Investing is the code for having a successful financial life, investing with the right expert would free you from modern financial slavery. Investing in crypto now is really cool especially with the current price in the market for now
Even with the current dip in the market I'm still glad can smile back at my portfolio of $32,500 built from my weekly trade, all thanks to my advisor fergus Waylen
I'm honestly surprised that this name is being mentioned here, I stumbled upon one of his clients testimony last two months in CNBC world news and decided to try him out...I'm Expecting my third cashout in 2days
I have also been trading with him and the profits are secured and over a 100% return on investment directly sent to your wallet. Lack of trade discipline is the primary reason for in day trade losses. It is estimated that nearly 80-85% of day traders end up losing money in the stock market
When you talk about power dynamics behind universalism, you wouldn't be denying universalism, you would be denying universalists who claim a particular understanding of these universals... When you want to tackle the problem of universalism, you have to tackle the idea whether morality can be deduced from necessarily apriori true principles... If you can build a case against that then you would be doing it right, otherwise you would be just making a critique of "universalists".
I quickly became suspicious of Massimo when he lumped Putin with Hitler and Mussolini as examples of people having justifications for evil deeds. I bet if he were to hear someone compare Putin in Ukraine to Harry Truman in Japan or Charles de Gaulle in Indochina he would have a conniption and pass out.
exactly, he clearly does not have a brain that understands anything. and he wants to teach about how to spot pseudo-science when you cant even see how Putin was pushed into invading ukr by the west
The word "evil" can be used as both a noun and an adjective. As a noun, it refers to something that is morally wrong or wicked. As an adjective, it means morally bad or wicked. Here are some examples of how the word "evil" can be used as a noun: The evil queen in Snow White was jealous of Snow White's beauty. The evil empire was a term used to describe the Soviet Union during the Cold War. The evil spirits were said to haunt the old house. Here are some examples of how the word "evil" can be used as an adjective: The evil wizard cast a spell on the princess. The evil deeds of the dictator were well-known. The evil plan was to destroy the world. I hope this helps! Let me know if you have any other questions.
1. Ideas about good & evil aren't universal, but some ideas are much more widely agreed than others. For example, there's a nearly universal consensus against murder, but not against abortion. 2. It would help to use the comparisons "better than" and "worse than" instead of the absolutist terms "good" and "evil." For example, in the Trolley Car Dilemma, sacrificing one person is better than allowing many people to die, so it's unhelpful to call both options evil (or bad). A choice should be deemed "evil" if and only if a better choice is feasible. Modern systems of justice recognize that some choices are worse than others, which is why different crimes have different sentencing guidelines, and why duress -- a situation in which other alternatives normally better were worse -- is taken into consideration.
Where Curry loses me is in the way he approaches Feminism's mandate to address intra-community violence - eg, sexual and domestic violence. Curry rightly points out that intra-community violence is exacerbated when a community lives in a state of colonization and economic desolation, but he just sorta leaves that there. The part he leaves unsaid seems to be some variation of "And therefore we don't need feminism". But why? Does he believe that intra-community violence will simply disappear after decolonization and an economic renaissance for Black communities? This is wildly unrealistic. No amount of resources, influence, or cultural dominion has stopped middle- and upper-class white men from beating their wives and molesting their daughters. Patriarchy still exists and needs to be reckoned with. And when/if the argument boils down to "But decolonization is more important/urgent/efficient", I'm not convinced that we can't fight for both at the same time. His critiques of Intersectionality likewise seem a bit too alarmist for my taste. The main sticking point seems to be the flexibility and adaptability of Intersectionality to critique. He makes the case that Crenshaw's Intersectionality of the 1980's does a disservice to Black men, and he'd be right. Crenshaw and her contemporaries were often most concerned with their exclusion from the white-led Feminist movements of the time, and as a result focused on a framework that navigated the relationship between Black women and white women. Over 3 decades of critiques have led to an Intersectional framework that is in some ways very different from Crenshaw's original work and is much better at navigating the experiences of BIPOC men. The risk here, and it's a very real risk, is that white academics will take advantage of Intersectionality's