(It’s not clear to me how this form of rationalism will survive contact with the real world. Are you strong enough to be able to think despite having testicles?)
It’s not clear to me how this form of rationalism will survive contact with the real world.
Perhaps better than some other form. By analogy, if I were teaching a soldier how to fight, I would first teach him how to operate his rifle without any distractions. Later he can practice firing with the added distraction of loud noises, people running and screaming, other people trying to shoot at him, and so on.
For a soldier analogy, how about women in the armed forces? Perhaps the IDF, who have a good reputation for kicking arse in practical tests. (Even if the War Nerd thinks they’re overrated.)
I am entirely unconvinced that a rationalism brought up without this bit of humanity will actually survive its first exposure to air, and your analogy doesn’t convince me. (You are of course entirely entitled not to care if I’m convinced.)
Though there may be, e.g., past data you can point to that shows this as the important criterion.
And, as Nancy Leibovitz points out, an experiment would be worth running.
Let us know how that works out for you.
(It’s not clear to me how this form of rationalism will survive contact with the real world. Are you strong enough to be able to think despite having testicles?)
Perhaps better than some other form. By analogy, if I were teaching a soldier how to fight, I would first teach him how to operate his rifle without any distractions. Later he can practice firing with the added distraction of loud noises, people running and screaming, other people trying to shoot at him, and so on.
For a soldier analogy, how about women in the armed forces? Perhaps the IDF, who have a good reputation for kicking arse in practical tests. (Even if the War Nerd thinks they’re overrated.)
I am entirely unconvinced that a rationalism brought up without this bit of humanity will actually survive its first exposure to air, and your analogy doesn’t convince me. (You are of course entirely entitled not to care if I’m convinced.)
Though there may be, e.g., past data you can point to that shows this as the important criterion.
And, as Nancy Leibovitz points out, an experiment would be worth running.