Skip to main content

About

This site will be used mainly for myself.

I expect the utility of this blog to include:

  • the development of my writing skills
  • the honing of my philosophical arguments
  • the questioning of modern society and culture
  • the reflection and feedback on my life
  • the passing of my time
and perhaps the list will grow as I blog.

The last point is of great importance to me, as currently I am serving in my country's mandatory military service in a police station. (I will most likely post a separate article on the details of this.) As of today, I am about 49% done with my time, and I fear that the rest of my sentence may be the last time I get to have so much free time on my hands. 

Comments

  1. AnonymousFebruary 12, 2017 at 6:25 PM

    "I expect the utility of this blog to include" wordy

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Problem with Measuring Opinion

The problem with studies conducted by gathering opinions is that the measurement system is inherently flawed. Before examining the flaws, take a quick look at a sample Big Five personality test: http://personality-testing.info/printable/big-five-personality-test.pdf This test uses what social scientists call the "Likert scale". Usually, 4 or 5 choices are available, where each choice represents the feelings of the survey taker. The scale should be familiar, though its name might not be. By Nicholas Smithvectorization: Own work - Own work, based on File:Example Likert Scale.jpg Likert scales are useful for simple surveys designed to summarize the general opinion of the public. The problem starts when social scientists try to use Likert scales to conduct statistical research. Obviously, the Likert scale is limited by human irrationality. R espondents might avoid the extremes. They might respond in ways that make themselves look good. They might choose an extreme opin...
1 comment
Read more

On Breaking Rules

Rules are great. They provide justice, order, and stability. But must they always be followed? If not (and one would think not), which  rules can be broken, and when? The Sufficient Conditions for Rule Breaking But what about rules that do make sense—ones that serve a good, clear purpose? When can they be broken? It is not possible to consider every possible scenario regarding each rule, so here is a "Rule for Breaking Rules": When the purpose of the rule is understood, and when breaking that rule does not go against its purpose, the rule can be broken . Here are some examples worth considering. Jaywalking The main purpose of traffic lights and other traffic laws is safety. Jaywalking is morally acceptable when a pedestrian, on an empty street, for instance, correctly judges that it is safe enough to cross. In undeveloped Chinese cities, traffic lights are ignored, so attention must be paid more to oncoming vehicles than to the traffic lights. Waiting ...
3 comments
Read more

Compulsory Organ Donations

More than a Nudge Robert Thaler, the soon to be winner of this year's Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences, wrote about how organ donation rates can change significantly when the question is asked differently to potential donors . In a nutshell, he differentiates the opt-in and the opt-out method, where the opt-out method gets more people to become donors, because the default choice is to be a donor. But he goes on to mention that the presumed-content law may be upsetting to some people, and that the Illinois system, which "makes one's wishes to be a donor legally binding . . . is a winning combination." Here, Thaler, in his strict adherence to libertarian paternalism, fails to consider a morally and economically superior policy: the policy of mandatory donations. It is not hard to see that mandatory donations are economically superior. To see why mandatory donations are morally superior, one need only consider the trolley problem. Here is the thought exp...
Post a Comment
Read more