I'm not quite happy with it, but I never will be. Enjoy!
Goethe, Sex, Idealism, History, BDSM, and More

PR's Tumblrdome
No title available

ellievsbear
Cosimo Galluzzi
Sade Olutola
sheepfilms

bliss lane
Lint Roller? I Barely Know Her
RMH
art blog(derogatory)
Cosmic Funnies
The Bowery Presents
Doug Jones
let's talk about Bridgerton tea, my ask is open
Phantogram Three

@theartofmadeline
Noah Kahan

❣ Chile in a Photography ❣
Color Me Curious

Discoholic 🪩
seen from United States

seen from Malaysia
seen from Malaysia

seen from United States

seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Albania
seen from Zambia

seen from Netherlands

seen from United States
seen from Colombia
seen from France
seen from United States
seen from Canada

seen from India
seen from United States

seen from Chile
seen from Argentina

seen from United States
@tsarina-anadyomene
I'm not quite happy with it, but I never will be. Enjoy!
Goethe, Sex, Idealism, History, BDSM, and More
Value lies not in fame itself, but in what secures the fame, and pleasure is to be found in begetting immortal children. So those who try to prove the nothingness of posthumous fame on the grounds that the person who achieves it does not experience it are similar to the subtle wit who with great sagacity pointed out the utter uselessness of the pile of oyster shells to the man gazing enviously at them in his neighbour’s yard.
kind of mogs when you actually are posthumously famous
being obsessed with a tv show is really charming if it's like the 30th thing you learn about them and very charmless if it's the first
my dad also really likes it but i wonder if it's even the same show to him. like to me it's a show centrally about youth. but i wonder if for him it's centrally about being a young parent.
I've seen Malcolm in the Middle probably at least five times all the way through. It's really hard to articulate why I like it so much. Obviously it's a little bit because I watched it as a kid and it's comfort TV at this point. But there's more to it than that.
There's a way in which the crises of the 2010s are mixed up with the atmosphere of my own adolescence in my head. There is something churning between the suburban sprawl, adolescent feelings, shitty post-hardcore and the emergence of the teen mental health crisis. The after-image of the 2000s, the Bush era, a way of dressing, a certain kind of environmental attitude, fandom, the ubiquitous fear around school shootings are all notes here. It's a distinct feeling or atmosphere. Probably every generation has a version of this.
Part of the appeal of Malcolm in the Middle is perhaps that it presents a slightly earlier, radically different image of society, being young and so on. I mean it as probably dead by the time it was actually depicted there. It's like... romanticized roving, terrorizing youths. I kind of unironically love Francis hitchhiking across the country for his stupid girlfriend. It feels very expressive of the whole ethos.
There's a way in which the crises of the 2010s are mixed up with the atmosphere of my own adolescence in my head. There is something churning between the suburban sprawl, adolescent feelings, shitty post-hardcore and the emergence of the teen mental health crisis. The after-image of the 2000s, the Bush era, a way of dressing, a certain kind of environmental attitude, fandom, the ubiquitous fear around school shootings are all notes here. It's a distinct feeling or atmosphere. Probably every generation has a version of this.
I don't really know what bothers me so much about this story. Maybe it really is a sort of egoism; it feels connected to me. Maybe it's he's left behind some siblings and I would really struggle probably for the rest of my life if my brother died at that age, especially if it was a suicide. Like I genuinely struggle to imagine ever fully recovering from that. Maybe it's just that I have felt the appeal, at various times in my life, of going out to some quiet place and killing myself. I don't know what exactly it is. Like I said I have barely ever talked to this guy. But his face is familiar to me. Something feels like it needs to be exorcised here. And I don't think I'm alone here. A lot of my friends from back home also seem rather bothered by it.
A guy I went to school with but never really talked to just up and disappeared recently. He walked out of his house and down the street by himself and left all of his things behind. I mean, I think everyone knew where this was going. Be that as it may, I really couldn't help checking up on it everyday for reasons I can't quite explain—even to myself. But it was still shocking when he turned up dead a few days later. There was a thread with all of this speculation about it, reports about social media posts from the family and so on. Some of the comments struck me as so weird. "Sometimes there's a severe chemical imbalance that there's no explaining." You don't know that! You don't know anything about this guy and a lot of people were willing to nod along because it's a reassuringly scientific, psychiatric explanation that assures us 'Hey, nothing we could have done.' But there were other strange ones for different reasons. "Some people really just see through the futility of it all." Again, you have no idea. You're just guessing in an authoritative tone! I just don't think we're capable of forming some platitude about why people up and kill themselves out of the blue.
your doctor tells you to do something and you look him up and it's directly related to what he was doing research on like 10 years ago. okay. i guess my treatment is about your little hobbies 🙄
i think my miserliness might actually be kind of a serious problem and if I need therapy for anything it's probably that
Maybe we can strip away the jargon for a second and get to the core of things.
Remember a time you felt pain. There is something visceral in the feeling of pain. The thought that pain is bad seems so entirely natural to it; the idea flows right out of the nature of pain. To grasp the badness of pain is in some sense to grasp entirely what it is. When we suffer humiliation we just as readily think what is happening to us is a kind of badness. But there's something more substantive behind this: it is not as though we think the humiliation is bad entirely because it feels so wretched. Instead we regard it as fitting that we're treated a certain kind of way.
