I don't know if I don't know.

Responding to:

What to consider when looking at the political positions of people.

Do you feel the logic in the air?


But are trans men real men?

A ramble about my development into the idiot I am today.

Response to a man who gets a lot right, but fails often.

I don't believe in anything. Not even in the idea that we can lack belief.

You have to admit I'm right.

A short ramble on moral intuitionism and reason-based ethics.

Thoughts on the fundamental divide in politics.

Honestly, social structures probably just fell out of the sky.


When I say social constructionist, I should have said social constructivist.

[N1] Indeed, it is only in the hard sciences that we can almost assuredly expect there to be no exceptions to the model. The same is not true for the softer sciences: In biology, there are hardly any universals. Try naming a single trait for human beings that has no exceptions.

[N2] This recommendation should be taken with the caveat that my views have since changed slightly. Look to the comments section of the suggested video to get the general idea. The refined version is what I elucidate here: that we have innate intuitions about the nature of our empirical reality and that these are ubiquitous and inescapable.

[N3] This is not to say that our mathematical models are useless. They have predictive power and they can be used to great effect. They do not have to be perfect for them to have utility. Also, Newton's model for the celestial bodies is not perfect, either.

[N4] I think the reason the in-group our moral intuitions apply to is expanding is due to multiple inter-related factors. First, we are living in large complex societies. We rely on many others for their goods, and it is in our best interest to work alongside them. This fact is bolstered by the second factor, which is government. Having a centralized monopoly of power helps regulate human behavior when we are in large groups. Finally, we are living in a time of resource abundance, at least in the West. Without resources to compete for, there is less reason to compete violently with an out-group.

[N5] I characterize (political) power, the ability to control people, as having two independently sufficient components. There is the violence component. This is straightforward: people who threaten violence have the capacity to control people. Then there is the illusory component. In large part, power is an illu..

Just a song by my favorite band, overlaid on some video that seems fitting.

Copyright notice:
I did not create this song:
I did not create this video:
I did not propose their union. The original wasn't well lined up, I thought:

All rights go to the respective owners.

This idea that science will ever act as an epistemic black box needs to die.

Current Standing on "finding the

Response to:

This is part of a larger conversation on race realism:
Eighth: The video that I am responding to.

Discussion I had with Blithering Genius about Nihilism and Epistemology.

His channel:

Just some quick thoughts on unconscious bias.


Oppressing women on the daily.



(1) Book: Contemporary Political Philosophy: An Introduction: Second Edition

(2) Video on gender relations:

(3) Relationship attachment in men and women:

(4) This is a compilation of sources; the primary sources are at the bottom of the page:

(5) Personality differences:

(6) Male and female attraction:

(7) Another study on male and female attraction:


Created 2 years ago.

25 videos

CategoryNews & Politics

Pseudo-Philosophizing Misanthrope.

I am a writer first, and a video maker second. If you want to read the essays/scripts for my videos you can find the link to my Wordpress page below or in the description of each video.

I do not claim to be an expert, so I welcome discussion and corrections to my work.