"Something bad might happen!", while technically true, is not a great argument by itself.
-
-
Replying to @GrumplessGrinch
@GrumplessGrinch The argument being made here is "certain a priori considerations should cause us to expect more unspecified bad things".1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MemberOfSpecies
@MemberOfSpecies I've never had an a priori consideration, so I guess I'm missing the premise of this argument.3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GrumplessGrinch
@GrumplessGrinch I meant prior to thinking about concrete bad effects.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MemberOfSpecies
@MemberOfSpecies Okay. But you have to actually talk about what those consideration are. All I've seen is handwaving.3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GrumplessGrinch
@GrumplessGrinch If you're not impressed with the considerations given, that's where to pursue the disagreement.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @GrumplessGrinch
@GrumplessGrinch I'm referring to@nydwracu's arguments, which I don't necessarily endorse, about preconditions for civilization2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MemberOfSpecies
@MemberOfSpecies@nydwracu All of his arguments so far can be applied to literally all social change of any sort.4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@GrumplessGrinch @nydwracu "Social change is the sort of thing that risks eroding civ" is different from "harm is theoretically possible".
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.