flexibility to attempt to depoliticize or deracialize the practice. Academics like Sirma Bilge and Ashlee Christoffersen, themselves both white women, have written a number of papers critical of efforts by white, European academics to reinvent Intersectionality as a class-focused and race-blind framework. This "deracialized" Intersectionality is extremely appealing to Liberal power structures in Europe and the UK. It uses all the buzzwords people have come to associate with "good", "race-conscious" activism, but makes no meaningful challenges to racial hierarchies and, conversely, is most often used to justify moving resources away from racial justice programs towards white-led initiatives. So, yeah. That can happen. That is happening. But we know about it. We're pushing back against it. It's not like the broader community of Intersectional Feminists is hopping on board this train. We are actively proving ourselves capable of keeping bad takes out of the canon, insofar as there is a canon. The power structures taking advantage of deracialized Intersectionality were actively antagonistic to racial justice and actual Intersectional Feminists to begin with. All of this is to say that I get being frustrated with a social media environment that exemplifies white habitus. I'm all for exposing more folks to the parts of American History you don't learn in school. I just don't see the point in picking fights with Intersectionality and Feminism that Curry knows are going to get twisted up as they're played out on social media. Curry may not advocate for misogyny in the work I've consumed, but he often says things online that any media-literate person knows will attract misogynists.
I'm not gonna lie I didn't finish reading your comment, but I can suggest you can go try to listen to some lectures by Denise Ferreira & Hortense Spiller to hear "feminists" talk that know gendered power structure is not some unique thing separate from other forms of power
@@jamelwest2586Curry believes in historiographically grounded frames of understanding human history. Philosophy as a thought exercise not grounded in reality is little more than intellectual pornography.
Richard Dawkins would not debate William Lane Craig for the same reason Massimo Pigliucci should not debate Curry. There is no substance to Curry ramblings just evasive circular verbiage.
Nothing more juvenile than pretending that one’s philosophical traditions are pure and virtuous and thus cannot be held by those who are evil and immoral. I guess, Hitler wasn’t a Christian either.
@@updogysl Dog-brained idiocy. It might help to actually engage with his body of work before making claims like this. Grow up and try to humble yourself in the future.
Massimo Pigliucci is not a thinker. He has the instincts of a child, even if he's stumbled upon (with the aid of an exasperated partner?) the wardrobe of the "public intellectual."
@@MontyCantsin5 It's ridiculous going through life without once considering history, or ever questioning your cultural presuppositions. And Pigliucci is getting on in years, isn't he? In fairness, videos like this and walking caricatures like Pigliucci are helpful in their way - as foils. He's somehow denser than the most uncharitable straw man.
@@MontyCantsin5 of course, massimo is making arguments not grounded in history. He's a liberal universalist, aka an imperialist, who wants us to overlook the violent and Totalitarian aspects of liberalism
"Fearless thinker" Tommy Curry? There's a tendentious claim. One used to promote a notion of indomitablility, and by extension, incontrovertible veracity in his argument. Mauvaise foi. I recognize only a sophistic gloss, motivated reasoning, and studied ethnocentrism.
The bad faith is pretending that intellectual traditions have no connection to the times or interpretations of those professing those traditions. You’re making a ideological argument of the absolute purity of philosophy.
I agree with Curry. Good and evil are not constants. Their meanings defined by those with power.
With everything going on right now, the best decision to be on any creative man's heart is having a profitable investment strategy.
Investing is the code for having a successful financial life, investing with the right expert would free you from modern financial slavery.
Investing in crypto now is really cool especially with the current price in the market for now
Even with the current dip in the market I'm still glad can smile back at my portfolio of $32,500 built from my weekly trade, all thanks to my advisor fergus Waylen
I'm honestly surprised that this name is being mentioned here, I stumbled upon one of his clients testimony last two months in CNBC world news and decided to try him out...I'm Expecting my third cashout in 2days
I have also been trading with him and the profits are secured and over a 100% return on investment directly sent to your wallet.
Lack of trade discipline is the primary reason for in day trade losses. It is estimated that nearly 80-85% of day traders end up losing money in the stock market
@maharasujp8903 Please how can I contact Mr fergus ? I really like what he has done for you, and I also want to benefit from it.
