“Can you really, honestly say that you do not ‘know’ the chair you are sitting in exists? Because you certainly behave as if you do.” People reflexively believe their sense impressions, and it is difficult to imagine what it would mean to not. Writing a paper on why you should not believe your sense impressions implies the existence of your writing implement or computer.

Question for the reader: when you think that something is outrageously wrong, how do you usually get there? By doing math?

There is one current debate around constitutional interpretation, happening largely among legal scholars on the right, that should be of interest to the online right wing. Those of you who plan on entering politics at some point, agitating for certain outcomes, or even voting, should be aware of what follows.

Actions become moral, under individual-focused, agency/consent-based morality, when they are desired and the harmful externalities fall under a threshold. But if our desires never come from within, if there is no authenticity, then no decision can be moral because the first requirement is never met.