@united Your gate agents lied to us about the bag space on Flight 1048 today. We believed them, and checked bags, then walked onto the plane and saw plenty of space. It cost us a visit with family on the other end. We won’t believe you next time.
Usually, lying only *seems* like a good idea. The lost trust is costly.
As the title suggests, I don’t argue either for or against going to law school; I argue that whether you go or not requires figuring out whom you are meant to become before you die. I hope the book will help people get to the right answer, about law school and other vocational questions.
I’ve been unforgivably slow in announcing the publication of my latest book, “Should You Go to Law School? Knowing How to Know.” But now that Amazon is offering double rewards for Kindle purchases made today (May 10), here’s the link: https://t.co/LWfndHciJf
When they tell us our brains aren't fully developed until 25, what are we supposed to do with that? My latest for the Heights Forum. https://t.co/Es02gMDwBw
There was a line from Zohran Mamdani’s inaugural address yesterday that took my breath away. He said he intended to replace “the frigidity of rugged individualism with the warmth of collectivism.” Collectivism in its various forms is responsible for the deaths of at least one hundred million people in the last century. Socialist and Communist forms of government around the world today—Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea, etc.—are disastrous. Catholic social teaching has consistently condemned socialism and has embraced the market economy, which people like Mayor Mamdani caricature as “rugged individualism.” In fact, it is the economic system that is based upon the rights, freedom, and dignity of the human person. For God’s sake, spare me the “warmth of collectivism.”
A reader thinks her daughter needs to know herself better before committing to a man. Our advice columnist Abigail Shrier responds. https://t.co/oY1ywZtKCk
Ezra Klein on Charlie Kirk:
“You can dislike much of what Kirk believed and the following statement is still true: Kirk was practicing politics in exactly the right way. He was showing up to campuses and talking with anyone who would talk to him. He was one of the era’s most effective practitioners of persuasion. When the left thought its hold on the hearts and minds of college students was nearly absolute, Kirk showed up again and again to break it. Slowly, then all at once, he did. College-age voters shifted sharply right in the 2024 election.
“That was not all Kirk’s doing, but he was central in laying the groundwork for it. I did not know Kirk and I am not the right person to eulogize him. But I envied what he built. A taste for disagreement is a virtue in a democracy. Liberalism could use more of his moxie and fearlessness. In the inaugural episode of his podcast, Gov. Gavin Newsom of California hosted Kirk, admitting that his son was a huge fan. What a testament to Kirk’s project.”
“Kirk and I were on different sides of most political arguments. We were on the same side on the continued possibility of American politics. It is supposed to be an argument, not a war; it is supposed to be won with words, not ended through bullets. I wanted Kirk to be safe for his sake, but I also wanted him to be safe for mine, and for the sake of our larger shared project. The same is true for Shapiro, for Hoffman, for Hortman, for Thompson, for Trump, for Pelosi, for Whitmer. We are all safe, or none of us are.”
Why have so many academics aided and abetted the spread of trans ideology? @d_kodsi and I have written about many philosophers' embarrassing inability to answer questions as easy as 'Are there any male women?' @philosophersmag
https://t.co/xQfeuEFuSc
Reality has its claims on philosophy. This philosophical analysis of the recent controversies over “gender-affirming care” is an excellent rebuttal to the widespread tendency to make charity toward the abnormal a basis for corroding the norms.
“All academic philosophers will have encountered skeptical interlocutors of more and less philosophically self-conscious kinds: students, perhaps, who, getting the feel for the skeptical strategy, begin impugning any valid argument from known premises as problematically circular. Good teachers will try to make vivid to students who exhibit this tendency how regressive it can be. Weakening one’s premises until they become acceptable even to the skeptic is often just a route to losing knowledge oneself.”