I think Anton Jäger is right that the collapse of the party system helps explain it: www.nytimes.com/2026/02/07/o...
27.02.2026 12:59
👍 1
🔁 0
💬 0
📌 0
I think Anton Jäger is right that the collapse of the party system helps explain it: www.nytimes.com/2026/02/07/o...
I dunno. Isn’t the inverse the exact nazi ratio? all that banality of basically pleasant bureaucrat eviling? You might be perfect as you are
Also: when they break 4th wall to camera, they tell us they’re performing to us. But when they break the 4th wall to their house audience and the camera cuts to the house, we realize: THAT’S US! WE’RE MUPPETS! #world/stagedistinctioncollapse #catharsis
Started reading but got confused about who was cold blooded
Quasi-Brandom answer: carefully tracking all the commitments conversation partners make (or seem to make), given what they say; exposing untenable commitments; and pushing toward clarity if there’s ambiguity or contradiction.
Also: an appetite for such a philosophic approach to *any* topic.
i made a version of wikipedia you can doomscroll
xikipedia.org
Pretty sure this is how Eleusinian mystery cult started
Money has been, in important ways, a military technology since city-states first minted their own coins 2,600 years ago.
But what page of man's ledger does this "ought" refer to? Thought debtor to what? It is
impossible to say.
Again, in almost all logics the subject of fallacies has occupied a prominent place. It has been supposed that the laws of logic might be broken. That they say "Thou ought"
not "thou shalt," that in short they are statements not of fact but of debt.
Top image: a cross glows behind the city as a plane departs.
Bottom image: they burned Toronto down?
The only compelling explanation I’ve seen is this one: publicseminar.org/2017/10/ador...
I recommend Gardner’s guide to the first critique. The intro essays in Cambridge Kant editions are great. Also wonderful are Bennett’s Early Modern Texts, which “translate” Kant and others into plain language, making them much easier to read. www.earlymoderntexts.com/authors/kant
Is this the ‘speed of the solar system finding messing up other stuff’ thing?
It’s giving Paul Klee
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pa...
then again, i just asked an LLM whether "Gwar is WWF Sun Ra" and it got it and was pretty into it, so who knows
I’ve started wondering if there has every been any such thing as “domain-general” intelligence.
Clock time is a form of oppression.
I’d grant some room to the inventing part. Helicopters are *insane* contraptions. Flying cars need to be designed for dumb-dumbery. So there’s a tech problem. But yeah social organization is huge and tech alone won’t solve it
Helicopters would count as flying cars if very few people had drivers licenses, and driving cars was exclusively an occupation, and there were super strict rules about where cars could go, etc.
What people mean by “flying cars” is exactly the situation we have with cars today, but flying.
Good points. I think this shift often lines up with another good one, from observing a spectacle to actually participating in the carnival.
#MakeNormiesCareAgain
psychoanalysis is currently being vindicated at levels previously never, ever seen
new episode out now! we talk about Alfred Sohn-Rethel's work on real abstraction and his theory of commodity exchange as the origin of transcendental subjectivity. we love a big swing and this is truly a big swing, folks www.patreon.com/posts/122-re...
I collected some materials on critical AI from my perspective; hope it's useful: olivia.science/ai
"CAIL is as an umbrella for all the prerequisite knowledge required to have an expert-level critical perspective, such as to tell apart nonsense hype from true theoretical computer scientific claims"
Psyched to read this—thank you!
This is something I want to read and write about. What other places do you have in mind?
It is fascinating. Big props to @jamescrane.bsky.social for translating. But the anthropology shaping Horkheimer and Adorno in these notes (and in DoE) seems so retrograde today. There was never a childhood of man! I wanna know what the critique of domination looks like without it.
PSA for anyone reading this thread: you’re allowed to despise America’s incessant liberal moralizing while still embracing the underlying values it tries (?) to reflect. This is a legit position you can hold. And you can still hate David Brooks.
We’re digging a tunnel from two ends: disaggregating and mechanizing human labour and humanizing machines. All to solve the problem of making humans do stuff so that others can profit.
