"The deep critical thinker has become

the misfit of the world,

this is not a coincidence.

To maintain order and control

you must isolate

the intellectual,

the sage,

the philosopher,

the savant

before their ideas awaken people."

Carl Jung.

122. A More Human Face: Steve Biko | History of Philosophy without any gaps

Critical Thinker Academy: Learn to Think Like a Philosopher

Critical Thinker Academy: Learn to Think Like a Philosopher

How to improve your grades, advance in your job and expand your mind �� by learning how to think for yourself! Requirements An interest in improving one’s critical thinking skills. That’s it! Description   For long-term success in school, business and life, learning HOW to think is far more important than learning WHAT to think.             Yet rather than serve as the core of any education…

View On WordPress

the thing is gaz is morally righteous and headstrong sooooooooo that means he also thinks he’s always 100% right whenever he has an opinion on something (even if he’s wrong LMAO) and soap likes to goad people on so they’re perfect for each other ❤️❤️

Violet’s second signet and why I think some of these theories are wrong:

Seeing the dead—she was drugged with that bullshit that blocked her bond with Tairn when she saw Liam. He was just a hallucination. Otherwise she would’ve been wielding lightning and talking to dad

Magic mending—????? Someone explain this one to me like I’m 5 all the theories I’ve read are too convoluted

Amplifier—similar to the above, maybe??? I personally don’t think there’s enough evidence to support this

Distance wielding—I think this one is going to be Aaric’s actually thanks 🫶🏻

Some form of intinnsic—technically possible I suppose but do we really think we’d get two of them?

Also. Guys. Let’s be honest. I love FW but nothing RY has written has been like genius levels of plot twists. Xaden’s second signet is obvious on like pg 10 of FW if you look. She put a massive emphasis on Violet’s dreams of the venin long before they ever faced them. And signets are supposed to be representative of the rider and who they are and what they need. All we fucking talked about in IF was how much Violet needed information to ground herself. Being able to see the future/foreshadow what is going to happen fits with that which is why this is what I believe and what I wrote in storm in the quiet. Thank you for coming to my ted talk 🩷

a good rule of thumb I have is that if I see someone use "critical thinker" as a self descriptor on their social media, they are probably the most close-minded know-it-all imaginable who doesn't know how to accept the possibility that they might be wrong about something

Very interesting argument from Antony, Fulvia, and the Ghost of Clodius in 47 B.C. by Kathryn E. Welch:

Welch collects a lot of disparate facts to argue that many Caesarian (and sort of Caesarian) politicians in the civil war sought to co-opt Clodius' supporters in Rome, trying to fill the power vacuum and advance their own interests while Caesar and the Pompeians were out of the city. Fulvia, as Clodius' widow, both acted as a political agent in her own right (retaining most of Clodius' clientele) and as a symbol to ally her forces with her husbands'. Welch's argument for the extent of Fulvia's influence uses a lot of circumstantial evidence, by necessity, but I do think it's plausible.

I don't think Mark Antony was a fool, but much of his power came more from high birth and being in the right place at the right time than ability. He was not very good at administering the city of Rome, miscalculated the Parthian and Actium campaigns tremendously, and missteps like the Donations of Alexandria practically wrote Octavian's propaganda for him. Fulvia, Cleopatra, Cicero, Octavian, and Agrippa all strike me as brighter and more resourceful.

I don't dislike him; he's quite funny, and his affair with Cleopatra makes for a great story. But I can't see him managing to stabilize Rome, improve general prosperity, and create a lasting political system like Octavian did.

Getting tired of seeing gotcha posts on Tumblr lately shitting all over vegans. They've gotten more common over the past few years...

Usually it'll be a post criticising a choice like maybe 3% of vegans actually make, or more usually an imaginary vegan they've pulled from thin air based on their own stereotypes and assumptions, followed by vibes along the lines of' "I know better, actually you don't care about sustainability or human rights at all! You're completely uneducated about (insert any topic here). Gotcha! Who's the morally superior one now, huh" Followed swiftly by the implication that there is no ethical consumption under capitalism, so why try at all.

Like yeah maybe there are some young idiot vegans who think buying pleather boots is ok for the environment, but every vegan I've ever met is more likely to get a second-hand pair of leather boots at an op-shop, because it's better for the environment. Every vegan I know has cared immensely about issues with soy and quinoa, about where their food comes from, about water use and microplastics, who picks their fruit and veg, and human rights in general. More than any non-vegans I know.

So why are we still constantly berated for not doing every single other thing that non-vegans want us to do? It's starting to feel like people have a very specific idea of vegans in their heads and need an outlet for weird anger and misery and frustration, and we're an easier punching bag than the large corporations and governments who dictate the rules of our late-stage capitalist hellscape, so why not have a go?

It really feels like people are unconsciously mad with themselves that they can't do more to help the world and possibly have unexamined issues or guilt with consuming animals themselves, and feel better about themselves after telling vegans they're just not doing their activism hard enough, and that everything they buy from the grocery store is a human rights violation, so really you're just as bad as the rest of us.

