Daniel Drucker
@danieldrucker.bsky.social
Philosophy professor at UT Austin who thinks about attitudes, epistemology, and communication. https://www.danieldrucker.info/
I got the cutest pups in philosophy (no offense to the haters and losers)
November 21, 2025 at 7:37 PM
I got the cutest pups in philosophy (no offense to the haters and losers)
My suspicion is people's values got worse and they started caring about wealth more than other parts of life.
November 21, 2025 at 2:19 PM
My suspicion is people's values got worse and they started caring about wealth more than other parts of life.
Sure... but the people who graduate from the passion majors now are doing pretty well for themselves, and better than the people you're describing in the earlier cohorts. So even here I'm not convinced.
November 21, 2025 at 2:18 PM
Sure... but the people who graduate from the passion majors now are doing pretty well for themselves, and better than the people you're describing in the earlier cohorts. So even here I'm not convinced.
Sorry, it seemed like you were giving a material explanation in terms of the great recession or underemployment or the like. I think given how good material conditions have been even then compared to when say the Silent Generation etc. went to college, that was unlikely to be it.
November 21, 2025 at 1:52 PM
Sorry, it seemed like you were giving a material explanation in terms of the great recession or underemployment or the like. I think given how good material conditions have been even then compared to when say the Silent Generation etc. went to college, that was unlikely to be it.
I would guess this is more cultural than material, given how much material conditions have been better during more recent periods than in earlier periods.
November 21, 2025 at 1:48 PM
I would guess this is more cultural than material, given how much material conditions have been better during more recent periods than in earlier periods.
I see where you’re coming from, but I think optimism about persuasion needs to be balanced with realism about its limits, especially in the short term.
November 21, 2025 at 2:31 AM
I see where you’re coming from, but I think optimism about persuasion needs to be balanced with realism about its limits, especially in the short term.
Electability is I think probably a somewhat identifiable thing that should make a difference to who someone supports (they may disagree with you somewhat more but will be more likely to enact more of your favored policies than someone who loses).
November 21, 2025 at 2:13 AM
Electability is I think probably a somewhat identifiable thing that should make a difference to who someone supports (they may disagree with you somewhat more but will be more likely to enact more of your favored policies than someone who loses).
Poor candidate choice from primary voters is a real thing that hurt the GOP a lot with the Senate in say 2022, no?
November 21, 2025 at 2:01 AM
Poor candidate choice from primary voters is a real thing that hurt the GOP a lot with the Senate in say 2022, no?
Reposted by Daniel Drucker
And Putnam's paper comparing Rorty and Quine has one of my favourite titles.
November 20, 2025 at 10:03 PM
And Putnam's paper comparing Rorty and Quine has one of my favourite titles.
I've seen the proposed explanation as more: some schools (notably, UCSD) went SAT optional, which meant fewer colleges knew how many poor math students they were getting than should have known, due to low HS standards.
November 19, 2025 at 4:08 PM
I've seen the proposed explanation as more: some schools (notably, UCSD) went SAT optional, which meant fewer colleges knew how many poor math students they were getting than should have known, due to low HS standards.
Canada benefits from this so at least there's that. Mexico has a pretty serious counterexample though!
November 19, 2025 at 3:10 PM
Canada benefits from this so at least there's that. Mexico has a pretty serious counterexample though!
Of course, this isn't at all to exclude other explanations. There will be one level of explanation that will involve the specific local processes of tissue development, etc. But if you leave out that it's good for bodies to not have gaping wounds, you'll miss part of what's going on.
November 17, 2025 at 8:07 PM
Of course, this isn't at all to exclude other explanations. There will be one level of explanation that will involve the specific local processes of tissue development, etc. But if you leave out that it's good for bodies to not have gaping wounds, you'll miss part of what's going on.
It's not magical. Sometimes some state's being the good of a thing explains why the thing tends toward that state. For health, or maturity (over the course of a lifespan), there's something pretty plausible about this idea. "Why did the wound heal? It's good for the body to heal its wounds."
