I'm sure you know the train question. If a train is going along and the conductor sees a child on the rails, but can change rails to another track, but that one has five. What do you do?
The actual answer is changing tracks has the train going slow so it doesn't derail. I have had family in the train engineering business for generations. So the actual answer is, the brakes you're going slow enough to stop easily.
I realized that yesterday while watching some old Doctor Who near a train station.
Anyway, the reason why I bring it up is I am arguing with someone that the answer is there, but not given by the original question. Also, no one thought to ask anyone in the train industry. I looked the guy up, and he's a lefty. It makes me realize that much of our society is based on the idea of false choices. There is always another answer, but the media and government act as if there is no alternatives. Then we make sure to ignore all evidence pointing to alternatives. This is society, trying to make a choice while the train stops on its own.
I'm totally on board with your pull/no-pull assessment, but quite against your insinuations against OP for cooking up their own independent response.
OP is under no obligation to play along with their version of rules for the hypothetical situation just because the asker proposed it first. If it's a debate between friends and you have already mutually declared the rules of the hypothetical you shouldn't pussy out after the fact, but actually agreeing to play their game is always the first step.Telling people who would unilaterally impose terms on you to fuck off is categorically not cowardice.
False dichotomies are a real and significant method of societal manipulation. (EG lock down and take the vax, or everyone's grandma dies) Imposing your own will on the boundaries and rules authority figures presuppose for you is a valuable act that more people should exercise, as a bulwark against creeping corruption.
Sure if you take it to extremes you end up with sovereign citizen wackery, but that's no worse than blind obedience. A better citizen pragmatically exercises their own independence against being used, because not only do they themselves suffer from being used, but blind obedience is inevitably used as force to punish other innocent dissenters.
He literally is. that's how hypotheticals work.
It is when you're a little bitch who is refusing to answer a hypothetical.
A hypothetical is not a "false dichotomy" because it is in the rules of the hypo that it is not false. Fictional and false are different things.
Again, only idiots and little bitches blindly do everything they're told.
If I, a stranger, propose a hypothetical where you have to suck ten dicks or take it in the ass, you're under no obligation to start degrading yourself by pondering how hard you're hypothetically getting reamed. Telling me to just fuck off and go suck twenty myself isn't cowardice, it's a chad move.
Friends can maybe fuck around like that, but strangers should know or be taught to have more respect for others' autonomy.
yes
https://twitter.com/BlueyAnon/status/1628503396796989440