Blog Roundup

Friday, February 20, 2026

A Friday Hodgepodge

1. "False: All Claims, Positive or Negative, Require Evidence," by Harry Binswanger (Value for Value):

To know, even to know that something might be the case, is to have formed a valid mental product; it takes the means of doing so. Evidence is that means. No evidence, no means of cognition. No means of cognition, no cognition.

The positive/negative distinction does apply to acts of consciousness: not accepting an idea (a negative) isn't an act at all. It's the commitment of your consciousness that needs justification. The not making of that commitment isn't a disguised commitment.

Atheism is not the belief in non-God. It's not a belief in anything; it's the rejection of belief.

The usual way of defending atheism is wrong. The defense is not: "I don't need a reason to accept atheism, but they need a reason to accept theism." The deepest explanation is: atheism isn't a belief; it isn't something you accept. Atheism is the refusal to accept nonsense stories.
480 words/2 minutes

2. "In Defense of 'Evil Billionaire' Jim Pattison," by Jaana Woiceshyn (How to Be Profitable and Moral):
The worst part of [Green Party leader Emily] Lowan's immoral argument is that it completely ignores the value Pattison's grocery businesses create, not only to him but to his customers (who can shop for plentiful food at local stores), to 59,000 employees (with well-paying jobs across all his companies), and to other businesses who can thrive in areas with value-creating grocery stores.

The anti-capitalist activists use the same arguments not only against grocery stores but against all successful businesses while ignoring the huge role business plays in making our lives better by producing and trading products and services that we need. Penalizing and destroying businesses would make our lives miserable and much poorer.
900 words/3 minutes

3. "The Lawyers Defending Trump's Tariffs Know They're Un-American. Here's How We Can Tell" (November 2025), by Ben Bayer (New Ideal):
Originalism is appealing to those who revere America's Founding Fathers and documents. But too many slip back and forth between thinking that the founders are to be revered because they did something great, and because they represent preserved, long-held tradition. Trump's "originalist" apologists exploit this ambiguity and cash in on the tradition worship, with the effect of negating what actually made the founders great: they overthrew the authority of the king on the basis of revolutionary philosophy that would liberate mankind from shackles. In their desperation to justify Trump's tariff powers, Trump's apologists reveal a willingness to trample on that revolution and reinstitute a monarchy. [footnotes omitted]
3000 words/10 minutes

4. "One Quick Question," by Harry Binswanger (Harry Binswanger Substack):
Crime is a problem. Crime by foreigners in the U.S. is a part of that problem. Crime by foreigners illegally in the U.S. is a part of that part.

Criminals, whether illegals or citizens, have guns and confederates. ICE agents have assault weapons, SWAT gear, and an organization of tens of thousands.

Criminals are condemned by everyone. They are outlaws, operating in the shadows. ICE agents have a moral sanction. ICE was set up by the U.S. Congress. It is funded by Congress. Half the country think ICE agents are doing God's work. Or they did until the recent killings.
310 words/1 minute

-- CAV

No comments: