Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


disillusioned last won the day on March 13

disillusioned had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,853 Wow


About disillusioned

  • Rank
    I'm kinda dumb, and so are you

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Still trying to find my way, mostly making it up as I go along.
  • Interests
    Chess, literature, science, philosophy, maths, entertainment, food and drink.
  • More About Me
    "Using words to talk of words is like using a pencil to draw a picture of itself, on itself."
    ~Patrick Rothfuss~

Previous Fields

  • Still have any Gods? If so, who or what?
    I have looked deep into the sauce and cheese.

Recent Profile Visitors

5,716 profile views
  1. It seems to me that Cheney held a position of power in an organization. The organization deemed she didn't represent their views, so they stripped her of power. Dawkins held an award from an organization. The organization deemed he didn't represent their views, so they stripped him of the award. How are these situations substantively different? Majority ruled in one case? That has to do with the structure of the organization in question, not the phenomenon per se. I don't personally think either one is a big deal. I'm fine with organizations choosing not to
  2. Ok, fine. If that's the ruling, that's the ruling. But it seems to me that the preceding has not been a discussion of science, even though it has been about a scientist. I'm asking about a politician, not about politics. Again, do as you will. I don't care, I'm just curious.
  3. Just a query: to those who have often been up in arms about cancel culture, what about Liz Cheney? Is this as troubling to you as all the other instances of "cancellation" that you cite? Genuinely curious.
  4. Yes, I'm familiar with the Drake equation. As you say, the values of several of its parameters are highly speculative. However, I agree, in principle, that it seems more likely than not that extra-terrestrial intelligence exists. It may have visited here. Even given this, though, I still don't find it at all puzzling that we don't see evidence of it. So I don't think that re-labelling the Fermi Paradox as a conundrum rather than a true paradox does any useful work. It isn't a paradox, and it isn't a conundrum either. There are many possible explanations.
  5. Welcome @Seekingwhatisnext. Always nice to see lurkers join the ranks.
  6. In my experience this is true, and it isn't really that surprising. One thing that Muslims tend to do better than Christians is take their faith seriously. Not, necessarily, in the sense of thinking it all the way through, but rather in the sense of truly committing to it. If it is really true that there is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is his prophet, then nothing else really matters. If it is the one true religion, then it deserves a place in government. It requires one. There are some Christians who take this line of reasoning, but not nearly as many.
  7. The Fermi "paradox" is not an actual paradox. A paradox exists where we have two or more logically correct statements which are in contradiction. This is just not the case here. There are many reasonable explanations for the absence of confirmed observations of extra-terrestrial life. So there simply is no paradox. Put another way: yes, it is true that it seems very likely that there should be extraterrestrial life. But it does not necessarily seem likely that we should all, therefore, have observed evidence of it. This just doesn't follow.
  8. Myrkhoos, I don't think we're likely to end up agreeing here, so I'll be brief. However, you put a couple of direct questions to me, which I will answer. As a matter of fact, I know people who have been affected by all of these things, and I've heard in-person accounts of all the other issues you listed later in your post. These are among what I was referring to when I said I have enough actual problems to worry about. Also, I wasn't talking about my circle of friends. I was talking about everyone that I interact with. Due to my profession, it's not a small gr
  9. Well, I do try to choose my words carefully, but that's mostly beside the point. It's definitely possible that I might say something tomorrow which doesn't age well. This is neither here nor there. I just don't see that this is actually a major cultural issue. I see a number of cases of famous people being "cancelled", quite often, though not always, for legitimate reasons. I see a handful of stories about more normal individuals getting fired etcetera for stupid reasons, but in the grand scheme of things, these seem to me to be mostly isolated incidents. Meanwhile, I hear people b
  10. This just sounds like fearmongering to me. Yes, it could be me one day. I could also die of ebola. But since no one in my life has been affected by ebola, I'm not very worried about that either.
  11. I'm sorry, I just don't see this. Maybe things are drastically different where you live vs where I live, but as I said to TABA above, I don't know a single person who has been "cancelled". The only examples I know of are celebrities, and I'm afraid I just don't have much sympathy there. When literally nobody in my life is affected by something, I find it difficult to buy that it's something I should be concerned about. That's all.
  12. So a journalist got fired for a stupid reason, and another quit her job. Why should I care? People get fired all the time. Sometimes for good reasons, sometimes for bad reasons. If the fired party believes they were wrongfully dismissed, they are free to take it up in court. I just don't see that this is either new, or that big of a deal. I don't know a single person who has actually been affected by "cancel culture". Not one. So again, why should I care?
  13. Am I the only one who just doesn't think that "cancel culture" is really that big of a deal?
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.