@RokoMijic Individualism for them but not e.g. third worlders.
At some point you need generalisation. E.g. if you're a government that needs an effective policy.
@KeithWoodsYT@RokoMijic@nativistconcern It's a false dichotomy. Assuming all welfare states are equal and all small states are equal.
Nevertheless it's pretty hard to argue for the current scale of welfare even if it were better done.
@collapsologist@RokoMijic It's a lazy and mostly incorrect (but prevalent) shorthand.
To the extent that we can model the world we use our general intelligence, but there's no compulsion to do so (outside of 'autism'), so people don't always do it even when they can.
@collapsologist@RokoMijic This is a very loose 'rationalist' way to talk about cognition. In evolutionary terms it is not minimising energy per se, but was never exposed to such dynamic modern environments in the first place.
@collapsologist@RokoMijic Energetically?
Simpler, more sustainable ideologies have existed in the past that provided an essentially static world.
Unfortunately the underlying requisite 'irrational beliefs' went the way of Chesterton's fence .
@collapsologist@RokoMijic What is worse is the consequence of this world view whereby they treat the world/society as immutable, so their 'optimal' solutions have no associated costs. Possibly with selected carve outs for e.g. the environment.
@MavenPolitic Not the same thing, but there should be more discussion on 'no brainer' policy proposals.
I'd say 7 is the only one that is not contentious.
Replacing/eliminating stamp duty is another.
@RokoMijic The difference between people who believe LLM AI is super intelligent and those who realise it isn't is having original thoughts/trains of investigation.