But whether you are reading this in February or July, the topic of love can be equally charged and confusing. So, what is love?
This post is less something I will defend to the death and more a form of self-therapy. On each tick, a cell tries to be the same color that the cell above it was last tick. On each tick, a cell tries NOT to be the same color that the cell below it was last tick. If they ever conflict, Rule 1 takes precedence over Rule 2.
If none of these rules apply, a cell stays as it is. The overall effect is sort of like a barber pole. Consider a group of people separated by some ranked attribute. There are four classes: Everyone wants to look like they are a member of a higher class than they actually are.
But everyone also wants to avoid getting mistaken for a member of a poorer class. So for example, the middle-class wants to look upper-class, but also wants to make sure no one accidentally mistakes them for lower-class.
No one has any hopes of getting mistaken for a class two levels higher than their own: Likewise, a member of the upper-class may worry about being mistaken for middle-class, but there is no way they will ever get mistaken for lower-class, let alone underclass.
So suppose we start off with a country in which everyone wears identical white togas. This idea goes over well, and the upper class starts wearing black. They want to pass for upper-class, and they expect to be able to pull it off, so they start wearing black too.
After two years, the lower-class notices the middle-class is mostly wearing black now, and they start wearing black to pass as middle-class. But the upper-class is very upset, because their gambit of wearing black to differentiate themselves from the middle-class has failed — both uppers and middles now wear identical black togas.
So they conceive an ingenious plan to switch back to white togas. Now the upper-class and underclass wear white, and the middle and lower classes wear black. And surely in our real world, where the upper-class has no way of distributing secret messages to every single cool person, this would be even harder.
There are some technical solutions to the problem. Upper class people are richer, and so can afford to about-face very quickly and buy an entirely new wardrobe.
The richest, trendiest person around wears something new, and either she is so hip that her friends immediately embrace it as a new trend, or she gets laughed at for going out in black when everyone knows all the cool people wear white.
Her friends are either sufficiently hip that they then adopt the new trend and help it grow, or so unsure of themselves that they decide to stick with something safe, or so un-hip that when they adopt the new trend everyone laughs at them for being so clueless they think they can pull off being one of the cool people.
That would be crass. So you have to understand the spirit of the fashion. In other words, new trends carry social risk, and only people sufficiently clued-in and trendy can be sure the benefits outweigh the risks. But as the trend catches on, it becomes less risky, until eventually you see your Aunt Gladys wearing it because she saw something about it in a supermarket tabloid, and then all the hip people have to find a new trend.
We saw this happen naturally on the 5th tick of the four-cell world, but it might be a more stable configuration than that model suggests. If the rich deliberately dress like the poor, then the middle-class have nowhere to go — if they try to ape the rich, they will probably just end up looking poor instead.
It is only the rich, who are at no risk of ever being mistaken for the poor, who can pull this off. Why do I like this model?This is testable by looking back more than a century and seeing how many of the issues back then were won by the right and then proceeded to fossilize on that side of the Overton window.
The locus classicus for this point of view is John Stuart Mill’s famous essay On Liberty: “The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of the community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others,” Mill wrote.
So the legalization of drugs cannot be supported by philosophical principle. But if the. In , Paul Graham wrote How To Disagree Better, ranking arguments on a scale from name-calling to explicitly refuting the other person’s central point..
And that’s why, ever since , Internet arguments have generally been civil and productive. Graham’s hierarchy is useful for its intended purpose, but it isn’t really a hierarchy of disagreements.
Why Marijuana should be legalized argumentative essay. Many countries from all-round the globe have laws prohibiting the use of marijuana. Most of these countries categorize marijuana in the same category with hard drugs, but there is not enough evidence showing that pot is a destructive drug (Owen, ).
A comprehensive, coeducational Catholic High school Diocese of Wollongong - Albion Park Act Justly, love tenderly and walk humbly with your God Micah As a member, you'll also get unlimited access to over 75, lessons in math, English, science, history, and more.
Plus, get practice tests, quizzes, and personalized coaching to help you succeed.