When you talk about power dynamics behind universalism, you wouldn't be denying universalism, you would be denying universalists who claim a particular understanding of these universals... When you want to tackle the problem of universalism, you have to tackle the idea whether morality can be deduced from necessarily apriori true principles... If you can build a case against that then you would be doing it right, otherwise you would be just making a critique of "universalists".
I quickly became suspicious of Massimo when he lumped Putin with Hitler and Mussolini as examples of people having justifications for evil deeds. I bet if he were to hear someone compare Putin in Ukraine to Harry Truman in Japan or Charles de Gaulle in Indochina he would have a conniption and pass out.
exactly, he clearly does not have a brain that understands anything. and he wants to teach about how to spot pseudo-science when you cant even see how Putin was pushed into invading ukr by the west
Oh relax. That gives away your viewpoint altogether…
How about Hitler and Netanyahu now there is a comparison!
Love ❤️ is needed in this world 🌎
Evil is not a noun. It is an adjective. It describes behavior, it doesn’t exist as a separate entity such as the devil.😅
Where's your proof? And "evil" is a noun.
@@billfarley9015In your head maybe.
The word "evil" can be used as both a noun and an adjective. As a noun, it refers to something that is morally wrong or wicked. As an adjective, it means morally bad or wicked.
Here are some examples of how the word "evil" can be used as a noun:
The evil queen in Snow White was jealous of Snow White's beauty.
The evil empire was a term used to describe the Soviet Union during the Cold War.
The evil spirits were said to haunt the old house.
Here are some examples of how the word "evil" can be used as an adjective:
The evil wizard cast a spell on the princess.
The evil deeds of the dictator were well-known.
The evil plan was to destroy the world.
I hope this helps! Let me know if you have any other questions.
1. Ideas about good & evil aren't universal, but some ideas are much more widely agreed than others. For example, there's a nearly universal consensus against murder, but not against abortion.
2. It would help to use the comparisons "better than" and "worse than" instead of the absolutist terms "good" and "evil." For example, in the Trolley Car Dilemma, sacrificing one person is better than allowing many people to die, so it's unhelpful to call both options evil (or bad). A choice should be deemed "evil" if and only if a better choice is feasible. Modern systems of justice recognize that some choices are worse than others, which is why different crimes have different sentencing guidelines, and why duress -- a situation in which other alternatives normally better were worse -- is taken into consideration.
the media in the west have manipulated ideas about abortion. before roe v wade was legally it was accepted by more people that it was morally wrong
The human history of war disproves any so called consensus.
Never debate with people who use should of or could of , it happen can’t change it 😂
Should have or could have... and "it happen can’t change it" What?
Where Curry loses me is in the way he approaches Feminism's mandate to address intra-community violence - eg, sexual and domestic violence. Curry rightly points out that intra-community violence is exacerbated when a community lives in a state of colonization and economic desolation, but he just sorta leaves that there. The part he leaves unsaid seems to be some variation of "And therefore we don't need feminism". But why? Does he believe that intra-community violence will simply disappear after decolonization and an economic renaissance for Black communities? This is wildly unrealistic. No amount of resources, influence, or cultural dominion has stopped middle- and upper-class white men from beating their wives and molesting their daughters. Patriarchy still exists and needs to be reckoned with. And when/if the argument boils down to "But decolonization is more important/urgent/efficient", I'm not convinced that we can't fight for both at the same time.
His critiques of Intersectionality likewise seem a bit too alarmist for my taste. The main sticking point seems to be the flexibility and adaptability of Intersectionality to critique. He makes the case that Crenshaw's Intersectionality of the 1980's does a disservice to Black men, and he'd be right. Crenshaw and her contemporaries were often most concerned with their exclusion from the white-led Feminist movements of the time, and as a result focused on a framework that navigated the relationship between Black women and white women. Over 3 decades of critiques have led to an Intersectional framework that is in some ways very different from Crenshaw's original work and is much better at navigating the experiences of BIPOC men.
