Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)D

daniskarma

@ daniskarma @lemmy.dbzer0.com

Posts
3
Comments
940
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • Who would win in a battle to the death, a lion or a knight in full armor?

    Jump

  • 100% the knight.

    Steel armor is quite resistant, and the lion doesn't have anything that could realistically penetrate it or blunt it.

    Even without weapon once they are entangled into a fight there's two outcomes, the lion runs away once it notices it's fighting a moving rock. Or the lion gets tired, once tired the human can beat it to death even without a weapon. Humans are famous for their resistance, we have more stamina for long fights and the presence of an armor will make the fight long.

    If the human have a weapon there isn't even a contest.

  • Come in and find out.

    Jump

  • Neighbors noises final boss.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump

  • OP post is faulty logic, though.

    As others had commented cancer existed before cigarettes.

  • Without stating your age, how old are you?

    Jump

  • I loved the star wars films that came out while I was a child, but the ones that were made after that are really bad.

  • Removed Locked

    Why does philosophy education make people uncomfortable?

    Jump

  • That is fair. And a sensible part of a school age curriculum (already included in my country, that's included in philosophy mandatory courses). But I don't see it having a extension to be included "everywhere", once taught in school is taught. I won't see a point continuing that formation in universities, same as I won't see why someone studying history should have an algebra course in university.

  • Removed Locked

    Why does philosophy education make people uncomfortable?

    Jump

  • But that's not advocating for everyone studying. It's advocating for everyone being taught it. By a teacher. That implies that there would be a specific curriculum. And that curriculum will follow a specific dogma.

    With other subjects you can have neutral teachings. Math is math. Others may be more complicated, like history, but there's some degree of neutrality to be found

    With ethics I think is inherently impossible to teach it on a neutral way. You would need to teach some particular set of ethics. And there's not a scientific way to describe a set of ethic norms as the right one. Quoting Professor Farnsworth "Science have not prove that human life is important". A set of ethics would be chosen as the correct one, and it will be taught by a teacher that will most likely come from a particular political scene. And even while agreeing with that political school of thought, I see great dangers in trying to officially push it as the correct one.

    I remember in my school years. I had both religion subject (because it was a religious school) and moral subject (a subject mandated in school curriculum by the government). And it was just wrong, trying to push things like that into children (or adults) even if it was good (moral subject curriculum was written by a left wing government).

    I think the members of society should conclude to the best ethical norms, not by indoctrination, but by experience. It should be the set of norms that they would see better for their experience in the society. Thus the way to "teach" people about the ethics we see as good is building a good society with those ethics. Basically teach by experience.

  • Removed Locked

    Why does philosophy education make people uncomfortable?

    Jump

  • But ethics and morality emerges from society. Giving a small group the power to decide and indoctrinate over that is dangerous and ultimately "unethical".

    I get the feeling of trying to push it. Nowadays most people studying philosophy is left wing. So pushing that those people should control society ethics is basically pushing our political agenda.

    I'm leftist, but not the kind of leftist that would do "everything" for the cause. Because I see the dangers of it. What if we do that, we leave ethics of society into a small group and that small group now or in the future diverges from what the society or myself consider moral?

    That's why I'm also against that idea of trying to push a "ethics" course on every major. Now it's seen as a way to push a particular agenda that we agree on. But surely in the future it will be used to push an agenda we don't like (as it had happened in the past), that's a big risk.

    I prefer to leave ethics to the individual and society as a sum. An not giving a small group power over it.

  • Removed Locked

    Why does philosophy education make people uncomfortable?

    Jump

  • I have nothing about people choosing to study whatever they want.

    I get a little bothered when people suggest philosophy majors as the "moral compass of society". For instance, I've been hearing more and more on how "philosophy is central to society because we need philosophy majors in ethical committees everywhere". And while I agree that ethical committees are important, I disagree that studying philosophy makes you more fit for a ethical committee than any other person. As moral of a society derives from the whole society, those ethical committees should follow more a popular jury structure imho.

    My point is that when people follow this position they are, inherently saying "a philosophy major is more moral than you" which is the thing that ultimately bothers me.

  • Deleted

    every ex-urban usa middle school right now

    Jump

  • I need a Rosseta Stone here. Can someone translate it into Egyptian Hieroglyphs so it's easier to understand?

  • What are subscriptions that are worth it and subscriptions that are not?

    Jump

  • I agree with journalism.

    They should pay me if they want to wash my brain with their propaganda.

  • Or the common cold!

    Jump

  • You can get sprays to completely alleviate symptoms. And if it's a severe case you can take injection. There's also inmune therapy to permanently cure it.

    I am the first guilty of not going to alergologist for years. But after I started to go each spring I have it completely managed.

  • Do you think anyone will be able to remember who any of us are in 600 years?

    Jump

  • I will write a blog complaining about copper prices. If my sources are correct I will be remembered forever.

  • Deleted Locked

    Dad dating a minor; what to do?

    Jump

  • It would depend somehow on the cultural backgrounds. I don't know their cultural backgrounds, but if in their cultures such age gaps are frowned upon is more than likely that she end up growing out of it. If it's something normal for their cultures they are more likely to last.

    If you have that information you could decide if you want to just wait it out, or not. Wait it out would be easy, just live your life until it ends.

    If they are likely to last, then you have to ask yourself if you can accept it or not, or of you can pretend you accept it for the love you have for your dad. If the answer is no, then remove yourself from the situation and live your own life.

  • Feral children are everywhere

    Jump

  • Not really. There are kids louder than others. And while there may be some internal aspects to that a lot of that have to do with education. Specially as they grow and education starts becoming more a defining factor.

  • Feral children are everywhere

    Jump

  • Society norms have to be bilateral, and convenient for every member of the society.

    One member of society cannot fuck around not expecting to, eventually, find out.

    This is why we have laws, norms and social customs. So we can live in a society.

    If members of society feel that they cannot longer live next to other members is when society breaks, and, you like it or not, the social pact gets broken.

    You cannot force members of a society to live en the minimum common suffering denominator. To lower everyone standards of living to the one provided by the most annoying member of the society. That's a highway to the society giving the big F to that member.

    It should be the contrary, society should try to live to the standard of the less annoyance. To avoid bother the most sensible member of the group.

    It's a everyone loses vs everyone wins situation. We should aim for the later.

  • Feral children are everywhere

    Jump

  • What retirement?

    I'll be long dead before retirement as they keep raising retirement age far beyond what most people in my family have lived.

  • Feral children are everywhere

    Jump

  • All I want is enough differentiated "adult only" spaces. I won't say anyone how to raise their kids, just let me be in a space where that parenting is not happening.

  • Welcome to 2025

    Jump

  • Is you homelab getting ddosed constantly?

    I had had it for years and never ever got ddosed.

    Are you sure it's actually ddos and not just the typical bots scanning for vulnerabilities? Which are easy defended for by keeping updated.

    It's weird as a DDOS is not something that's just happens, it's a targeted attack. It's a rare occurrence that someone decided to attack a homelab.

  • What would stop you from switching to a flip phone (or dumbphone) in 2025?

    Jump

  • I'm closer to carrying around a cyberdeck than a dumbphone.

    I don't like either sms or phonecalls.