(I could make a joke here about leaving it as an "exercise to the reader" to show that Care is axiomatically important)
-
-
Replying to @Locus_of_Ctrl
You can't just assert this. "care" is useful as a tool for making humans do things. It's certainly not the crown jewel of the universe.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @biodysphoria
We *pick* our axioms. I cannot "just assert this" -- but I can show that picking Care as an axiom is good because any argument against it seems very self-refuting. Why are we having this conversation even? Because we Care about something.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Locus_of_Ctrl
We do what we do because of brain processes that we simplify and call "care." It's a convenient simplification that accounts for an incomprehensibly narrow range of what happens in the universe. Pigs care about eating garbage and rutting in the mud. So what?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @biodysphoria
This is a galaxy brain take. JFC. You cannot care about things you cannot care about. Trying to care about something you cannot care about is like pig trying to care about the battle of Tours. It's immaterial to the pig.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Locus_of_Ctrl
You said something like: "Care cares about separation of concerns." What I'm saying is, even if that's true (though I think my own "cares" provide a counterexample), something isn't desirable from the universe's point of view just because humans care about it.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @biodysphoria @Locus_of_Ctrl
e.g. very human can't help but care about their own animal pleasure. But anyone but a degenerate hedonist will admit that pleasure isn't the point of life. It may be necessary to fight against our own cares if we want to be anything more noble than a gluttonous sex pervert.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @biodysphoria
>It may be necessary to fight against our own cares Fighting against our "cares" is a form of Care you silly.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Locus_of_Ctrl
So what? I'm not denying its existence as an abstraction.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @biodysphoria
So then you accept it as a first axiom that enframes things we can talk about.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
"Abstraction" and "first axiom" are incompatible
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.