The risk here, and it's a very real risk, is that white academics will take advantage of Intersectionality's flexibility to attempt to depoliticize or deracialize the practice. Academics like Sirma Bilge and Ashlee Christoffersen, themselves both white women, have written a number of papers critical of efforts by white, European academics to reinvent Intersectionality as a class-focused and race-blind framework. This "deracialized" Intersectionality is extremely appealing to Liberal power structures in Europe and the UK. It uses all the buzzwords people have come to associate with "good", "race-conscious" activism, but makes no meaningful challenges to racial hierarchies and, conversely, is most often used to justify moving resources away from racial justice programs towards white-led initiatives.
So, yeah. That can happen. That is happening. But we know about it. We're pushing back against it. It's not like the broader community of Intersectional Feminists is hopping on board this train. We are actively proving ourselves capable of keeping bad takes out of the canon, insofar as there is a canon. The power structures taking advantage of deracialized Intersectionality were actively antagonistic to racial justice and actual Intersectional Feminists to begin with.
All of this is to say that I get being frustrated with a social media environment that exemplifies white habitus. I'm all for exposing more folks to the parts of American History you don't learn in school. I just don't see the point in picking fights with Intersectionality and Feminism that Curry knows are going to get twisted up as they're played out on social media. Curry may not advocate for misogyny in the work I've consumed, but he often says things online that any media-literate person knows will attract misogynists.
I'm not gonna lie I didn't finish reading your comment, but I can suggest you can go try to listen to some lectures by Denise Ferreira & Hortense Spiller to hear "feminists" talk that know gendered power structure is not some unique thing separate from other forms of power
It’s hard to decipher what Curry’s position is from any of this. And “fearless thinker”?
Curry is a nihilist. He doesn't have a position or coherent politics.
@@jamelwest2586 What an absurd claim. It's okay to admit you don't understand
@@jamelwest2586Curry believes in historiographically grounded frames of understanding human history. Philosophy as a thought exercise not grounded in reality is little more than intellectual pornography.
Once again, where or what are Curry's politics? I don't think that either of you black male studies minions can tell me.
Yes just making noises on stage. I wonder if they invited him for affirmative action?
Way to go off topic…🙄
Richard Dawkins would not debate William Lane Craig for the same reason Massimo Pigliucci should not debate Curry. There is no substance to Curry ramblings just evasive circular verbiage.
You're triggered
Nothing more juvenile than pretending that one’s philosophical traditions are pure and virtuous and thus cannot be held by those who are evil and immoral. I guess, Hitler wasn’t a Christian either.
We get it, he's black and you don't like him
Just apeing about on stage. We need truly rational minds capable of pure reason to be on stage. Affirmative action is destroying standards
@@updogysl Dog-brained idiocy. It might help to actually engage with his body of work before making claims like this. Grow up and try to humble yourself in the future.
Massimo Pigliucci is not a thinker. He has the instincts of a child, even if he's stumbled upon (with the aid of an exasperated partner?) the wardrobe of the "public intellectual."
Don’t be ridiculous.
@@MontyCantsin5 It's ridiculous going through life without once considering history, or ever questioning your cultural presuppositions. And Pigliucci is getting on in years, isn't he?
In fairness, videos like this and walking caricatures like Pigliucci are helpful in their way - as foils. He's somehow denser than the most uncharitable straw man.
@@MontyCantsin5 hea right
@@tankiebot704: Hea right?
@@MontyCantsin5 of course, massimo is making arguments not grounded in history. He's a liberal universalist, aka an imperialist, who wants us to overlook the violent and Totalitarian aspects of liberalism
Tommy Curry destroyed that clown 🤡
"Fearless thinker" Tommy Curry? There's a tendentious claim. One used to promote a notion of indomitablility, and by extension, incontrovertible veracity in his argument. Mauvaise foi. I recognize only a sophistic gloss, motivated reasoning, and studied ethnocentrism.
Why should anyone care what you think???
The bad faith is pretending that intellectual traditions have no connection to the times or interpretations of those professing those traditions. You’re making a ideological argument of the absolute purity of philosophy.
Pigliucci is such a faker.
Uuhhhhhhhhhhhhh……………
Criticize Putin but hush hush for Biden, got it
Prosecute Putin for war crimes.
Oh relax!