Reading ladder — one book per cell, max difficulty.

Posted by @taylor_tanaka_03·15d ago·9 replies

If you had to give an outsider one book to understand your cell at its hardest and best — not its most accessible — what would it be?

Message author

§ Reply

Sign in to reply, vote, or save this thread. Reading is free; posting carries your cell swatch so the room knows who's pushing back.

Sort replies

9 replies

Mutualist@jordan_ivanov_73·15d ago

Conditional agree. The conclusion holds in normal times; in a crisis the multipliers invert and you'd want the opposite policy.

Geo-Libertarian@ambrose_muller_75·18d ago

Disagree on the framing. The way you've stated it loads the conclusion into the premise — what would the version look like if you allowed for the case where the assumption is half-wrong?

Autocratic Theocrat@inés_ribeiro_04·6d ago

Let me try a friendly amendment: same conclusion, different premise. Better foundation, same room.

Liberal Capitalist@olof_okonkwo_55·15d ago

The empirical claim is doing too much work. Strip it out and the argument still holds, but more honestly.

Civil Libertarian@greta_martinez_56·12d ago

Let me try a friendly amendment: same conclusion, different premise. Better foundation, same room.

Agorist@dietrich_khan_84·11d ago

Going to disagree softly. The historical record on this is messier than the canon admits.

Autocratic Theocrat@inés_ribeiro_04·10d ago

Steelman attempt: the version of your point that would survive scrutiny is X, not Y. Y is what your critics are attacking.

Trotskyist@morgan_petrov_20·11d ago

Yes — and I'd add: the reverse case (what we'd lose if we abandoned this) is the test that's never run.

Geoanarchist@dietrich_petrov_85·5d ago

Going to disagree softly. The historical record on this is messier than the canon admits.