The maps have been copied from Flinders' Atlas, with the omission of a few details, which, on the small scale necessarily adopted, would have caused confusion; it has been thought better to make what is given quite legible to the unassisted eye.
Posted on February 23, by Scott Alexander [Content warning: Discussion of social justice, discussion of violence, spoilers for Jacqueline Carey books. This post was inspired by a debate with a friend of a friend on Facebook who has since become somewhat famous. Andrew Cord criticizes me for my bold and controversial suggestion that maybe people should try to tell slightly fewer blatant hurtful lies: And then complain about losing rather than changing their tactics to match those of people who are winning.
That post [ the one debunking false rape statistics ] is exactly my problem with Scott. It honestly makes me kind of sick. In other words, if a fight is important to you, fight nasty. If that means lying, lie.
If that means insults, insult. If that means silencing people, silence. But in a way, that would be assuming the conclusion. Then if the stress ends up bursting an aneurysm in his brain, I can dance on his grave, singing: I mean, he thinks that sexism is detrimental to society, so spreading lies and destroying people is justified in order to stop it.
I think that discourse based on mud-slinging and falsehoods is detrimental to society. You know who got things done? Why not assassinate prominent racist and sexist politicians and intellectuals?
Unless you do not believe there will ever be an opportunity to defect unpunished, you need this sort of social contract to take you at least some of the way.
Bullets, as you say, are neutral. In a war, a real war, a war for survival, you use all the weapons in your arsenal because you assume the enemy will use all the weapons in theirs. Because you understand that it IS a war. There are a lot of things I am tempted to say to this.
You can get most of this from Hobbesbut this blog post will be shorter. Suppose I am a radical Catholic who believes all Protestants deserve to die, and therefore go around killing Protestants.
So far, so good. Unfortunately, there might be some radical Protestants around who believe all Catholics deserve to die.
So we make an agreement: So then I try to destroy the hated Protestants using the government.+ free ebooks online. Did you know that you can help us produce ebooks by proof-reading just one page a day?
Go to: Distributed Proofreaders. Life extension is the idea of extending the human lifespan, either modestly – through improvements in medicine – or dramatically by increasing the maximum lifespan beyond its generally settled limit of years.
The ability to achieve such dramatic changes, however, does not currently exist. Some researchers in this area, and "life extensionists", "immortalists" or "longevists" (those who.
The Problem of Prolonging Life As my mother and I wrestled with the idea of turning off my father's pacemaker, I learned about the moral, medical, and legal obstacles to letting someone die.
Katy. Years ago, Charlie, a highly respected orthopedist and a mentor of mine, found a lump in his stomach. He had a surgeon explore the area, and the diagnosis was pancreatic cancer. This surgeon was one of the best in the country. He had even invented a new procedure for this exact cancer that could.
Sep 11, · Campus Watch demands academic integrity in North American Middle East studies (MES) programs. It reviews and critiques MES bias with the aim of improving education – keeping watch on scores of professors at hundreds of universities. Published: Mon, 5 Dec The ethical issue of euthanasia, which confronts our society today, is evidence of our culture’s pervasive concern with finding an easy way out of a moral dilemma.