yes, a car can also do the half marathon faster than a human

Check out this 6 bedroom detached house for sale on Rightmove 6 bedroom detached house for sale in Sandford Lane, Hurst, Reading, Berkshire, RG10 for £2,200,000. Marketed by Savills, Henley-On-Thames

tag yourselves

www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/1...

I love this. More buildings should have interiors designed by some kind of game of Mad Libs.

And this isn’t even all of them!

The year is 1998, Mandelson is in a corruption scandal

The year is 2001, Mandelson is in a corruption scandal

The year is 2012, Mandelson is in a corruption scandal

The years are 2024-2026, Mandelson is in a corruption scandal. No one could have predicted this.

I can sort get how people end up in bubbles thinking Farage is universally loved, as those people do just talk to other Farage supporters and convince themselves it's representative of the entire country. But surely most Starmer supporters AREN'T just talking to other Starmer supporters?

I really want to know how people even end up in an epistemic bubble that convinces them that the only people who hate Starmer are the "Westminster Bubble" and Journalists and if you go out into the rest of the UK everyone is happy with him. How does that even exist?

black and white drawing of an underwater scene. a large bird sticking it's head into the water, surrounded by shocked fish

WHATS UP YOU WET MOTHERFUCKERS

Not content with beating Labour on perceived competence, economic management and leadership, the SNP have unveiled a bold new policy to outflank Anas Sarwar on “really really stupid responses to the global resource crisis”.

It's a depressing trend that 'progressive' parties – the Greens, now the SNP – are promoting fantasy economic policies. Seems not very intellectually healthy!

I feel like there are a number of quite obvious flaws with this announcement

In part, I assume, because the UK (and maybe much of Europe) doesn’t have the same idea of a general liberal arts education and people just typically focus on their one subject

I can say that the concept doesn’t really exist in the UK, so I always viewed them as uniquely American, or at least as uniquely North American. Obviously the UK is only a small portion of all places in the world though and I can’t speak for the rest

Quite a flex to turn up at the presidential palace, get him to confirm you as prime minister, call him unfit to serve with no moral authority, tell him to resign, and then pose for a picture

Liam has reminded me of something I've been meaning to do for a while:

Why "Beauvoir" and not "de Beauvoir"?

A thread 🧵

This is something I had never thought about until I started referencing Tocqueville and I realised I was doing it wrong writing de Tocqueville. Though I think it's more obvious in that case (literal aristocratic family, part of the family title) than Beauvoir where I hadn't even put this together

Also very true, and I think people conflating "Capitalism" and "Unfettered Markets" (I won't make any claims about why they do) is what leads to some of the image problem of Econ and why people often end up incorrectly conflating Economics and Libertarian Political Views

Then yes I do think we're in agreement! I agree there is a popular view that "Economics" is just what the groups defending libertarianism etc do. contrary to what actual economists are doing (both in practice and in standard assumptions), which does lead to these reactions

And in Koppelman's book the focus is on how Robathbardian etc thinking corrupted libertarian philosophy. But Libertarian Philosophy is nowhere near the same thing as orthodox economics. Orthodox economics broadly takes the view free markets are mostly good, but it's far far more nuanced than that

This is supposedly criticism of the mainstream economics profession and it's assumptions. Anyone criticising the field of economics based on Rothbard is battling a strawman, like someone criticising medicine because anti vax doctors exist. Because that just isn't what most economists do or believe

But just because it's popular among non-mainstream economist groups doesn't mean it has remotely taken over mainstream economics or economists at all. Full-throated Rothbardian free market thinking ISN'T mainstream economics. In the same way that something like MMT isn't mainstream economics.

"If me and all my friends are convinced up is down you need to put your "science" away or you're dumb and out of touch"

Also I feel like someone like Murray Rothbard is heterodox in a way that you're criticising here too? Like he basically just rejected mainstream economics. I don't know really know F. A. Harper, but as an Austrian school person he'd also be heterodox (Friedman was obviously much more mainstream)

Train Watchers have had it too good for too long. The British state needs to put them back in their place

The Times has now become the Telegraph, the Telegraph has become the Spectator, the Spectator has become Spiked and Spiked has become a pamphlet distributed at a neo-nazi rally by a man with badly spelled tattoos.

Anyway you get bad writing in analytic philosophy and bad writing in continental philosophy. Academics are usually bad writers!! And bad writing doesn’t mean bad ideas (though you get that in both too)

And I feel like anyone who, in modern times, tries to draw a distinction to negatively go after one or the other is intellectually incurious in a way we would usually critique bad students for (and I say this as someone who really doesn’t read continental)

I guess this is part of your opening but analytic has just moved so far past it’s original meaning, and in the broad sense now encompasses people influenced e.g by pragmatism, historical scholars previously excluded and some continental traditions, that drawing a clean distinction is misguided

I stay out of these disputes by just not reading at all