Continued:

The cross cultural conversations happening on RedNote are something to see. For example:

So the Pettitian republican can maintain the view’s distinctness by insisting on (and trying to defend) these ‘implausible’ parts, which is generally what I think they do

I thought the remaining parts were more narrowly to do with the ‘mere capacity’ condition (i.e. non-interfering masters, rather than interfering non-masters). But the overall structure of C/K’s argument is definitely that RL collapses into NL *once stripped of the implausible(-to-them) bits*

That’s not my recollection: I thought they dismissed arbitrariness as implausible/moralised (for them, the justly imprisoned criminal is obviously unfree), then argued that any remaining seemingly-plausible parts of the republican account can be handled by probabilities of interference.

Pettit has an arbitrariness condition, which C/K reject; and he denies that probabilities matter, whereas C/K think they do. One might side with C/K on both issues, but the problem isn’t a lack of distinctness!

“Women are educated—who knows how?—as it were by breathing in ideas.” (Hegel, Philosophy of Right, s. 166)

The sheer scale of the self-own in that aside has killed me. I am dead.

Update: Moana 2 is a solid B- Disney movie, lots of thrills, spills, songs and a few decent visual gags. But it’s entirely lacking in the wit and emotional depth that made the first one so wonderful. Overall, disappointing.

Gonna get just a medium popcorn and see how far it goes

(This dad joke is for my fellow Moana fans: you’re welcome)

“I tweeted [x] on Bluesky”

Rousseau 😡😡😡

For an intellectually serious analysis of what’s going on with the far-right, I’m not going to look to the far-right! I’m going to look for scholars I can trust.