Idk man I just. It really feels like a lot of whataboutism most of the time from non-vegans who have a weird, skewed view of militant white vegans, while the majority of vegans (who aren't all white, might I add) are just living their lives, trying to make the world a slightly less shitty place. We should absolutely criticise racist white vegans. Take them the fuck down. I don't think you think vegans are who you think they are, though. Vegans are from intersecting identities just like everybody else, and come from many different countries. And also there are some silly, uninformed vegans with misplaced ideas, just like there are silly, uninformed non-vegans with misplaced ideas. But if you imagine a vegan to be someone you'd hate, it's a lot easier to ridicule them to make you feel like you're right and good.

I just wish that the people who make these posts and the folks who join in and/or reblog, would take a look at themselves and think about what they themselves are doing to prevent cruelty in this world, in any shape or form. Like are you painstakingly making sure you're not buying clothes with plastic in it? Are you checking the label of every food item you buy to make sure you knew where it came from? Do you only buy your veg from local farms within 10km or only eat things from your own garden? If not, idk what to tell you, but it's probably that you should give vegans a break if you're not doing all the very things you tell us we should be doing.

It just feels like a lot of misplaced anger. Why are you so, so enraged at vegans not being perfect people when you could be going and protesting outside the farms of migrant workers, if you're so pissed about where our fruit and veg comes from? If you're mad about fruit and veg, wait till you hear of the human rights abuses in abattoirs.

When someone tells a vegan that there's no ethical consumption under capitalism, it just feels like a cop-out. You're not trying so why should anyone else, right? I just think people should be allowed to try to make the world better in their own ways, and not be ridiculed for not living up to an unattainable standard set my non-vegans.

Being vegan is about doing the least harm you can, within your means. It's not an on-off switch- it's a sliding scale of effort to do less harm. It's not stupid to acknowledge unnecessary suffering and choose not to take part in what's within your means to abstain from. Some vaccines still use animal products. Some of my medication has animal product ingredients. Am I going to go off my meds and become an anti-vaxxer? No. Do I think Indigenous Peoples should stop eating the foods they have always eaten, often for tens of thousands of years before colonisation? Of fucking course not. It's possible try to unsubscribe to shitty things in this world without doing it perfectly. The whole world would be a lot better if most people consumed 70% less animal products, than 2% of the world doing veganism perfectly.

I think most non-vegans are too afraid of what they might find out if they actually research animal agriculture so they stubbornly make excuses not to bother. So that's their choice, but until you're as perfect as how you claim we should be, literally shut the fuck up and find something more productive to do with your time, like actively try to fight against the very things you think we've all somehow decided to turn a blind eye to. Because I bet the majority of people consuming whatever unethical product you've decided on aren't vegans.

Coming across one silly vegan on the internet doesn't mean you have permission now to write off the crucial need for our planet to massively reduce animal agriculture, and the possibility that you might potentially be able to opt out of it. Criticising veganism doesn't mean you've absolved yourself of any harm you yourself are doing, and also doesn't absolve you of finding ways to do less harm to people, animals, and the planet.

And if you're pissed about vegans having moral superiority, I'd really like to see non-vegans examine their own moral superiority they seem to feel they have over vegans.

Ok signing off lol

The only way I would've accepted seeing pre-fall Crowley and Aziraphale together is if they were like in the Heaven cafeteria, Crowley complaining to a celestial dinnerlady that the lunch options all look bad ("the food hadn't been that good lately"), while Aziraphale walks by in the other direction, needlessly worrying about something. Neither notices the other. They were this close and yet!

Perhaps Aziraphale and another angel are even discussing some rumour about angels starting to ask questions of The Almighty and expresses concern.

Keep in the "how much trouble can I get into for asking a few questions?" or whatever from Crowley but have it be with the disgruntled dinnerlady or one of Lucifer's crew he was presumably hanging out with. Show one of these soon-to-be-cast-out angels casually mentioning to him that they're thinking of bringing up a few of their concerns to "the boss" and would he be interested? It's worth a shot after all. What harm could it to?

Just anything to make it less fucking needlessly dramatic and serious.

Also for as much as I love characters being permanently dead, I would accept a power of friendship bullshit way for Rogue to bring Gambit back after he gets raised as a Horseman of Apocalypse if it means she and Magneto aren't a couple by the end of next season lol

writer friends, are you ever just like "omg, i know i made him up but i love him' ??????

extremely impressed by the kids in the classavetes this year; they seem to really be getting why his work resonates so much (imho) so i remain really grateful that they’re this engaged by/with mr. gena rowlands’ work

"no unleashing the god eating entity is fine for US bc it only eats gods, obvs! it wont eat us after haha. you all will see eventually 😌" this seems like a fantastic and well thought out plan, my buddy, my pal. no notes. you're SO smart and SO special and SO smug. (im going to murder him).