/lit/ - Literature

>>17613921
>It's amazing how much one has to deny factual reality in order to fit their ideology. So to you the hypothesis "astrophysicists are just as smart as cashiers" is more probable than "astrophysicists tend to be quite smarter than cashiers" ? Like, seriously, not just to win a debate on the internet. You literally believe that?
Like I said, smart at doing what? The kind of genius that makes someone an astrophysicist is not the same kind of genius that makes someone a military general.
>"I don't actually believe in equality in properties I just think there's no objective way to tell which one is preferrable!".
It depends entirely on the task, perhaps in certain tasks one may be "objectively better" but you made no mention of this and that's why I said it depends on the situation and the observer, see: subjective.
>Except it's not that good of a motte. Do you think being dumb is equally as valuable as being intelligent?
As I have previously said you can be smart in some things but be dumb in others.
>How about healthy vs prone to diseases?
If everyone has a disease and they don't recognize it as such, is it a disease? Certain diseases were seen at such at one point, but not in another.
>I mean the votes vs rifles may sound really shmart when you talk with your marxist friends but it's just simply not analogous.
I am not a Marxist and it certainly is comparable because again, it depends on the situation