November 17, 2025 at 8:07 PM
It's not magical. Sometimes some state's being the good of a thing explains why the thing tends toward that state. For health, or maturity (over the course of a lifespan), there's something pretty plausible about this idea. "Why did the wound heal? It's good for the body to heal its wounds."
I'm not gonna bigfoot you or anything! Just curious what you had in mind. On final causes, briefly, the idea is that some creatures/systems have a good toward which they tend. "Why did the person seek out good food? Ultimately because it's in their interest to have such food."
November 17, 2025 at 8:07 PM
I'm not gonna bigfoot you or anything! Just curious what you had in mind. On final causes, briefly, the idea is that some creatures/systems have a good toward which they tend. "Why did the person seek out good food? Ultimately because it's in their interest to have such food."
What’s the problem with it?
November 17, 2025 at 7:51 PM
What’s the problem with it?
I get that the mechanisms involved are different, but we do stuff like this too, right? Positive self-talk, e.g.
November 17, 2025 at 5:36 PM
I get that the mechanisms involved are different, but we do stuff like this too, right? Positive self-talk, e.g.
Partly the lesson seems hard to apply? A parliamentary system with viable third-party replacements will be very different from a rigidly two-party system. The left in the UK isn't forced to vote for Labour, whereas in the US it's more plausible that it is (if they vote at all, obviously big caveat).
November 16, 2025 at 1:11 PM
Partly the lesson seems hard to apply? A parliamentary system with viable third-party replacements will be very different from a rigidly two-party system. The left in the UK isn't forced to vote for Labour, whereas in the US it's more plausible that it is (if they vote at all, obviously big caveat).
Haha, no I got it, was being a little difficult
November 13, 2025 at 2:37 PM
Haha, no I got it, was being a little difficult
Hm.. maybe see destructive, but not wasteful? Surely the ability to think about the possible outcomes of one's actions, how the world would be, is productive?
November 13, 2025 at 2:07 PM
Hm.. maybe see destructive, but not wasteful? Surely the ability to think about the possible outcomes of one's actions, how the world would be, is productive?
Is 'fight every time, no matter the tradeoffs' the rule here? If not, is there a pain point for ordinary people (federal workers, SNAP recipients, air travelers) where this rule should be suspended in the face of opposition stubbornness?
November 10, 2025 at 1:42 PM
Is 'fight every time, no matter the tradeoffs' the rule here? If not, is there a pain point for ordinary people (federal workers, SNAP recipients, air travelers) where this rule should be suspended in the face of opposition stubbornness?
The anonymity of the crowd is another interesting factor though imo, it's a general disadvantage of elites in dangerous or unpredictable circumstances right?
November 6, 2025 at 9:35 PM
The anonymity of the crowd is another interesting factor though imo, it's a general disadvantage of elites in dangerous or unpredictable circumstances right?
I guess I'm just wondering who the person who is currently voting GOP but would vote for a person with that mix of positions is. When I imagine them, I would guess they would already vote for Democrats, but that's obviously not a rigorous method.
November 5, 2025 at 2:20 PM
I guess I'm just wondering who the person who is currently voting GOP but would vote for a person with that mix of positions is. When I imagine them, I would guess they would already vote for Democrats, but that's obviously not a rigorous method.
In American politics now, the wealthiest districts tend to be Democratic already, no? Quick Google search gave me this: www.businessinsider.com/marcy-kaptur...
This 40-year veteran lawmaker shows top Democrats one eye-popping chart revealing her party's problem winning over the working class
According to a chart compiled by Rep. Marcy Kaptur's office, Democrats overwhelmingly represent the wealthiest parts of the country.
www.businessinsider.com
November 5, 2025 at 2:16 PM
In American politics now, the wealthiest districts tend to be Democratic already, no? Quick Google search gave me this: www.businessinsider.com/marcy-kaptur...