TehGonzalez
TehGonzalez
TehGonzalez
Feb 11 2016
Save

It’s not intuitive, but it’s actually reasonable. He’s using utilitarian moral philosophy. It works like this: Read more

Jun 8 2015
1

Argh! I’m torn here. I would very much like to end this conversation with us both understanding each other, but as long as you see it as an argument, we’re going to have to deal with tertiary concerns like “getting the last word” and “shooting down arguments.” Read more

Jun 7 2015
1

This conversation does not meet your standards because it has different standards. This conversation is not for you, and it’s not my responsibility to make it work for you.

Jun 7 2015
Save

Yeah, this is what I meant by “not tongue-in-cheek enough.” That’s fine. But don’t try to dismiss the conversation for those of us who have a frame of reference that works for it.

Jun 5 2015
Save

Hm. I see where you’re coming from, but that’s not how I’m approaching this. The writing is what it is. Most stories tend to have plot holes, etc., which we tend to ignore. The plot holes move the story along just like the actual plot elements do. They didn’t seem to bother the original audience too much when Star Read more

Jun 4 2015
Save

Perhaps. Either way, I don’t think you’re being tongue-in-cheek enough to appreciate this discussion.

Jun 2 2015
44

I have a theory about that. What if the stormtroopers really were good shots—until Obi-Wan became one with the Force, allowing him to throw off everyone’s aim all over the galaxy?

May 5 2015
2

“All science majors are just natural philosophy, guys!”

Apr 24 2015
Save

Still, it’s important to recognize the environment in which we’re discussing the technology.

Apr 18 2015
1

My theory is that Force-ghost Obi-Wan was knocking off their aim every time they tried to shoot something plot-critical.

Apr 16 2015
Save

Chewie's aged well. Are wookies longer-lived than humans or something?

Mar 27 2015
1

I won't deny there's a heroic appeal to defying fate, if you wanna cast it that way. But again, I don't think that's what the article is trying to accomplish. It's a background piece, trying to contextualize the discussion without necessarily weighing in on either side. Which is why its conclusion is "pause and Read more

Mar 27 2015
Save

I think the article's argument was more that it's inevitable than that it's good or bad.

Mar 27 2015
Save

My favorite auto-antonym is "nonplussed." My dictionary actually has a note that guesses people started using the "wrong" definition because they were confused by the "non-" prefix.

Mar 20 2015
1

You are not alone. No one understands the Matrix rules. Even the people who wrote the Matrix rules didn't understand them. Read more

Jan 26 2015
Save

This presents an interesting counterpoint to the rationalist argument that it is always in the rationalist's interest to acquire more information.