no bias there, eh? AI is a “smokescreen” in many ways. It is a record player that of necessity plays the tune that some HUMAN programmed it to play what the human wants. Let’s not confuse complexity with independent moral agency or Truth, here!
AI is great for some things. But it is NOT a moral agent or an arbiter of truth!
at at heart, AI is just a complex record player that plays whatever tune is recorded (by humans, with agendas and wants) on the record. It is NOT a “truth-teller.” It’s a very complex toaster oven!
Now, it very clearly can be a valuable tool. But let’s not lose sight of the FACT that it is just a tool. It does what it is programmed to do–there IS no moral agency in play, here, any more than a hammer is exercising moral agency when it hits your thumb!
It is not a “bad hammer” because it hit your thumb or that it hit the head of your friend. The hammer is merely something that is acted upon, not something that acts! Same with AI. It is intrinsically neither good nor bad.
progress! What the bank did is just inexcusable! Why are Lefties so into coercion? I guess it’s just part of the bedrock philosophical foundation of Leftism–the overwhelming hatred toward moral agency…
There are big changes for the firearm industry when it comes to access to banking services. JPMorgan Chase recently announced the banking giant’s policy of denying services to manufacturers of modern sporting rifles is over.
That’s a welcome reversal of policy after NSSF met with JPMorgan Chase officials to work to end the discriminatory policy. It’s also the most recent of the big banks, including Bank of America and Citigroup that have shifted banking service policies that previously froze out members of the firearm industry.
not much of a surprise. Leftism has violence at its very core. No “you be you” or anything like that. It is, “You will be FORCED. Comrade.”
Put that on a chart, and it becomes a visual Double Black Diamond ski slope, with a quarter of “very liberal” people supporting political violence, 17% of liberal people doing so, six percent of “conservatives” (shame on those 1 out of 20!), and 3% of very conservative people doing so. That is, quite literally, a margin of error number in a poll.
If you don’t recognize how violent the Left has become, you frankly have your head up your butt! We really are not the same…
The party of the schoolmarm’s veto. She’ll rap your knuckles, you know!
that for an atheist (or evolutionary absolutist) there simply CAN logically be no God. There is NO human law or any kind of morality that is not based squarely on the existence of God.
You may consider yourself to be an atheist, but if you claim that there are any moral “rules” at all, you are speaking with a forked tongue.
At most you can say it is better for living with others not to lie and kill. But is it always? Says who? And by what authority? Lying and cheating can lead to some pretty good personal outcomes!
And pure empiricism certainly doesn’t show that some actions are “good” and some actions are “bad!” And if YOU choose to not act in a certain way, what then?
I guess we will leave aside the question of whether you can choose at all for now. But it really does not mesh with the human concept of right and wrong if ALL behavior is merely necessary.
At best this line of reasoning leads to a stultifying nihilism. It leaves one literally adrift on a Godless sea, with no rudder or sail with which to steer.
If there is no God, there simply IS no right and no wrong. There is only power and the willingness to seek and use it. There is no meaning to our lives at all–Nietzsche was entirely correct. The psychopath has the only true perception of the world. The rest is just boob-bait for Bubba.
Answer: I certainly hope so. But if these policies are so obviously better and have drastically helped the economy, why don’t Democrats cotton on to them?
In a word, control. Democrats hate this because they cannot control it. Creating conditions for the economy to grow on its own is the antithesis of Leftism itself. This growth is tied tightly to human agency, and that is anathema to the Left.
But I certainly hope that Trump follows Milei’s guidelines! He has shown us the way…
I have been having, provoked in part by Peter Thiel.
Coercive government is indeed ALWAYS sold under the thin patina of “peace and safety.” Think about it: The promise is that there will be no war (and who wants war?) and everyone will be safe and secure (what kind of monster wouldn’t want THAT?”)
Yet, while no rational or moral person enjoys war, there sometimes is little choice.
To quote Patrick Henry’s famous speech:
It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace — but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! … What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God!
See, the problem is that to force there to be peace and safety for all, there can be no moral agency, only direct control. And just who has that direct control? Huh?
Suddenly we are in the domain of coercion and despotism!
Left is the party of violence.
Trump
Paul
Scalise
Zeldon
All these were Conservatives physically attacked by Leftists.
Now name some (within the last 50 years, please) of Leftists physically attacked by a Conservative. Go ahead, I’ll wait…
Understand well, Leftism IS the political philosophy of violence! If a group is violent, it is a VERY safe bet that they are Leftist! Look around–BLM and ANTIFA are merely recent “flavors” of this same ol’ crap sandwich.
At heart, Leftism is about force, violence, and lack of moral agency. “Saving” everyone by removing the ability to choose. Conservatives, OTOH, tend to value free choice and personal liberty. They value conversion over coercion.
Now YOU have to decide what YOU believe!
life, I spend all day every day reading psychological evaluations. Yesterday I ran across a line in a report that really struck me:
Just because he has a disorder does not mean that he cannot engage in some behavior on purpose.
I think that MUCH of the time people (and psychologists, who should know better) talk as if a psychological disorder somehow completely prevents a person from exercising moral agency.
Well, it doesn’t. Not typically. Maybe the more severe a condition is the less moral agency is in play–OK, I can buy that–but to say that the presence of a disorder means that the person can exert no moral agency at all is bull crap!
A good psychologist has to tease apart that which is a choice and that which is a mere reflex.
Denying moral agency also means that there is no way to “decide” to change and get better. Denying moral agency may lead to one feeling “better” and “justified” in the very short term, but it is a damning straight-jacket that actually prevents people from changing and getting better.
There is simply no way to believe in change without also believing in moral agency.