Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

tadmjones

Regulars
  • Posts

    1363
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    22

Posts posted by tadmjones

  1. Eiuol

    " As far as NATO goes, there seems to be absolutely no intent to get involved with the Ukraine and Russia and didn't plan to before either. So the only intent you can pick out of here is the intent to not admit Russia into NATO.  "

    item 66:(2018)

    https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_156624.htm#54

     

    item 23 (2008)

    https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_8443.htm

  2. From the aricle

    "The authors note several limitations to their findings. Notably, their model is based on a number of necessary assumptions, including the precise proportions of which vaccine types have been delivered, how they were delivered and the precise timing of when new virus variants arrived in each country. They also assumed that the relationship between age and the proportion of COVID-19 deaths occurring among infected individuals is the same for each country. More broadly, the findings from the study should be considered in the context of uncertainty in calculating the true death toll of the pandemic owing to the difference in country-level reporting of COVID-19 mortality."

  3. How is hosting nuclear weapons different than ‘installing ‘ nuclear weapons ? I thought your argument was that no nuclear weapons were ‘in’ NATO member countries.

    What I was referring to re schemes , was the paused but ongoing military exercises and training between Ukrainian forces and NATO forces. One of the reasons for such exercises is to coordinate and integrate command and control and incorporate various military units into a framework under NATO control.

    Which from a Russian perspective this could be seen as a situation where, ultimately, Ukrainian military forces would not be under the certain control of the Ukrainian government. 

  4. I get caught or stuck on the phrase ‘the universe is deterministic’  and especially when that conclusion is then used as a qualifier for whatever comes next, which is obviously , usually a statement about free will .

    I think it’s because I can never be quite sure what is meant by ‘universe’. For me the concept denotes ‘all of existence ‘ , but when determinism is applied as a qualifier I infer a concept closer to something that describes cosmology, and for that I understand the materialistic ‘laws of physics’ , all of existence minus minds and their products.

    Another stumble is encountering ‘emergence’ . It seems to be invoked when one needs to name a casual force but at the same time trying to imply an uncaused  force. 

    Unfortunately, I can’t remember where I heard it , but recently heard a conversation about the differences between complicated and complex systems. It was pretty interesting and the basic idea was that complicated systems could be broken down to it constituents, the parts explained as to cause and effect and reassembled and its predictable functions would resume. Complex systems on the other hand could be disassembled and the constituents examined but the interactions of the parts and their arrangements make predictions of their functions impossible.

    I suppose that is the idea of emergence and that complexity is a necessary condition or a casual property of emergence qua force ?

    Perhaps the determinism of the universe is emergent , too ?

    Sorry for the rambling post ,it’s late , but interesting thread.

  5. Elon's got a problem and he better nip it in the bud, if it isnt already too late

    "An open letter to the Executives of SpaceX,

    In light of recent allegations against our CEO and his public disparagement of the situation, we would like to deliver feedback on how these events affect our company’s reputation, and through it, our mission. Employees across the spectra of gender, ethnicity, seniority, and technical roles have collaborated on this letter. We feel it is imperative to maintain honest and open dialogue with each other to effectively reach our company’s primary goals together: making SpaceX a great place to work for all, and making humans a multiplanetary species.

    As SpaceX employees we are expected to challenge established processes, rapidly innovate to solve complex problems as a team, and use failures as learning opportunities. Commitment to these ideals is fundamental to our identity and is core to how we have redefined our industry. But for all our technical achievements, SpaceX fails to apply these principles to the promotion of diversity, equity, and inclusion with equal priority across the company, resulting in a workplace culture that remains firmly rooted in the status quo.

    Individuals and groups of employees at SpaceX have spent significant effort beyond their technical scope to make the company a more inclusive space via conference recruiting, open forums, feedback to leadership, outreach, and more. However, we feel an unequal burden to carry this effort as the company has not applied appropriate urgency and resources to the problem in a manner consistent with our approach to critical path technical projects. To be clear: recent events are not isolated incidents; they are emblematic of a wider culture that underserves many of the people who enable SpaceX’s extraordinary accomplishments. As industry leaders, we bear unique responsibility to address this.

    Elon’s behavior in the public sphere is a frequent source of distraction and embarrassment for us, particularly in recent weeks. As our CEO and most prominent spokesperson, Elon is seen as the face of SpaceX—every Tweet that Elon sends is a de facto public statement by the company. It is critical to make clear to our teams and to our potential talent pool that his messaging does not reflect our work, our mission, or our values.

