for - interesting perspective - Karl Marx - He wasn't principally interested in equality - book - Capitalism: the word and the thing - perspectival knowledge of - Michael Sonenscher - misunderstanding - modern capitalists - misunderstand Karl Marx's work - Michael Sonenscher - Karl Marx and Capitalism - Maximizing each individual's freedom while not trampling on the same aspiration of other individuals within a society

Interesting perspective - Karl Marx wasn't principally interested in equality - Sonenscher offers an interesting interpretation and perspectival knowledge of Karl Marx's motivation in his principal work paraphrase - Marx's thought centered on is interest in individuality and the degree to which in certain respects being somebody who is free and able to make choices about his or her lives and future activities is going to depend on each person's: - qualities - capabilities - capacities - preoccupations - values, etc - For Marx, freedom is in the final analysis something to do with something - particular - specific and - individual w - What matters to me may not matter entirely in the same sort of way to you because ultimately - in an ideal State of Affairs, my kinds of concerns and your kinds of concerns will be simply specific to you and to me respectively - For Marx, the problems begin as is also the case with Rosseau - when these kinds of absolute qualities are displaced by - relative qualities that apply equally to us both - For Marx, things like - markets - prices - commodities and - things that connect people - are the hallmarks of equality because they put people on the same kind of footing prices and productivity - Whereas the things that REALLY SHOULD COUNT are - the things that separate and distinguish people that make each individual fully and and entirely him or herself and - the idea for Marx is that capitalism - which is not a term that Marx used, - puts people on a kind of spurious footing of equality - Getting beyond capitalism means getting beyond equality to a state of effect in which - difference , - particularity, - individuality and - uniqueness - in a certain kind of sense will prevail

comment - This perspective is quite enlightening on Marx's motivations on this part of his work and is likely misconstrued by those mainstream "capitalists" who vilify his work without critical analysis - Of course freedom - within a social context - is never an absolute term. - It is not possible to live in a society in which everyone is able to actualize their full imaginations, something pointed out in the work of two other famous thought leaders of modern history: - Thomas Hobbes observed in his famous work, Leviathan, and - Sigmund Freud also made a primary subject of his ID, Ego and Superego framework. - Total freedom would lead - first to anarchy and then - the emergence within that anarchy of those which possess the most charisma, influence, self-seeking manipulative skills and brutality - surfacing rule by authority - Historically, as democracy attempts to surface from a history of authoritarian, patriarchal governance, - democracy is far from ubiquitous and authoritarian governance is still alive and well in many parts of the world - The battle between - authoritarian governments among themselves and - authoritarian and democratic governments - results in war, violence and trauma that creates the breeding ground for the next generation of authoritarian leaders - Marx's main intent seems to be to enable the individual existing within a society to live the fullest life possible, - by way of enabling and maximizing their unique expression, - while not constraining the same aspiration in other individuals who belong to the same society

It also feels important that human MISUNDERSTANDING can act as a catalyst for COMPASSION

• for: projection, biases, bias, perspectival knowing, indyweb, tacit to explicit, explication, misunderstanding
• comment
  • The "why" is invisible.
  • It is the thoughts in the private worlds of the other.
  • It is only our explication through language or other means that makes public our private world
  • We construct meaning in the world.
  • Our meaningverse is our construction. BUT it is a cultural construction,
    • it was constructed by all the meaning learned from others, especially beginning with the most significant other, our mother.

An article about contemporary philosopher Agnes Callard

That's not required. The standard doesn't require this to be a URL locator — merely a URI! So you can just make up a URI and use it even if it's not resolvable. ... like you did for the URN below.

ReconfigBehSci. (2020, October 31). RT @learnfromerror: PHIL STAT FORUM NOVEMBER 19; STEPHEN SENN ‘Randomisation and Control in the Age of Coronavirus?’ https://t.co/hqT8GWTqC… [Tweet]. @SciBeh. https://twitter.com/SciBeh/status/1323311706609721344

Nick Mark MD. (2022, January 21). This FLCCC COVID protocol gets nuttier with each version. Now hydroxychloroquine is “preferred for omicron”? What?!🤯 Stuff that actually works (monoclonals & fluvoxamine) are 2nd line And steroids, which increased mortality in people NOT on O2 in RECOVERY, are recommended?😱 https://t.co/XXfn1eMTJt [Tweet]. @nickmmark. https://twitter.com/nickmmark/status/1484382662517137410

