Not by itself obviously. But it would make everything necessary to resolve the fundamental human problems (IE, the excising of the tumor of human nature) much much easier. It is a necessary but not sufficient condition.
-
which is which, tho are you saying that fallibility isn't a fundamental, objective problem, or different willing isn't a fundamental, objective problem
"An ye harm none, do what thou wilt" seems fine to me. But biology is fundamentally intermeshed with harm. You can't advocate biology and not be fascist. It doesn't matter that it's the status quo
-
-
we are literally in a crisis in defining "harm" just because it's obvious to *you* what harm is, doesn't mean anything- if you think you're infallible, you're mistaken
-
Everyone else's definition of harm seems to result in harming me. So I sort of don't have to care.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.