magnoliaalchemist

[magnoliaalchemist]

its really fun* listening to a behind the bastards episode recorded in 2020 referencing the brutality of police against protestors during the trump administration and being hit in the face with the fact that its 2024 and fucking nothing has changed but thank god a democrats in office!

*and by really fun i mean i want to [REDACTED]

#i say stuff sometimes

[magnoliaalchemist]

#🙃

[magnoliaalchemist]

Okay let me try this one again. The Trolley Problem sets up a scenario that sucks to be in. You either kill one guy, or you kill five guys. Nobody likes these options. We all don't want this be happening. That's kind of the point. It's a moral quandary. It's supposed to feel bad.

Now, according to a recent post floating around on tumblr, choosing either of the two options demonstrates "learned helplessness" and makes you a neolib sheep. The only correct answer, the post states, is to reject the question altogether. (Or to change the parameters of the question to include an option that saves everyone, thus eliminating the moral quandary.)

It sounds nice, doesn't it? Fuck this bad situation, we control our imaginations, so let's imagine a situation that doesn't suck. Hah! Bet you didn't think of that!

Here's the problem. Even though I think most situations generally have at least one solution that is both Feasible and Not Terrible, I have to admit that there are some situations (as in, not zero of them) where all the feasible options are unpleasant. This is a natural consequence of living in a world where A Lot Of Things Suck.

But if shitty situations do exist, even if it's super super rare, then it's not unreasonable to ask, "How should we make decisions when we find ourselves in a shitty situation?"

This is the beginning premise of the Trolley Problem. It says, "Hey what if you were in an unambiguously shitty situation? There are many shitty situations, so let's imagine one that is contrived enough to get everyone on the same page regardless of political affiliation, AND really emphasizes the key parts that I want to discuss."

Tumblr says "let me stop you right there. What if instead...we imagined a different scenario that wasn't as shitty?"

Well, okay, but then we're not talking about the same thing anymore. That doesn't actually count as an answer to the problem, you're just changing the subject to a completely different thing.

Tumblr goes on to say, "Exactly. That's the only thing you should ever do when confronted with an ethical quandary. Frankly the fact that you are willing to even consider a scenario that sucks suggests that you are fundamentally incapable of considering less shitty scenarios."

I just want to say I think that's bullshit. I don't think every problem is a trolley problem, but I do think that some problems are a trolley problem. And I think that those problems are worth discussing, even though they don't feel good. The trolley problem exists as a framework to discuss those problems.

Maybe our aversion to difficult decisions has an impact on our ethical reasoning, and maybe we should actually question how our ethical standards hold up under the weight of that aversion. So maybe moral quandaries like the trolley problem are worth discussing. And if you don't want to engage with the quandary, then don't - you don't have to concoct a whole essay about how the quandary is inherently morally bad.

It's possible that what you really want to say is that it sucks when people treat certain situations as trolley problems, when those specific situations actually do contain unambiguously feasible and unambiguously perfect solutions. I would agree with that.

But like. Let's not pretend that you can reduce all of ethics down to unchallenging black and white moralism.

[magnoliaalchemist]

#endless ikea

[magnoliaalchemist]

Are any of y’all making mistakes too or is it just me

[magnoliaalchemist]

[magnoliaalchemist]

#video #cats

[magnoliaalchemist]

spiderman. opinions on rhode island

your mom rhode my island last night

#INCREDIBLE

[magnoliaalchemist]

!!!!!!!!!ITS THE 20TH ANNIVERSARY OF SPONGEBOB TOMORROW!!!!!!!!

#🫡🫡🫡

[magnoliaalchemist]

[magnoliaalchemist]

your honor my client should be at the club

[magnoliaalchemist]

i think at the end of every war they should dump a cooler full of blood on the president

[magnoliaalchemist]

I need a little help here

[magnoliaalchemist]

not every story is about being transgender. if you can see yourself in stories, that's great, but not every story is about transgenderism. please realize that. i have seen white people claim examples of racism in media to actually be an allegory for being transgender and that's not the best thing to say. in case you didnt know.

[magnoliaalchemist]

SWIFTIAN WORDPLAY 🤣

[magnoliaalchemist]

I’m going to be honest. I don’t think you should be a pharmacist or a doctor if you’re not comfortable dispensing medication and assisting people of every demographic. The medical field is one place where the right to refuse service gets people killed. If you’re not able to empathize and help people because of a personal bias against their race, sexuality, gender identity, disability status, religion etc., do not become a doctor. If your “personal beliefs” against birth control are so strong that you will refuse to dispense lifesaving medications like hormonal birth control or misoprostol or you’re so virulently transphobic that you refuse to dispense hormones and hormone blockers, you should not be a pharmacist.

If you have these beliefs that are so strongly against people’s bodies and identities, you should not work around vulnerable demographics. If you want a job where you have the right to pick and choose who you assist, go into gig work or something.

[magnoliaalchemist]

The Middle East is not a continent. It is a transcontinental region that was coined by the British. It’s not a race or ethnicity. Not all Middle Easterns are Arabs or Muslims and different Middle Eastern Arabs aren’t interchangeable and have their own cultures and dialects. Cultures in the Middle Eastern are diverse. We are not homogenous. There is no one Middle Eastern culture. Okay? Okay.