Yes, would be cool. I am up for a debate / interleaved thread, whatever. TLDR: I think WoG's heart is in the right place, but his stance is naive / simplistic / ignores tradeoffs / gets the science wrong. https://twitter.com/levisan/status/1230527932331745282 …
-
-
The guy has citations for lots of his numbers, but the way he uses them drives me nuts, because they’re often irrelevant or misinterpreted. I can’t figure out if he’s nearly scientifically illiterate or just gets excited and gets out over his skis.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
>if WoG stuck to aesthetics he'd be in an unassailable position False. His schtick is "my aesthetics are objectively correct, and everyone should share them or they are morally defective" That position is VERY assailable.
-
assailable, but popular he's actually correct in that his aesthetics are what appeal to most people, and ~complex systemic forces~ (handwave handwave) have ended up producing a bunch of places whose aesthetics few really like
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
I think his core premise amounts to long term sustainability at human scale, which would be at odds with about any non-environmentalist starting point.. Perspective is from rural Japan which has a very long and strong tradition in that area.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.