Fine, but in all this we've become derailed. What is your empirical argument against JP's statement? Is there one or is it ethical?
-
-
Replying to @seanrife @IrisVanRooij and
I interpret his statement (in contxt) to mean there is no evidence that essentialism is not true. But then who has the burden of proof?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @JCSkewesDK @seanrife and
Again, ethically AND scientifically
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @JCSkewesDK @seanrife and
Arguing that differences between people have biological basis ends with implying different cultures must have biological basis.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @JCSkewesDK and
But saying that differences like eg customs are biologically based is a pretty useless explanation.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @o_guest @JCSkewesDK and
Great point. Like we tend to use decimal numbers because of the morphogenesis of fingers. Spectacularly meaningless.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @morungos @JCSkewesDK and
I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or not here. But many cultures use(d) a system with base 12, does that mean they have 12 fingers?
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Not to mention that base 12 is mathematically more elegant
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @JCSkewesDK @o_guest and
Socially more elegant too. More ways to divide it equally.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
0xDEAD — can you do that with base 12? No, I didn't think so. Also see 0xB00B. Yeah. Case closed.
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.