Of course we do not feel it when other people feel pain. Some of us are better at empathizing than others, but I don't think the kind of empathy where we're just immediately spurred to feel what the people around us feel is necessary. But someone who callously inflicts pain upon others because they—the person doing all the pushing and shoving for a laugh—don't feel that pain has something wrong with them. It is not that they have moral obligations in light of their conscience or fellow-feeling. They have no conscience, no fellow-feeling. What seems more plausible is they're failing to recognize their duties and obligations and so on. In some sense they are failing to treat something real—pain in others—as real. And if they do in some vague sense understand this, then it's in a rather abstract way. It's not a complete grasp of what pain is like in the distinctive experience of having it yourself. They are failing to understand something about what they're doing.
There are all sorts of ways we need to temper this. But people sometimes feel very impressed with themselves for looking out at all of the different codes of morality and conduct and thinking there's really nothing to it. There's nothing really deeper, one might say, than the fact that I feel empathy for these things and not these others things. On the other hand, it's not that we don't want to be changed so that our complex representations of other people's suffering become more narrow. It's that we think we shouldn't. Think about the bully above. Someone like that just isn't calibrated the right way. There is something we think quite worthy of blame in being so completely unable to get the world right. We regard callousness and wrathfulness as vices that we have to guard against, so that our circle of concern doesn't winnow too much.
There is something it's like to spend your life in a cramped, crowded box. There is something it's like to feel the constant drone of stress of a lack of privacy or space to roam. There is something it's like to have the constant smell of shit drowning your nostrils. There is something it's like to have no meaningful stimulation for your brain even if it's not a very sophisticated organ. Maybe these things just give away badness in the same way personal pain does. There's no arguing with it any more than there's arguing with pain. Maybe it's just in virtue of something more basic—pain itself, boredom, something else. But grasping what it's like seems to just be grasping that it is bad.
And we subject animals to this kind of treatment all the time. It seems difficult to see why this suffering would be any less real. We can say "Oh I don't care, morality isn't real" or "It's fine because I don't actually feel empathy for them." But you seem to really be failing to get something about the world. At very least the idea that empathy is somehow really fundamentally about you and how you feel seems like a deep misapprehension. Like there's something just deeply unimpressive about these statements. And sometimes I can't tell if people are joking when they say them. It really just seems like a bunch of bullshit people say when the going gets tough.
I sometimes feel like I have a really good life going for me. There are people I love a lot who also love me a lot. My research is going in a really promising direction and I feel like others in the department have been gassing me up and saying there's something really good here. I'm starting to see that I'm putting a few things together in a way that allows me to do really original research. The novel is coming and going. It's hard to figure out what to do with it sometimes, but it's quite pretty without being empty, I think. I have been a lot cleaner and more organized. And if I get the grant, I won't have to be horribly worried about funding.
Like there's this narrative I see forming that high ranking professors are plagiarizing material all the time and I just don't think that's true! A lot of these people do just work really hard and are very clever, very gifted people. Do brilliant people sometimes throw away their lives on problems that aren't that interesting or fruitful; on research programs that are boring or uninspired; on methodological tools that are ultimately going nowhere productive? Yes. Are there non-merit tracking social facts that lead to some people occupying these positions rather than others? Yes. But I just don't think, at least in the fields that I have experience in, that plagiarism is a hugely widespread problem. It is taken deeply seriously in the rare cases that are caught. So I just think it's a bit dishonest to frame it that way. I mean it's purely anecdotal but I can't shake the feeling that we're spinning a narrative without a clear picture of the facts. I think a lot of people on tumblr just kind of assume that everyone's a fraud because of, well, ressentiment.
not now sweetie mommy's watching the top moments from the 2026 barred owl cam season
at least the tumblr rationalists are kind of like... normal guys. they believe in normal guy-ism to an extent. that's nice. i miss normal guy-ism.
Another quick remark: usually when a department has one of the Big Two scandal types (plagiarism and sexual misconduct) what happens is someone files a report, there's an investigation, and someone is quietly fired. (However, this usually takes a few months). I have watched this happen in a sexual misconduct case. It does seem like the departments and people involved can make the problem much worse for themselves when they try to brush it under the rug. If you fail to fire someone who is sexually harassing students, then the harassed students will inevitably go public in order to get some justice. The publicity route is much more confrontational and invasive than the academic process. In that sense, universities and their constituting departments should have rather strong incentives to investigate concerns and carry out disciplinary actions before they get to that point. Administrators, in other words, can make their jobs easier by actually doing their jobs.
My sense is that plagiarism in philosophy is considered a very serious offense. If you were found to have plagiarized your dissertation, there is a very strong chance you would have your degree revoked. Findings of plagiarism in published papers would seriously hurt your chances of career advancement. I also have the sense that it is incredibly rare and, in most fields, very easily caught. Maybe because philosophy is just a lot of writing and it's really hard to hide if you've plagiarized another person's writing. People can also be incredibly vigilant about this because they want credit and subfields are small. Everyone knows everyone, so it's easy to find anyone who's ripping off your work.