ReconfigBehSci on Twitter: ‘astonishing’ / Twitter. (n.d.). Retrieved 14 January 2022, from https://twitter.com/SciBeh/status/1481916090930376709

ReconfigBehSci on Twitter: ‘RT @thehowie: Here is @ClayTravis showing that he didn’t read the article. Https://t.co/RCjijieeaI’ / Twitter. (n.d.). Retrieved 12 January 2022, from https://twitter.com/SciBeh/status/1481167779541794820

ReconfigBehSci on Twitter: ‘RT @thehowie: Here is @CortesSteve showing that he did not read the article. Https://t.co/VeYt3xz37b’ / Twitter. (n.d.). Retrieved 12 January 2022, from https://twitter.com/SciBeh/status/1481167836127141893

ReconfigBehSci on Twitter: ‘RT @thehowie: Here is @jennybethm showing that she did not read the article. Https://t.co/pg6Obhc3WL’ / Twitter. (n.d.). Retrieved 12 January 2022, from https://twitter.com/SciBeh/status/1481167853617307650

ReconfigBehSci on Twitter: ‘T cell immunologist getting very upset at people arguing that high levels of transmission are a good thing’ / Twitter. (n.d.). Retrieved 12 January 2022, from https://twitter.com/SciBeh/status/1481178244678402048

Spencer, C. (2021, September 23). No, Vaccinated People Are Not ‘Just as Likely’ to Spread the Coronavirus as Unvaccinated People. The Atlantic. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/09/the-vaccinated-arent-just-as-likely-to-spread-covid/620161/

Dumpster diving in the VAERS database to find more COVID-19 vaccine-associated myocarditis in children | Science-Based Medicine. (n.d.). Retrieved September 14, 2021, from https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/dumpster-diving-in-vaers-doctors-fall-into-the-same-trap-as-antivaxxers/

Seth Trueger. (2021, May 3). This truly is the blurst of times https://t.co/cu02JsP4Mc [Tweet]. @MDaware. https://twitter.com/MDaware/status/1389238925483560961

ReconfigBehSci on Twitter. (2020). Twitter. Retrieved 4 March 2021, from https://twitter.com/SciBeh/status/1336251915441745923

November 19: “Randomisation and control in the age of coronavirus?” (Stephen Senn). (2020, October 30). PhilStatWars. https://phil-stat-wars.com/2020/10/30/november-19-randomisation-and-control-in-the-age-of-coronavirus-stephen-senn/

Washington, D. of C. 1100 C. A. N. S. 1300B, & Dc 20036. (n.d.). PolitiFact - Fact-checking ‘Plandemic 2’: Another video full of conspiracy theories about COVID-19. @politifact. Retrieved August 27, 2020, from https://www.politifact.com/article/2020/aug/18/fact-checking-plandemic-2-video-recycles-inaccurat/

Althouse, A. D. (2020). Post Hoc Power: Not Empowering, Just Misleading. Journal of Surgical Research, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2019.10.049

The Lady’s Handbook for Her Mysterious Illness: A Memoir | IndieBound.org. (n.d.). Retrieved August 26, 2020, from https://www.indiebound.org/book/9780385534079

Consent for the publisher to "access their browser"? Hmm. The Web is a pull-based, client/server, request/response model, not a push model. So it seems odd to me to talk about a publisher needing consent to "access" the user's browser. It is the user's browser (user agent) that made the HTTP request to the publisher's web server. Doesn't the publisher have the right, then, to send a response containing whatever content they wish, since the user requested the content? If the client wishes to filter/block/exclude some of that content, it seems like they have that right, but it seems the responsibility for that is on the client side, not the server side.

Not that I like ads, but I wonder how much of these new policies are based on a misunderstanding of how web technologies actually work....

Maybe the distinction is that the publisher of whom you requested content may dynamically load content (ads) from 3rd parties that the user did not specifically request content from? That too is just how the web works, and it is the publisher who controls what other content to load from other domains/sources. But it still may be a worthwhile distinction...?

Jones, A. L., Schild, C., Satchell, L., & Jaeger, B. (2020, May 21). Misunderstanding COVID-19 and digit ratio: Methodological and statistical issues in Manning and Fink (2020). https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/ht74e

It is very understandable that the North Korea would see these hostile activities on the part of the United States and South Korea as a threat.

That moment when you choose to take teaching rhetoric in a new direction and everyone claims you undermined the importance of what rhetoric was