It's a slow, snowy afternoon. How about a 🧵 on "rationalists" & "rationalism"? I want to talk about what real rationalism might look like & what people devoted to rationalism might actually behave like--and how that differs from what you often see from self-styled rationalists.

Caveat up front: this is not about Slate Star Codex, which I haven't read regularly enough to have an opinion on, or about the recent controversy between SSC & the NYT. I'm more interested in the *idea* of rationalism (vs. the practice).

The core premise of rationalism, as I understand it, is simply that humans' cognitive machinery was not designed by evolution to find truth, but rather to advance the interests & welfare of the collective -- a Venn overlap, but not the same thing. Therefore ...

... reasoning well, both individually & as groups, requires special effort. It requires consciously trying to set aside the parochialism, biases, & other distortions that typically characterize our thinking -- resisting, to some extent, the dynamics of group membership/welfare.

That's all fine. I agree entirely that we should make special effort to reason well & to guard against the typical failures of reasoning to which we humans are prone. I believe it's the best (maybe only) way forward as a species. So far so good.

Rather than cheat on your spouse, the honourable thing to do is quit the marriage
I know many people would rather want to eat their cake and have it, in principle, people who do that are scums and cheats
Either you are the husband or the wife, you have a duty to yourself to stay

faithful to your spouse regardless of the circumstances or the situation you find yourself in
If the situation is such that you cannot cope with the relationship, the best thing to do is walk out and stay out.
A lady came to my office claiming her husband was a two minute man and

the lack of sexual satisfaction had almost driven her into the street in search of a lover
She hadn't done anything yet...
She was just considering it because of the frustration the quick ejaculation issue the husband has was causing her
She made sure she dragged her husband to

my office too
She had been talking to him about it and she really wanted him to take her serious on the issue so that they can address it
Her husband didn't form
He acknowledged that he had a challenge and had tried so much to address it to no avail
They have a daughter and the

husband was willing to do anything to keep his home
His openness and sincerity impressed me
Many men do not like to talk about their sexuality or deficiency in that area because they assume it belittles them
He was not like most men
I asked him a salient question that day
I said

23 December 2020 #MAGAanalysis #PenceCard

If By Any Other Means...

First a nod to my new friend, @HeloProcurement, Don The Pleb. You'll enjoy the show we did last night, and it's meditating on our conversation that led to today's

Today, in #WealthOfTweets, more rude produce, #AdamSmith's opinions about Scottish Cheese, and, to be perfectly honest, an irresponsible amount of poop. #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets

The second kind of rude produce is the kind humans can produce more of in response to demand. This includes stuff like sheep, 🐄🐄, and fruits & veg that farm well.(I.xi.l.1) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets

We don’t bother to cultivate this stuff until we reach a certain level of wealth because it reproduces well on its own. But as we get wealthier, we want more stuff and can pay for it, so it’s profitable to herd and farm these things. (I.xi.l.1) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets

But unlike the wild and rare stuff, there’s a limit on the price of this kind of produce, because when the price goes higher, we make more of it, which brings the price back down.(I.xi.l.1) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets

(We also find more profitable uses for, say, the wild grazing land, crowd the sheep out, and then *need* to cultivate them.) (I.xi.l.2) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweet

Sources : We have been continuously maintaining that @ikamalhaasan is an @RSSorg product and he is a front of RSS. We also had earlier stated that Kamal’s party MNM is funded by Mukesh Ambani 1/n

Kamalhassan released a video supporting a fanatic sanghi – Soorappa, VC of Anna University. Why would Kamal release a video in support of Soorappa ? 2/n

One Dr Karthick Sridhar is the Vice Chairman of Indian Center for Academic Rankings and Excellence. ICARE This Karthick Sridhar, This is a Right Wing institute under the garb of “merit & excellence”. 3/n

Following the order of Commission of Inquiry against Dr Soorappa, this Karthick Sridhar took Soorappa to meet Kamal and promised funding by Mukesh Ambani. Only after this, Kamal came out in support of Soorappa. Subsequently Soorappa thanked Kamal too. 4/n

The Chairman of the Board of Governors of ICARE is one venomous sanghi named Mohandas Pai. This Mohandas Pai is funding two poisonous right wing portals which not only spew venom on minorities but also spreads fake news. The two portals are “Opindia and Swarajya” 5/n

As a scholar who has researched and written quite a bit about the Anabaptists, can we set a few things straight?

1. Baptists are not Anabaptists. Their history is theirs; ours is ours. We have similarities, but we are not them. We honor them by not using them for our purposes.

2. Not all Anabaptists were in Münster, and many if not most Anabaptists at the time were just as appalled as we are by the Münsterites. So please drop the tropes equating all Anabaptists with Münster. Informed and honest scholars are known by their right retelling of history.