    SpaceX’s current systems and culture do not live up to its stated values, as many employees continue to experience unequal enforcement of our oft-repeated “No Asshole” and “Zero Tolerance” policies. This must change. As a starting point, we are putting forth the following categories of action items, the specifics of which we would like to discuss in person with the executive team within a month:

    Publicly address and condemn Elon’s harmful Twitter behavior. SpaceX must swiftly and explicitly separate itself from Elon’s personal brand.

    Hold all leadership equally accountable to making SpaceX a great place to work for everyone. Apply a critical eye to issues that prevent employees from fully performing their jobs and meeting their potential, pursuing specific and enduring actions that are well resourced, transparent, and treated with the same rigor and urgency as establishing flight rationale after a hardware anomaly.

    Define and uniformly respond to all forms of unacceptable behavior. Clearly define what exactly is intended by SpaceX’s “no-asshole” and “zero tolerance” policies and enforce them consistently. SpaceX must establish safe avenues for reporting and uphold clear repercussions for all unacceptable behavior, whether from the CEO or an employee starting their first day.

    We care deeply about SpaceX’s mission to make humanity multiplanetary. But more importantly, we care about each other. The collaboration we need to make life multiplanetary is incompatible with a culture that treats employees as consumable resources. Our unique position requires us to consider how our actions today will shape the experiences of individuals beyond our planet. Is the culture we are fostering now the one which we aim to bring to Mars and beyond?

    We have made strides in that direction, but there is so much more to accomplish."

    From an article at The Verge

  6. 29 minutes ago, Doug Morris said:

    Russia proper and its satellite Belarus were not invaded, occupied, or incurred into either, unless you count Belarus by Russia.  If you go back a little further, the former Iron Curtain countries have a lot to remember.

      

    True and their  'remembering' is in  , or comes from, a different context than that of a lot of the Anglo-West, and I think especially different from a distinctly American framing. Sovereignty, nation, people, culture and the acquisition of and legitimacy of power in a nation state comes from a very different context.   Ethno-nationalism is a 'thing' and the way that has evolved or played out for centuries shaped the politics.

     

     

  7. 1 hour ago, Tenderlysharp said:

    "To exist is to be something, as distinguished from the nothing of non-existence, it is to be an entity of a specific nature made of specific attributes. Centuries ago, the man who was—no matter what his errors—the greatest of your philosophers, has stated the formula defining the concept of existence and the rule of all knowledge: A is A. A thing is itself. You have never grasped the meaning of his statement. I am here to complete it: Existence is Identity, Consciousness is Identification."

    Is the mask part of your identity as a human consciousness?  

    Is my subjective experience of consciousness equivalent to the concept of human consciousness? 

    Maybe we should check with Stephen .

    Are asking about cloth masks , or the more ephemeral (?) act of altering your appearance to others ? A projection of a nonA you?

  8. 19 minutes ago, Doug Morris said:

    Even talking and breathing can spread germs.

     

    Agreed , but what of it ? I'd imagine there are myriad virons that pass from host to host like parasites ,but like asymbiosisly , one way benefit to parasite with little or no cost to the host. Or perhaps it is a symbiotic relationship that 'helped evolution' develop the immune system. Aside from the effectiveness of positive pressure suits what advantage is gained with cloth masking that isn't overridden by negative effects of wearing them?

  9. Common sense says " cover your mouth when you cough", so your spittle doesn't land on someone else. Would mouth covering while congregating with groups of non coughing individuals have any appreciable health benefits , benefits obvious enough to 'become common sense'? It would seem if that were the case it would already be part of the culture.

    I would agree that 'germ theory' is 'newer' than most behaviors that could be described as 'social norms' so ubiquitous masking may take some time to permeate culture. But the discovery of 'germ theory' has also given the understanding of relative size of particles and how they are transmitted.  

  10. 7 hours ago, Eiuol said:

    This isn't a good source for this claim. A bunch of the studies listed there say there is no evidence for or against. A lot of other sources are either opinion pieces, or according to the writer, also articles that have allegedly good reporting. But good reporting is already dependent on the studies it reports. If it is good reporting, it would be citing the things already mentioned in this compilation. So, that 164 is actually smaller in terms of studied evidence. A further problem is that even supposing all 164 articles were studies, and none of them had positive evidence in favor of using masks, that doesn't show how many studies really did show positive evidence in favor of using masks. Maybe there are 300 studies that show that. 

