@skillissuer @swlabr Which might be why he's so comfortable dismissing every current area of ethical contention: the proponents for change are mainly not classically liberal philosophers, the font of every blessing. Betterment doesn't come from vehemence and demonstration and action, nor from injured parties asserting their own humanity. It comes from a disinterested nerd writing a treatise, followed by comfortably slow and unconscious improvement over the next two to twenty generations

@flizzo @dgerard I'm Ryan Gosling in Drive and Blue Valentine, but I'm not Ryan Gosling in Half Nelson or La La Land. I'm American Psycho, but I'm not The Rules of Attraction. I'm Taxi Driver, but I'm not Raging Bull.

Discard what's false and regard what's truest
Then render me thy answer to this:
What roles must I play when I'm Daniel Day-Lewis?

@skillissuer @swlabr To judge from the pod's summary, it's specifically *classically liberal philosophers* who lead the rest of the elites to virtue, with the masses following after

@Architeuthis @dgerard "...impossible to ever take anything he writes in good faith."

See also this unguarded moment from Tumblr. All the alpha is in bad faith social engineering!
https://www.reddit.com/r/SneerClub/comments/9lj3g7

@Architeuthis @bitofhope Taleb calls that a "dead man bias," though I don't know if he originated the critique. https://medium.com/incerto/iq-is-largely-a-pseudoscientific-swindle-f131c101ba39