Radical empathy is both radical and empathetic.
I am happy to concede that point.
That said, in the US, evidentially speaking, the current administration has a near all time low in approval.
I am not convinced the veto panels would be any worse off than the current administration in terms of approval.
There are a few ways that the Socratic position (epistocracy) could be implemented and he covers them in the book. I am partial to a panel of experts that can only veto laws in their area of expertise.
For example. Congress passes a law to allow offshore drilling and the climate change panel vetos it.
I am not sure I buy the conditional statement
“If a population is well educated then they will vote well”
There is a component of research time that greatly limits ones ability to vote in most matters.
Furthermore the afformentioned conditional statement ignores the litany of cognitive biases that would influence a vote.
Without spoiling too much from the book, the argument is “protection from the tyrrany of the massively misinformed.”
The arguments hinge on the idea that, if voting is equal (I am not 100% sure on his stance for equitable), then the under informed masses force us into subjugation through their ignorance.
Pragmatically, his major point is, it’s very hard (and likely impossible) for everyone to be informed on every topic, so we should abstain from topics where we are under informed (which for most of us, most of the time, is most topics).
I both think people have a right to dignity, which by extension means they should have a say of how to live their lives. I also think that the general population shouldn’t vote. Against Democracy is a really good read if you haven’t read it.
For the record, I literally will drive people to the polls (since our current system creates better outcomes if more people vote) but I do really wish that most of them wouldn’t XD.
Not enough context. Why does it look like hot garbage?
It looks more like “police can’t just sit in squad cars all day looking for people to harass” which is a better use of resources.
I don’t know if it’s a location as much as a mindset for me.
I look for fallacies and falsehoods and should they arise at rates that would be hard to chalk up as honest error, I stop trusting the source.
Headblown is cute, but I thought Republicans make neck fountains when they overload.
I want to put them on an island loaded with cameras and watch them Big Brother style.
Oh and the island can’t receive any supplies, there are enough supplies hauled in at the beginning to have everyone live safely for 20 years. Which means all but 3 are dead within a year.
After years of teaching I’ve found it’s easier for people to believe in survivorship bias and assume everyone could do more than wonder why people don’t do more.
I agree through, immature and irresponsible how?
Not sure.
P(bigfoot|trump) = P(bigfoot and Trump)/P(trump)
If bigfoot and Trump are independent events then it’s just 14%
Otherwise we need to compute P(bigfoot and Trump) which is likely only possible to figure out with a survey or something.
I’m sorry for you when you realize you are surrounded by them.
Correct me if I am wrong but isn’t that the whole thrust of Keynesian economic theory?
When is the last time your reaffirmed your humanity?
No. I feel miserable for Alex but maintain my position. That said, should any of the ICE agents been shot right there by anyone on the street whilst commiting a crime I wouldn’t have anything negative to say about their shooting.
I said it in a other comment.
I don’t think the world is a better place when a 1st grade teachers gut reaction is to watch someone in a medical emergency die.
Did I misrepresent your position?
Holy crap. Hi SARGE.
30mg edible can get me close to non-verbal some days and just not really hit that hard others.
I have GAD so I think that messes with my perception.