Just to be clear: You favor total anarchy? The conclusion of all your argument seems to be that nothing can be analyzed and nothing should be done, in general, for any problem. “It’s complex; therefore, you shouldn’t think about it.”
“It’s complex; therefore, you shouldn’t think about it.”
No.
It’s complex, therefore thoughts about it should probably be complex.
Banning proximate causes of ill is usually not a proposal that respects the complexities of a situation. It’s reminiscent of the war on drugs, the war on crime, the war on poverty, the war on terrorism...just about the only thing that could be a more perniciously deranging political cause than a war on a random abstract noun is a war on politics itself. That takes all the usual problems to the meta level.
Just to be clear: You favor total anarchy?
I had not expected that severe misinterpretation of what I wrote and notice my own surprise and stupidity.
Just to be clear: You favor total anarchy? The conclusion of all your argument seems to be that nothing can be analyzed and nothing should be done, in general, for any problem. “It’s complex; therefore, you shouldn’t think about it.”
No.
It’s complex, therefore thoughts about it should probably be complex.
Banning proximate causes of ill is usually not a proposal that respects the complexities of a situation. It’s reminiscent of the war on drugs, the war on crime, the war on poverty, the war on terrorism...just about the only thing that could be a more perniciously deranging political cause than a war on a random abstract noun is a war on politics itself. That takes all the usual problems to the meta level.
I had not expected that severe misinterpretation of what I wrote and notice my own surprise and stupidity.