• Evinceo@awful.systems
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    While I love blaming slatescott for things, I do think there’s maybe a deeper story to the fascination with addies than slatescott blogging about it once.

    A lot of millennials were prescribed stimulants as kids, enough that we have some level of folk knowledge about them. In Adderall Risks he more or less admits to handing them out like candy and he is far from the only (lol ex) psychiatrist to do so.

    The article, while clearly endorsing stimulants as a safe nootrooic that everyone should take (and is good for the world now let me munch a few more pills 💊), is actually more of an apologia to convince people who are already using stimulants that no harm will come to them. Sure there’s the usual amount of discovering an apple pie from scratch new atheist libertarian bloviating that obscures it, but he does that about everything.*

    One funny aspect of his ‘stimulants are required for modern work’ argument is that he’s basically endorsing the social model of disability, though more recently he has decided that expressing ableism to own the libs is more important than being correct.

    *Except if he wants to sneak in an idea without you thinking about it. Those will usually be the hardcore nrx ones.

    • Amoeba_Girl@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      more recently he has decided that expressing ableism to own the libs is more important than being correct.

      I already know these people are eugenicists who would rather die than think about sociology for one minute, but still I feel the need to say: god what a cunt.

      • Deborah@hachyderm.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        Or rather die than come up with good metaphors to attack his shitty strawman. He knows his Everest metaphor is shit – some summiters are blind or double amputees, and the amount of equipment ableds need to climb everest is *evidence* of the social model – he backpedals halfway through, but he makes the metaphor anyway! NASA is literally trying to figure out how to design space travel for disabled astronauts, which he’d know if he’d typed two words into google.

        He’s just… being a cunt.

        • Deborah@hachyderm.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          Also the distance between the social model of disability and transhumanism is measured in nanometers, and yet these assholes are so offended that disabled people might be using the enhancements of their eugenicist dystopias.

          These motherfuckers.

          • 200fifty@awful.systems
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            1 year ago

            “We can transcend the limitations of our physical bodies via technology! Wait, no, not like that!”

              • 200fifty@awful.systems
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                1 year ago

                it’s a shame, because gender transition stuff is probably one of the most successful “human biohacking” type things in common use today, and it’s also just… really cool. alas, bigotry

        • Amoeba_Girl@awful.systems
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          B-but submarines aren’t wheelchair accessible and I can’t imagine alternatives to wheelchairs or different submarines! And I like to think about how my grandmother would die if I stranded her on a desert island! So I must be right! P.S. cars are a natural occurrence!

  • TinyTimmyTokyo@awful.systems
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    One of the easiest ways to get downvoted on the orange site is to say anything even mildly critical of Scott Alexander Siskind. It’s really amusing how much respect there is for him there.

  • gerikson@awful.systems
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    to be scrupulously fair there’s only a small subset in the threads doing that annoying passive-aggressive HN thing of “I don’t understand, please provide me with copious citations supporting your position”.

    It’s very important for some HN to keep up the facade that Scott Siskind is just the author of the Neoreactionary FAQ and actually not a neoreactionary himself.

  • Steve@awful.systems
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I don’t accept that as an excuse - because if it is a “joke”, then it’s one that only works if they say this stuff all the time seriously.

    It’s the species of “it’s a joke!” that’s serious until someone calls them out on it, then they retreat to claiming it was just a joke.

    This is essay worthy in itself. There is this thing I’ve been thinking a lot about lately around the conflation of the flexibility of language and a flexibility of the definition of words. Just because language evolves it doesn’t necessarily mean that the meaning of words can, should, does, change with it. Every time someone says “it’s obvious this was a joke” they are fucking with the definition of a joke.