@Deleted User you could change country join foreign military in the future

@Hagar who

?

you might have been doxx you just dont know

@Deleted User who?

@Deleted User wow why is zeus muted

?

@Hagar isn't that what happened with krill and tom as well

@Hagar you are right hagar you arent

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1t1Vvc6IQD8&t=594s 10:00

@Hagar wheres that from

@RandomDiscordAccount are you zeus

wow

what

@RandomDiscordAccount i heard you are an orbitter

@RandomDiscordAccount are you a chaser?

@Hagar what happened?

@chain server politics you are mod then you arent

@LustrousMandrill is doobie like a discord entrepreneur or something ?

ohh he is the owner of the politics server

@RespectfulDré how many pedophiles were there at the server

was it many ?

@Hagar @LustrousMandrill thats less misogynist than what method believes actually

https://sci-hub.tw/https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11153-019-09738-7?fbclid=IwAR2Qh7rp0oT195Gql-fQtenJ6LY0pewmhLG7-CUy1PZApCNWFs87Dbm7sR8 ,

i thought kurasabe and liz were the same person for a while tbh

@Endy good morning its nice to see that there was a non fascist ''good morning'' today tbh

Yes

@Marcdoof you dont believe there are categorical aesthetic reasons

?

im jk

@Marcdoof why arent you #1 ?

@RealMischlingHours are you from politics 101 that chewbacado

?

back from the dead

some people should stay dead though

@chain its okay chain only those that dont know jiu jitsu need to read phil papers and phil books

@Hagar says you are a @Irish Princess text chat vc lurker

@ᏉᎬᏁus ( ᵘ ᵕ ᵘ ⁎) is islamic law atleast good?

@ᏉᎬᏁus ( ᵘ ᵕ ᵘ ⁎) whats with the whole thing with hermaphrodytes being trans people and islamic law is okay with them

@chain how do you feel that haggar replaced you in the method likeness hierarchy

@chain who methode likes more currently i guess

@LustrousMandrill fair enough

@「ＳｏｃｒａｄｅｅｚＮｕｔｓ」✓ᴸᵉᵗ ε<0 its a brute fact nothing more can be said

@Deleted User its a brute fact that he wants to leave theres nothing more to be said

@LustrousMandrill whats your power level

@Master, remember the Athenians. https://www.nber.org/papers/w26500 ''Despite the importance of the opioid crisis and the desire to understand its origins, there
is little empirical work exploring its initial causes. We study the effects of the introduction of
OxyContin in 1996, exploiting early variation in its promotion and market entry based on preexisting state policies known as triplicate prescription programs. These state policies were
adopted decades earlier and became outdated soon after OxyContin's launch. However, their
initial deterrence of OxyContin promotion and use had long-term effects on overdoses in these
states, dramatically decreasing overdose death rates even today.
Our results imply striking differences throughout the opioid crisis stemming from
variation in initial policy conditions. '' ,

''We use our results to provide a back-of-the-envelope calculation of how much of the
dramatic growth in drug overdose deaths can be accounted for by the introduction and marketing
of OxyContin. On average, the national drug overdose death rate increased by 6.89 deaths per
100,000 since 1996, comparing the mean during the 1996-2017 time period (11.33 deaths per
100,000) relative to the 1991-1995 baseline mean (4.44). The additional exposure to
OxyContin’s launch and marketing for non-triplicate states led to 4.49 more deaths per 100,000,
which is equivalent to 65% (4.49/6.89) of the national growth in overdose death rates since
1996. As an additional benchmarking exercise, we consider the additional deaths that could be
attributed to an increase in initial OxyContin exposure moving from no exposure to the national
level of exposure. To make this calculation, we need to scale our mortality results by the
difference in OxyContin exposure between non-triplicate and triplicate states.66 This
extrapolation suggests that moving from no OxyContin exposure to the national average would
lead to 5.56 more deaths per 100,000, which is 81% of the rise in the overdose death rate since
1996. We note that this extrapolation is far out-of-sample since no part of the United States was
unexposed, so we interpret it with caution. However, these calculations suggest that exposure to
OxyContin may explain a large share of the growth in drug overdose deaths since the mid-1990s. ''
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/373119138689974273/651477636568317962/unknown.png

@Master, remember the Athenians. this is what eplains the opioid crisis specifically overdose death rates