    If the article were good, it would try to collect a number of studies that had positive evidence. But it didn't try to make the comparison. I'm not interested enough to do a systematic look at each link in the compilation, because it already made some big mistakes in trying to make an effective argument. One article even cited a recommendation not to use masks back when people were going crazy about mask supply and before the CDC made a sensible recommendation to use them. So, it wasn't careful about checking dates. 

     

     

    Well regardless any assessment of the sources , they at least exist.

    I'm of the opinion that little more than 'common sense' is all that is needed to make a judgment that cloth face coverings are ineffective in stopping the spread of a virus. Self isolation when symptomatic is probably the most effective technique an individual can practice to help reduce spread. Air circulation and volume exchange are, I think, much more important factors in communal settings and the focus and attention that was/is placed on mask wearing doesn't come from 'science-based' arguments regarding viron concentration/exchange/spread of disease. And even with a concentrated effort using high filtration devices and or increased air volume exchange in communal settings, stopping a respiratory virus spread through a human population is ,in a practical sense, negligible or impossible.  

    It is objectively hard to stop spread and the wide spread use of cloth face diapers does practically nothing, even if it had a small beneficial effect, a more prudent allocation of effort would be those steered toward treatment of the disease caused by the hard to stop virus. So the importance people place on mask compliance is , I think,  misplaced .

    I see cloth mask wearing in 2022 and the degree to which people try to justify their use 'scientifically', given the real world data and common sense observations of their 'effectiveness' ie eyeglass fogging , blocking/alteration of nonverbal human communication especially considering the importance of learning how to gauge expression among the young, as coming from a political / virtue signally stance.

    DM states he does it to set an example.

    I don't because I think it isn't worth it.

  11. Hasn’t Gorbachev expressed publicly that he has grown more suspicious of the West and NATO expansion (or growth) and paranoid about what that signals for any Russian regime ?

    POTUS is threatening regime change in Russia , is that inline with what State is saying ? today? Seriously I don’t recall if The White House had to walk back on hyperbole or if that’s our current position.

    Granted that doesn’t necessarily translate to long or longer term stance from a NATO standpoint , but the west certainly doesn’t seem to be all that conciliatory toward Russia , perhaps not overtly belligerent but fairly aggressive in containment.

    The most recent Munk Debate I thought had a decent showing presenting opposing analysis on the question of formulating a western/NATO stance in dealing with the current conflict by incorporating Russian objectives into any calculation.

  12. On 1/4/2021 at 3:48 PM, Doug Morris said:

    I sometimes put my mask on ahead of time, or leave it on in between times.  Why go to the extra trouble of taking it off and putting it on again?  Also, I have occasionally forgotten at first to put it on, and putting it on ahead of time is one way to prevent that.

    I have tentatively decided that I will wear a mask for longer than Biden says, even if the only reason is to indicate that I don't blindly follow him.

    Biden still has his , you got yours ?

  13. On 3/13/2021 at 9:16 AM, Boydstun said:

    You were having this illness in February 2020, if I've gotten this right. I attended the conference of the American Philosophical Association in that month in Chicago. I recall having a mask in my pocket and putting it on once during part of a session someone nearby was coughing quite a bit. I'm afraid we weren't yet really fully aware of the risk of the new germ in the air. That particular session was a packed room with overflow sitting on the floor. When I took the train home to Lynchburg, there was not yet any social distancing or masks against that particular infection. I hope you are having no bad effects by now.

    I never got the infection, and we are being vaccinated now. The crummy thing I've noticed about wearing the mask at public places like the grocery store these many months, is the great obstacle it brings to full, sensitive communication to people you speak to, especially to friends you encounter. We can see only eye expressions to supplement voice. I don't think I realized before how important full visible face is to rich personal communication.

    Nietzsche has a few wild thoughts on the subject: "Every profound spirit needs a mask: what's more, a mask is constantly growing around every profound spirit, thanks to the consistently false (which is to say shallow) interpretation of every word, every step, every sign of life he displays." (BGE 40)

    If we hadn't realized before the profound effect facial masking has on interpersonal communication, I shudder to think what the implications for multiyear masking of children will have on their development. I think we inadvertently by acquiescence just broadened ' the spectrum'. 

×
×
  • Create New...