Marchesk

I was curious about the global projections for CO2 emissions for the rest of the century and I found this article from last year: http://euanmearns.co...

Okay, but what does that look like? The problem is that if nobody wants their lifestyle drastically altered, then there won't be political will to imp...

The warming is about 0.05-0.07 degrees celsius every three years. So a slow roast indeed. Climate scientists would like for emissions to drop to zero ...

The Earth is not roasting, it's in the process of warming up a by a few degrees. The Earth has been warmer in the past, and colder. And warmer. Venus ...

Right, climate models aren't civilization models, and the idea that the entire Earth will become uninhabitable for humans is absurd. Earth isn't Venus...

It should also be noted that there are proposed solutions that don't require drastic changes to the economy, such as planting six trillion trees, larg...

Really? When the dinosaurs evolved, the CO2 in the atmosphere was six times what it was now, and it didn't result in the planet being uninhabitable fo...

Nope. It won't happen. Also, we'll be adding a couple more billion while large parts of Asia and Africa finish catching up. Add to that the majority o...

You mean all of human culture? I don't think abolishing gender roles is realistic. But they can be made more equal and diverse.

See this language is what fuels skepticism about taking radical action to avert climate catastrophe. It comes off sounding like an excuse to implement...

The danger here is that the patriarchy can be justified on the grounds that humans evolved gender roles to be such. So then feminists who wish to abol...

But the comparison to money, which was a social construct that came with civilization, doesn't work either. The context is generally patriarchal socie...

Another question that comes up is whether a biological male who undergoes a sex change or even just identifies themselves as female should be allowed ...

My question regarding whether gender is a social construct like money is to ask whether hunter-gatherer societies have gender roles and whether this i...

No, but we are responsible for preventing harm to others by said human beings if we can do so, even if it requires lying to them. This trumps any cate...

Do we really want others to be free to cause injury? Is that sort of freedom moral?

Does Nick Bostrom have anything to say about Tipler's cosmology? Anyway, there are physical limits to potential future technologies, however advanced.

Looks like the difference between Platonism and Constructivism. If you think mathematical objects are real and have existence beyond humans calculatin...

Depending on how you interpret the myth, it seems one or more of the following: 1. This is the Jewish version of Pandora's box, meant to explain why b...

It might make a difference if it's the aliens making us feel like we have free will while they totally determine our actions. Like burning fossil fuel...

The motivation isn't. The reason agile became a thing is because often it's the case that during a software project the requirements change as the cus...

No, merely human. They based their philosophy on a principle of empirical verification which itself can't be empirically verified. The counter to that...

One problem with the view that metaphysics is meaningless is that a lot of people, including philosophers, have found it meaningful enough to discuss ...

I can think of exceptions. Once I drove my car into high water and ruined the engine. It was under my control. I didn't have to drive the car when I k...

And you sound irrational.

So, the Senate is undemocratic therefore it's bad and thus should be abolished, irregardless of existing political realities. That's the argument bein...

Because Hitler was bad?

If you think the US Senate shouldn't exist, then you have to deal with the reality of the states as well, since that's the reason for the Senate exist...

Ah, it only took four pages to mention Hitler.

The argument is that the states exist as a fundamental political unit of organization making up the US. You don't have to like it, but it is a reality...

I don't trust foreigners, particularly if they're European.

And also maybe a requirement that the President has to win the popular vote in addition to the electoral college. If they win one but not the other, t...

I also think reform to the election process needs to happen. Voter ranked choice would be nice. And money should be removed from elections. The candid...

I agree with you on gerrymandering, but I'm on the fence about the Electoral College, because once it's done away with, the candidates will focus much...

Right, the senators are elected by the people, but the Senate is not representative of the state populations. This is more of an issue today than near...

So why not just get rid of representatives and go with straight democracy using the internet? We vote on everything. Majority rules.

So then saying the Senate is anti-democratic isn't saying much by itself. The argument would need to be that the Senate is anti-democratic in a way th...

We can also ask how democratic is a two party system? You have two parties representing the wishes of several hundred million people. If we really wan...

It doesn't seem like the current president is either. He can get voted out next election, but so can senators.

Then it's not much of a philosophical discussion.

So what would be the ideal setup of the US government? Abolish the Senate and the House takes over both roles. Abolish the Electoral College. Get rid ...

So the OP seems to be arguing that undemocratic political institutions are bad. That would be more appropriate for a philosophical discussion than arg...

That's not what I recall. I guess we can google some historical analysis or use the Founders words to settle this.

Fine, it's not democratically representative of the population. That's the House. Next question is whether all political institutions should be democr...

No, there are reasons for it to exist which have to do with the US being a union of states. Maybe the need for state governments will change someday.

So you're saying if there wasn't an institution of slavery, there would have been no senate? That the founders created the senate solely on behalf of ...

It justifies the state as a fundamental unit of government in addition to the Federal government. That's the whole point of the United States of Ameri...

Even if we all agree that the Senate is bad because being undemocratic is inherently immoral or something, then what? You do realize the states have t...

Okay, but what does that have to do with the Senate as an institution? Control of the Senate will swing back to the Democratic party in time.

The Senate represents the states, so yes in that case. Are you talking about in theory?