Comic Strips

12729 readers

2222 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

The post can be a single image, an image gallery, or a link to a specific comic hosted on another site (the author's website, for instance).
The comic must be a complete story.
If it is an external link, it must be to a specific story, not to the root of the site.
You may post comics from others or your own.
If you are posting a comic of your own, a maximum of one per week is allowed (I know, your comics are great, but this rule helps avoid spam).
The comic can be in any language, but if it's not in English, OP must include an English translation in the post's 'body' field (note: you don't need to select a specific language when posting a comic).
Politeness.
Adult content is not allowed. This community aims to be fun for people of all ages.

Web of links

[email protected]: "I use Arch btw"
[email protected]: memes (you don't say!)

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

304

Stereotyping (lemmy.world)

submitted 15 hours ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

45 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

To each their own then, I find a lot of value in the things uncovered by the four of them, specifically Greg Hill. I myself think reality is too vast for anyone to grasp completely and point to RAWs illustrations about the contrast between our scientific understanding of general relativity and quantum mechanics. Which to my knowledge are irreconcilable but are what we observe the universe to be. Those lenses are both useful but don’t describe the full truth of how the universe works by themselves.

Seriously you and I are not going to agree here. I do wish you the best. But could never agree with your rigid understanding of reality

[–] [email protected] -2 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

RAWs illustrations about the contrast between our scientific understanding of general relativity and quantum mechanics. Which to my knowledge are irreconcilable but are what we observe the universe to be. Those lenses are both useful but don’t describe the full truth of how the universe works by themselves.

That just shows our understanding is not complete, and more investigation is necessary. The entire field of scientific inquiry is to give us a more filled in understanding of what the universe is, in terms that are able to be universally understood and built upon. Richard Feynman gives a wonderful response to that point.

Edit: just to address your critiques, you can make any ideology or worldview into eugenics without much effort. ‘Maybe logic’ doesn’t encourage it any more than any other ideology.

I would argue a worldview that lets an individual consider any point of view or theory to be plausible or correct, regardless of hard evidence, is more able to construct a justification for eugenics to be a worthwhile endeavour, compared to a worldview that is able to take a hard stance against it due material and historical evidence demonstrating its extreme harm and lack of humanity, and dismiss it entirely.

And I just find it hilarious that my original criticism was that it was a waste of time to criticize astrology, which you never addressed in your comment back that undoubtedly took away a lot of your time

I responded by asking who or what determines what is or is not a waste of time. I fundamentally disagree that it is a waste of time. I would also say that this conversation was fruitful, as it provides a good contrast between our points of view for any third party reading along.

Seriously you and I are not going to agree here. I do wish you the best. But could never agree with your rigid understanding of reality

I wish you the best as well.