Philosophy

A framework for animal moral status that doesn’t collapse into sentimentality or dismissiveness The previous essay argued that human dignity is grounded in kind-membership — that belonging to a kind whose nature is constitutively oriented toward self-transcendence is what makes a human being worth protecting, regardless of what any individual has personally achieved or can currently do. What do you do with the edges? Gorillas. Elephants. Dolphins. Animals that are clearly doing something cognitively that a cow isn’t. Do they just get lumped in with livestock? ...

The previous part lays out the idea from first principles: beauty is a kind of power — it acts on people before they consent — and the grown-up thing to do with power is to carry it with care, neither flaunting it nor burying it as shameful. That argument is deliberately narrow: it only speaks where power is in play, and it generates no dress codes. This part turns to a specific application: the place of modesty in Jewish life, and a failure mode the principle predicts. ...

On kind membership, potential, and the collapse of civilizational superiority There’s a question that sits beneath most arguments about how we treat animals, how we treat the vulnerable, and how societies have historically justified treating each other: what, exactly, grounds the special moral status of a human being? The intuitive answer — that humans are smarter, more capable, more morally complex — runs into problems almost immediately. What about the comatose patient? The infant? And more uncomfortably: what about the tribal community that has lived in the same way for thousands of years, with no written philosophy, no systematic theology, no recorded science? ...

The Innocence of Children Picture an isolated village in the hills. The children there have found little nuggets of gold in the streambed, and they play with them — flick them, trade them, leave them in the dirt. You watch and you smile. They are holding something that could build a house or buy a field, and to them it is a pebble that catches the light. That is innocence. It is not knowing the value of what you hold. The child who throws a heavy object at his brother’s head and misses, breaking a window instead, is guilty of the broken window and the thrown object both. And he is still innocent, because he cannot yet feel the weight of what he nearly did. He doesn’t see how close he came. The depth of harm, the full meaning of being responsible for another person — these are things a child develops into. Empathy at that depth is earned, not issued at birth. So a child can be guilty and innocent at once: he did the thing, but the thing has no real size to him yet. ...

A prosecutor in Los Angeles wants to convict someone who killed an attacker in self-defense. The attacker had a criminal record stretching to the moon. The prosecutor’s move: you couldn’t have known about that record when you killed him, so it’s irrelevant. The argument bugged me for weeks before I could name why. It’s not stupid. It’s the opposite of stupid — it takes a certain amount of cleverness to build. And that turns out to be the whole problem. ...

A Street Interview A college student with a phone camera spots a Jewish man on the sidewalk and approaches him. Anthony: Hey man, you got a minute? I’m doing street interviews for my YouTube channel. I’m just gonna be straight with you — I’ve met a few Jewish people who have this vibe like they think they’re better than everyone else. There’s this whole “chosen people” thing, and some of them have been pretty condescending about it. Is that actually a Jewish belief, or am I just running into jerks who happen to be Jewish? ...

The Force Is a Religion: Why Modern Star Wars Can’t Find Its Soul There’s a persistent mystery in contemporary pop culture: why can’t the most valuable intellectual property in entertainment history recapture its magic? Disney has poured billions into Star Wars, hired talented filmmakers, and produced technically proficient content—yet something essential keeps slipping through their fingers. The sequel trilogy divided the fanbase. Solo flopped. The streaming shows range from “pretty good” to “forgettable.” Meanwhile, the original and prequel trilogies, for all their flaws, continue to resonate across generations. ...

In what is found the greatness of man? In his understanding? That would leave the difference between man and beast to be a matter of degree. In fact, that would leave beast as our superior; his intellect is perfectly suited to his needs. The path to obtain them - or the cruel reality of his inability - is always clear. Unique to man is not-understanding - the ability to recognize a vastness which is not understood, and to be inspired by that awareness. The beast lives in his world, which consists entirely of what he perceives. Only man loses himself in the stars. ...

My two year old son was sad on the long drive home today. Very sad. Car sick, tired, miserable, alternating between tears and distraction to the sound of my barely coherent ramblings. We get home, and I unpack, and all the while inside the car he is the picture of misery. I take him out of the car, and he’s happy! He gets a bath, changed, a song in bed, and all the old suffering is gone, replaced by joy and security. ...