A conspiracy theory is global rather than local when the person who advances it aims to explain global or international events or when the explanation the person provides refers to international affairs. However, I worry that running such a set of distinctions is just another way of defining away problem cases as ipso facto unwarranted and thus ignoring the possibility that maybe there is an argument for there being a total conspiracy in effect. I also was perplexed by this:
Posted on November 21, by Scott Alexander I. Jonah got swallowed by a whale. But the Bible says Jonah got swallowed by a big fish. So the Bible seems to think whales are just big fish.
Therefore the Bible is fallible. Therefore, the Bible was not written by God. For all we know, Jonah was swallowed by a really really really big herring. The second problem is that if the ancient Hebrews want to call whales a kind of fish, let them call whales a kind of fish.
Suppose you travel back in time to ancient Israel and try to explain to King Solomon that whales are a kind of mammal and not a kind of fish.
So you try again and say that a whale is a behemah, not a dag. You try to explain that no, Solomon is wrong, dag are actually defined not by their swimming-in-sea-with-fins-ness, but by their genes. Who died and made you an expert on Biblical Hebrew?
You try to explain that whales actually have tiny little hairs, too small to even see, just as cows and sheep and pigs have hair. Solomon says oh God, you are so annoying, who the hell cares whether whales have tiny little hairs or not.
The Ministry of Dag is based on the coast and has a lot of people who work on ships. The Ministry of Behemah has a strong presence inland and lots of of people who hunt on horseback. So please he continues keep going about how whales have little tiny hairs.
It says so right here in this biology textbook. You can point out how many important professors of icthyology in fancy suits use your definition, and how only a couple of people with really weird facial hair use his.
There are facts of the matter on each individual point — whether a whale has fins, whether a whale lives in the ocean, whether a whale has tiny hairs, et cetera. But there is no fact of the matter on whether a whale is a fish.
The argument is entirely semantic. So this is the second reason why this particular objection to the Bible is silly. If God wants to call a whale a big fish, stop telling God what to do. When terms are not defined directly by God, we need our own methods of dividing them into categories.
Planets tend to share many characteristics in common.
For example, they are large, round, have normal shaped orbits lined up with the plane of the ecliptic, have cleared out a certain area of space, and are at least kind of close to the Sun as opposed to way out in the Oort Cloud. One could imagine a brain that thought about these characteristics like Network 1 here: One could imagine this model telling you everything you need to know.
But Network 1 has some big problems. For one thing, if you inscribe it in blood, you might accidentally summon the Devil. Each attribute affects each other attribute which affects it in turn and so on in an infinite cycle, so that its behavior tends to be chaotic and unpredictable.
What people actually seem to do is more like Network 2:Ethics of Conspiracy Theorizing In the context of this essay conspiracies will be defined where a proposed explanation E is a conspiracy theory if and only if E is a proposed causal explanation of an event (or set of events) which postulates secret plans and actions on the part of the group and E conflicts with the official story.
Evolutionary ethics concerns approaches to ethics (morality) based on the role of evolution in shaping human psychology and behavior. Such approaches may be based in scientific fields such as evolutionary psychology or sociobiology, with a focus on understanding and explaining observed ethical preferences and choices.
Transhumanism (abbreviated as H+ or h+) is an international philosophical movement that advocates for the transformation of the human condition by developing and making widely available sophisticated technologies to greatly enhance human intellect and physiology..
Transhumanist thinkers study the potential benefits and dangers of emerging technologies that could overcome fundamental human. It is further argued that the pervasive effect of the “fundamental attribution error” can explain the behavior of such conspiracy theorists. A rival approach due to Brian Keeley, which involves the criticism of a subclass of conspiracy theories on epistemic grounds, is considered and found to be inadequate.
Sep 24, · Let me summarize Erik's argument essay as this: 1. Free software and open source are a poor way to adapt and grow software.
2. Dynamic mechanisms that don't even require access to . Ethics of Conspiracy Theorizing Essay Conspiracies are sometimes morally permissible. But usually they are the result of nefarious motivations on the part of the conspirators.