3. The same truth applies to the other types of Reformation Radicals. There is a great difference between those who have become known as Evangelical Anabaptists on the one hand and Spiritualists, Rationalists, etc. on the other hand. Respect them as you also wish to be respected.

4. Yes, there were Anabaptists who toyed with various heresies, including Arianism, Socinianism, and Celestial Flesh Christology. But there were also many Anabaptists who affirmed, commented upon, and used the traditional Apostles’ Creed, Nicene Creed, and Athanasian Creed.

And if you want to do the honest research, you can also find a few heretical Roman Catholic Popes and more than a few heretical Anglicans, Presbyterians, Lutherans. and whomever else you want to talk about. Good historical theology doesn’t play favorites; it speaks the truth.

@JohnCoy29071630 Some people have decided that Wings is against independence, because they don't like what he is now saying. I decided to find out for myself. The first thing that bothered me re SNP was what happened in AS trial.
I hadn't followed the trial at the time.

As time went on I saw more and more posts re the un-fairness of the trial. These were from people I had followed for years. I didn't read Wings much at that time.
Everything was going smoothly for the SNP until these posts started appearing. I began to question what was going on?

This seemed a big conspiratory at first, until I found out that some complainers were in a Watsapp group with someone who worked in the ScotGov, close to NS. This raised the hair on my neck, considering they were not supposed to know each other due to them being anonymous.

I began looking at the links and paperwork that were being tweeted by ppl I followed for years. I didn't like what I was seeing and reading. The ScotGov appeared to be blocking the publication of Alex Salmond's trial paperwork. I had always thought of SNP as open & transparent!

I was shocked by what I was seeing. I was seeing leaked documents, etc. When I started questioning this on twitter, people were posting more links to different documents. I was now getting all different links from different people. I started reading as much as I could.

My morning thought. I think what's most incompatible about the way I think and the journal article format as a means of capturing and validating thought is that I have a completely different sense of the relation between tentativeness, rigor, and informatic compression.

The characteristic Pete thought is: wait a minute, this whole area is dominated by an assumption that no one seems to be questioning, and I've got two options to express that: i) outline the logic of the issue in a quick and compressed way, ii) write a small book with references.

The discipline seems to want something in between these poles every single time, and this makes me extremely anxious because I feel (with good reason) like any partially referential engagement with the issue will get instantly torpedoed by anyone outside its referential remit.

To repeat something I've said before: I'm actually quite good at being *concise*, I just find it very hard to be *brief*, because most of the thoughts I have don't permit brevity. Consider what your (referential) reactions are to this brief piece:

One of the main genres of publication I've actually excelled in over the years is dictionary articles, which I take a lot of joy in writing, and include some of the pieces of which I'm most proud. Consider this one on the crux of Meillassoux's project:

1/ All I keep thinking about in this moment are all the horrible things that Rush Limbaugh did and said. Just flashes of them.

Like how following Trayvon Martin's death, he tried to convince people it was okay to say "n word" now as long as you ended with an "a" (and said it).

2/ Or how, one of his "undeniable truths" was that "Feminism was established so as to allow unattractive women easier access to the mainstream of pop culture."

3/ Or how if a prominent woman would publicly defend another woman, he would refer to it as "solidarity of the vaginas."

4/ How he absolutely hated Michelle Obama...and used to refer to has as "moo-chelle." He really liked this because it both attacked her for mooching off system as he claimed and because it was his way of calling her a cow (he thought she was fat).

5/ He had this one song called "Barack the Magic Negro." The lyrics were even more racist than the name. And he played it all the time. He was still playing that song during his show a few months ago.

Lot of chat about instructional coaching. To get it right, don't underestimate the time it takes!

- There has to be a shared vision for effective T&L from the coaches. Keep revisiting this and keep unpicking all the elements so they are able to break them down and explain them.

We used the Evidence Review by @ProfCoe to create some effective teaching habits, using a lot of TLAC techniques and work from @every_lesson. Knowledge and expertise and ability to break this down is vital.

Lots of time then required with coaches to look at lessons and look at highest leverage point. In one training session our coaching team picked out over 30 tweaks in a 5 minute video. Where do you start? Why there? Consistency key. Leads to great debate.

Time needs to be built in. Time for visits, time for coaching sessions, time to practice. SLT need to all understand the process and buy-in and all live it. Putting staff development first is truly exciting and hugely powerful if actioned in the way it is desired.

Teachers/coaches need to have the process modelled for them. Staff need to understand the why behind IC, not just what it is. Worth talking through research on teacher's habitual practice from @mikehobbiss and @DrSamSims.

