I'm not sure they're shaky at all. What's the outcome of people internalizing the idea that pro-social behavior is beneficial versus some austere moral requirement? It seems to me that people act anti-socially in many cases because they see some benefit that outweighs the moral issue. If people instead were encouraged to see pro-social behavior as inherently personally beneficial, those who aren't convinced by the moral argument might be more likely to adopt it anyway.
Stargate is also about a conflict with a much more advanced society that has interstellar travel and uses it to oppress as many worlds as possible. The cat is out of the bag a far as any concern about interfering goes. Also, humans are the less advanced civilization here, and a lot of the time they're arming other humans.
I don't feel like the food I got in the cafeteria as a kid was slop, but there were definitely some dishes that did better when cooked en masse than others, and some that were more or less appealing. Like, pizza, ravioli, burgers, chicken sandwiches or nuggets, they all tended to be pretty consistent and good. The spaghetti tended toward being kind of weak and mushy because I imagine it's tricky to get a proper al dente when you're cooking for hundreds of people. Likewise, the baked chicken wasn't anything to write home about.
Most of where they'd drop the ball was with texture or with things not being spiced as well as they could have been. But again, at scale I'm sure it's tricky.
As others have said, though, the US is nowhere near as homogeneous as you'd assume if you only watch our media. A lot of the complaints about school food being inedible are also significantly overblown because it's something to complain about and bond over.
Right, but it says a Flock employee cancelled the room, not that the hotel refused service. It sounds as though someone just called up and cancelled the reservation for Ben Jordan.
Exactly what I was about to post. Conservatism has drifted from "avoid making adjustments to elements of society that formed organically" to "do whatever lets you be cold in the face of suffering and injustice". Not that the earlier justification was particularly insightful, but at least the rationale had some basis in trying to preserve functional aspects of culture.
It's all just based on the worst possible emotional justification at this point. And how could they turn back now? That would mean admitting that they'd done immense harm by ignoring the result of their actions.
Well! Why didn't you say so?!
I'm not sure they're shaky at all. What's the outcome of people internalizing the idea that pro-social behavior is beneficial versus some austere moral requirement? It seems to me that people act anti-socially in many cases because they see some benefit that outweighs the moral issue. If people instead were encouraged to see pro-social behavior as inherently personally beneficial, those who aren't convinced by the moral argument might be more likely to adopt it anyway.
Stargate is also about a conflict with a much more advanced society that has interstellar travel and uses it to oppress as many worlds as possible. The cat is out of the bag a far as any concern about interfering goes. Also, humans are the less advanced civilization here, and a lot of the time they're arming other humans.
If people do things differently, one of them must be bad!!!
Not even close
děkuji
There used to be an off-menu steak rice and cheese at the local mexican place that was only $2. Better than just rice at the sushi place i think.
I don't feel like the food I got in the cafeteria as a kid was slop, but there were definitely some dishes that did better when cooked en masse than others, and some that were more or less appealing. Like, pizza, ravioli, burgers, chicken sandwiches or nuggets, they all tended to be pretty consistent and good. The spaghetti tended toward being kind of weak and mushy because I imagine it's tricky to get a proper al dente when you're cooking for hundreds of people. Likewise, the baked chicken wasn't anything to write home about.
Most of where they'd drop the ball was with texture or with things not being spiced as well as they could have been. But again, at scale I'm sure it's tricky.
As others have said, though, the US is nowhere near as homogeneous as you'd assume if you only watch our media. A lot of the complaints about school food being inedible are also significantly overblown because it's something to complain about and bond over.
D&D beat Minecraft to weird golem variants by about 35 years.
Right, but it says a Flock employee cancelled the room, not that the hotel refused service. It sounds as though someone just called up and cancelled the reservation for Ben Jordan.
Is it not fraud to cancel someone else's reservation without their permission?
Exactly what I was about to post. Conservatism has drifted from "avoid making adjustments to elements of society that formed organically" to "do whatever lets you be cold in the face of suffering and injustice". Not that the earlier justification was particularly insightful, but at least the rationale had some basis in trying to preserve functional aspects of culture.
It's all just based on the worst possible emotional justification at this point. And how could they turn back now? That would mean admitting that they'd done immense harm by ignoring the result of their actions.
It's okay puddin.
I do like hot chip. And lie.
"I'm off! Bye!"
I can't read "Mr. J" without hearing Harley Quinn.
I'm ready to hide a remote mine in a toilet. Let's go.
Reads like some sort of government special committee.
What is that font? I love it.