@「ＳｏｃｒａｄｅｅｚＮｕｔｓ」✓ᴸᵉᵗ ε<0 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12136-018-0369-0

http://dar.aucegypt.edu/bitstream/handle/10526/4957/sherif%20thesis%20final%2019-12.pdf?sequence=1 @Sasha

@Deleted User https://philarchive.org/archive/OPPPNM , https://philosophy.acadiau.ca/tl_files/sites/philosophy/resources/documents/Maitzen_NOTT.pdf these are what i was talking about earlier

@Deleted User the second one is how responces to the problem of evil and problem of suffering haw problematic implications for ordinary morality the first one is the one where you relax the maximally great attributes as a strategy

@Marcdoof @Deleted User goodys fries are better

@Deleted User lol thats randb

from crossroads

fake weabo

>2 times speed

@Deleted User was that one of the servers a cross roads member had

grapevine?

@iamChalzz , @sillyolyou @Deleted User

ask for these people for responces

https://twitter.com/iamChalzz/status/1202749463724314624

the easiest argument to make is to say that meaning is fake

@Deleted User

@actual_communist_boi avoiding the collapse objection exposes you to the incoherence objection the standford page cites hookers responce but it isnt succesfull at defeating a certain form of the incoherence objection https://sci-hub.tw/https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10677-016-9687-8 that objection too can be avoided but with serious costs the rule consequentialism has to accept brute facts

@actual_communist_boi ''The viability of this defense of rule-consequentialism against the incoherence objection may depend in part on what the argument for rule-consequentialism is supposed to be. The defense seems less viable if the argument for rule-consequentialism starts from a commitment to consequentialist assessment. For starting with such a commitment seems very close to starting from an overriding commitment to maximize the expected good. The defence against the incoherence objection seems far more secure, however, if the argument for rule-consequentialism is that this theory does better than any other moral theory at specifying an impartial justification for intuitively plausible moral rules. (For more on this, see Hooker 2005, 2007.)''

this si from the standford page

@actual_communist_boi the responce they cite against the incoherence is from hooker

@actual_communist_boi the author that article is responding to,i got this from just reading the section and collapse in the standford page you cited

@actual_communist_boi Oh i saw you posting the quote tbh.Well if i remmember the dialectic started with the issue of exceptions and and then at one point you posted the responce to the objection from collapse from standford page

@Deleted User @Sasha This is for the boghossian stuff you were talking about earlier https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12136-018-0369-0

@sydtko who are you

i didnt even ping you for the paper

triggered by eliminativism?

i have a something that will really trigger you eliminativism cannot be self defeating because truth is a folk psychology notion https://philpapers.org/rec/PARITM

@sydtko i think we should norms of assertion based on moores paradox but i dont think thats what the objection above is about this is about,you would have to look into the multiple cognitive collapse objections he makes tbh .

@Sasha @Deleted User

@sydtko thats a horrible version of the CiG theres a diffrence beetwen entailments,analogy,absortption and then theres another argument about how you could argue for the parity premise . There are arguments for the view that epistemic reasons have to be normative in order to avoid self defeat because and against instrumentalism and epistemic pluralism the above version of the argument doesnt defend the existence premise very well either .

@actual_communist_boi he amends the objections in the paper he isnt making the same objection iirc he says that in the next paragraphs.

@sydtko i said epistemic pluralism has been a responce against the epistemic existence premise in the way the CIG formulates it .All the other stuff you are saying arent self defeat arguments that defend the epistemic existenc premise or atleast the ones im reffering to i could dm them to you later if you want but you should stop trying to guess.

@LustrousMandrill https://liberty-intl.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Sierpinski-Critique-of-Hans-Hermann-Hoppe.pdf

@Marcdoof i guess you didnt leave discord

monerty

nice

@Hagar you are not cool enough to be in hafe saven secret chat

@LustrousMandrill do you have syndicalist sympathies

?

is that why

@sydtko https://scholarworks.iu.edu/dspace/bitstream/handle/2022/8120/umi-indiana-2089.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

you may be interested

@sydtko its regarding goulds criticism of psychometrics its written by a philosopher of science

this is a novel contribution not making the same arguments

@sydtko https://medium.com/@simonjwhitten/has-stephen-jay-goulds-the-mismeasure-of-man-really-been-discredited-f38ab6e50086 you may also be interested

its a defence of gould against some recent studies that claim to debunk his points about morton

whats up

@Hagar no its not lol

it is not true