Philosophers who take her seriously clearly care more about the stylistic appearance of analytical philosophy than genuine engagement with other people's ideas, the rich history of feminist scholarship, or the actual harm her work is doing in the world. A serious red flag

Really interesting take!

I think it's hilarious but I don't want to give my examiners ideas for the viva. Probably not that funny (for me) if it goes badly

Genes aren't selfish, nor are they nice. A gene either survives or it does not. Projecting these values onto genes only risks creating faux legitimacy for claims about society that are ultimately based on nothing but circular reasoning

Extra baffling because observing correlations between circumstances and behaviour is literally the only way we can learn to interpret animal behaviour at all. There is no independently verified dog language cheat sheet, all our knowledge is based on contextual observation

Love that idea haha

I'm glad to hear, and happy I got you interested in reading some philosophy of chemistry! 😊

I am arguing that the assignment doesn't make sense in the first place, not that it is or isn't.