I have some thoughts on this.

Coming from a former alt-righter and former cult member who is still deradicalizing.

This is gonna be long.

Thread time.

This is de-radicalization going terribly wrong. This is keeping the tactics you learned in a hate group, but turning them on others. This is not unlearning. This is changing targets.

This is weaponizing what you learned to harm those who personally don't back you.

Look, I could sit here and break down my life. Break down the threats I've faced. Break down the ways I learned to find people IRL. Break down why I endorse being anon if you need to. Break down why this behavior is wrong.

But you know what? Screw that. Others covered that.

What I am going to say, is that it is a tactic of cults to teach you that you are the bravest, the strongest, the best, because of your membership in a group and your goals. That you are better than the masses. Above them. You are superior. "The Alpha", as Amy says.

It teaches you to be belligerent. Aggressive. If they're not with you, they're against you. It teaches you to center yourself. Everyone else doesn't matter. They don't understand. They aren't on the same level as you.

It's a delusion.

How has religion been used to fan the flames of insurrection on Capitol Hill? - welcome to the participants to our zoom briefing today! We'll be live-tweeting as we go along:

Bishop @Mebudde felt a range of emotions on yesterdays events such as shock outrage, deep confusion, and alarm at the ways they unfolded with some predictability #capitolhill #washington #briefing

Bishop @Mebudde highlights there was no protection for vulnerable people, the homeless and key workers in the #CapitolHill area during yesterdays events

"truths unveiled" is how @wsvarghese described the events on #capitolhill, and feels the US nation has been anxious and so on edge, especially the last 4 years in many communities, and shockingly stressful. #briefing #news

Guest @ChineMcDonald shares how she has previously felt called vocationally to "detoxify the brand" of UK #Evangelicals- but has become aware its a place where white supremacy reigns

THREAD: My thoughts on the decision not to call witnesses. Please correct me if I'm wrong. This take is based on what I think I know, and there's much I don't know, but I do not understand why the dems didn't depose Rep. Beutler. Let's talk about the objections: 1/

First, many are saying it would drag this thing out and prevent Biden's agenda from moving forward. I don't see how that's possible. The senate had the votes to depose Rep. Beutler. We saw that with the 55-45 vote to allow witnesses. GOP can't filibuster that 2/

It would have taken probably a week to depose her and introduce her testimony into the senate record. The senate is scheduled to be in recess this week. The only thing a deposition of Beutler would have done is stopped the senate's vacation. 3/

Since everything would have been done in roughly a week, and the senate was scheduled for a week-long vacation, the deposition of Beutler wouldn't have delayed any of Biden's agenda. 4/

Next, many are saying Mitch threatened to filibuster Biden's agenda. That's also an empty threat. Cabinet confirmations require only a simple majority vote, and the Covid relief package is going through the budget reconciliation process so it's not subject to filibuster 5/

Horseshoe theory sets off my bs detector & the divisions on the left leave me at a loss for an explanation- Venn diagram? Another shape? What's going on?
Enter @bastardspod! They really break this down & sort it out in a way that helped me out a lot.

Three of their points I found particularly useful in explaining why the horseshoe looks correct to some or why/how some ppl that look left-ish are really extreme right or take that turn (ally with boogaloo or proud boys, for instance?). 2/10

📍as you go farther left, some are more attracted to authoritarianism or violence like those on the right. BUT this is NOT a horseshoe bc the ideals of left & right are starkly different. That's important - this isn't a horseshoe. 3/10

Their examples are Kessler (of Unite the Right) who started in Occupy Wall St NY & Mussolini who started out against imperialism. Seemingly left-ish ppl turned fascist - why? I agree with the hosts when they said if you're anti-authoritarian, you won't end up a fascist. 4/10

📍(surprise!) toxic masculinity (they don't use those words) or wounded masculine pride is a factor. The pod says~getting the shit kicked out of you can push men in a violent authoritarian direction. Feeling disenfranchised like MRAs and white nationalists seems related too. 5/10

My view on lent:

My biggest problem with lent is the public display of fasting which is contrary to scripture: Matthew 6:16-18

Just as well, overhearing discussions of humble brags, “oh man, this is so hard fasting from x” while displaying ashes on one’s forehead seems overtly contrary to scripture. Again, Matthew 6:16-18 is clear.

Additionally it has been my experience that repentance and fasting lose much of their substance for those practicing the tradition.

However....

We cannot oversimplify and call lent a “Roman Catholic invention” or a “pagan” practice given its presence, minimally the term, in the early church with people like Athanasius.

In the modern conception: Advent is to Christmas what lent is to Easter. While asceticism is removed and shallow tradition enters into the practice, this can happen in most everything.