This is like discovering Euclidean geometry, formalizing it axiomatically, discovering that you can't actually undermine non-parallel-line geometries, and then legislating that only the Euclidean parallel line postulate is legal.
-
Show this thread
-
It doesn't work. The degeneracy (in a mathematical sense) of history as a solution to a system of psychohistorical equations, once recognized, inevitably evolves past the degeneracy to realize a fuller set of solutions.
1 reply 1 retweet 5 likesShow this thread -
I've often wondered why my writing seems to appeal to a subset of reactionary types even though I'm openly anti-reactionary. I think it's because I share a bunch of analytical lenses with both left and right reactionaries, but then go on gleefully to alt-parallel-postulates
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likesShow this thread -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @sudeepj21 @vgr
Me too. You are presumably reacting to something. What are you reacting to? Is my response to this tweet reactionary behavior? The opposite could be "actionary" where you just take actions that are not in response to anything.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @sudeepj21 @parresianz
Semantic first principles are less useful here than conventional usage. In the US certain people self-identify as reactionaries. My usage is based on their self-declared positions.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @vgr @sudeepj21
In that case: reactionary = opposing political or social progress or reform. Is that the same as conservative?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
Depends on the type of family and how far back, and what other notions of family (for example gay or with working wives) you want to either prevent or undo.
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
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.