Pinned Tweet
I've written up a piece for @IAI_TV on the illusory explanatory power of laws of nature.
"Simply naming these patterns leaves untouched the issue as to the necessary prerequisites of those patterns."
iai.tv/articles/the-laws-of-…
Eivor Oftestad har Norges beste penn.
«Men spørsmålet er sjølvsagt ikkje kvifor dei klappa. Spørsmålet er kvifor dei ikkje stoppa å klappe? Var det ingen som torde å avslutte?»
dagogtid.no/samfunn/nar-skul…
Daniel Joachim Kleiven retweeted
I sometimes wonder if giving people the illusion of knowing history (which is what a modern, ideologically-oriented "semi-education" does) is not more cruel than just not teaching them history at all.
A guest on @BBCr4today claims “the transatlantic slave trade was the first time that people were classified as chattel and not humans”, by contrast to the Roman, African and Arab slave trade. Completely incorrect.
Daniel Joachim Kleiven retweeted
That the Communist hammer and sickle isn’t commonly regarded as evil and offensive as the Nazi swastika is a failure of education.
“Dear Italian students, who today take to the streets carrying flags with the hammer and sickle and wearing T-shirts emblazoned with ‘CCCP’,” began an open letter in Italian by Lithuanian expat Neringa Budryt.
“I would like to ask you a question: do you truly know what the symbols you carry represent? And do you know what would have happened to many of you had you openly demonstrated in countries living under the oppression of communist regimes?
Let me tell you something. It is easy to display a red flag when, for you, communism is merely an abstract idea of equality, social justice, and rebellion against the system. It is easy to wear a T-shirt with "CCCP" on it when you have never experienced the reality of a communist regime.
We come from that part of Europe where communism was not a T-shirt, a symbol of rebellion, or a romanticized notion of equality. It was the system in which we lived—a system we never chose.
We know the history of Soviet repression, Stalinist purges, the Gulags, and mass deportations. Above all, we know the word "Siberia"—a place to which thousands of innocent people were forcibly deported, simply for thinking differently.
In Siberia—amidst freezing cold, starvation, and forced labor—many lost their lives; those who survived carried the scars of that experience forever. Entire families were torn apart, and generations were denied the chance to live freely in their own homeland.
In the countries of the Soviet bloc, censorship, political police, surveillance, and the suppression of dissent drastically curtailed individual freedoms.
We grew up in a system where state control permeated even our daily lives. At school, we were required to wear the red necktie of the "Pioneers." We were monitored; they tracked where we went and even whether we attended church. Even faith—a choice that should belong to an individual’s own conscience—could become a cause for suspicion.
We used to celebrate Christmas with our windows blacked out, to ensure no one would see us and report us. Because it was forbidden—just like so many other things: jeans, rock music, and all the symbols of a Western lifestyle. My mother returned from a Soviet labor camp. And do you know what happened to her? She was barred from continuing her education because she had been labeled an enemy of communism.
Under a communist regime, you could not protest. You risked arrest, imprisonment, interrogation, persecution—and, in certain historical contexts, even death. In the Soviet Union and other communist regimes, political dissent could cost you your freedom and your life.
Demonstrations independent of the authorities were not a guaranteed right; they were often suppressed by force.
That is why it strikes me to see young Italians proudly displaying the hammer and sickle—symbols associated with regimes that persecuted and imprisoned millions of people.
Today, you are free to take to the streets, shout against the government, criticize institutions, and wave your flags precisely because you live in a democracy that grants you these freedoms. Under an authoritarian regime of that kind, protesting against those in power could have landed you in prison.
This is not about denying the existence of social injustices, inequalities, or the right to fight for a better world. You are free to take to the streets to demand a more just society—but you should not idealize a system that denied so many people the very things you are free to exercise today: the right to choose, to believe, to speak, and to dissent. Before wearing a T-shirt with "CCCP" on it, listen to those who experienced that world. Talk to the deportees and their descendants; read the accounts of those who endured the gulags and forced exile to Siberia. Learn what it meant to be stripped of your freedom, your home, your loved ones—and even any prospect of a normal life—simply because of your background or your beliefs.
Before waving the hammer and sickle, please, study history thoroughly.”
Daniel Joachim Kleiven retweeted
By all means resist, but if you resist in the name of the false gods of liberalism, Enlightenment, ethnic purity, jingoistic nostalgia, or anything other than return to the Christian faith that built our civilization, you will not get to the root of the problem and ultimately you will fail. What Islamists understand that too many Westerners, left and right, do not understand is that in the long run you cannot defeat religion except with religion. And they do not understand it because they are in their different ways blinded by attachment to the things of this world – economic wellbeing, political power, freedom, pleasure, security, national pride – things which have their place but have become idols. Hence, again and again, they flail about looking for some secular political solution, whether left-wing or right-wing, to a problem that is at bottom theological.
Daniel Joachim Kleiven retweeted
So here are two places where Aristotle, a well-known fan of essences, is perfectly aware of gradualism. Perhaps Dennett doesn't really understand the position he's arguing against.
Daniel Joachim Kleiven retweeted
Dødskulten Hamas’ sinnssyke og islamistiske angrep 7/10 var minst ti ganger verre enn 22/7. Israels hevn ble, som Hamas visste, grusom og uproporsjonal, med mange sivile tap. Hamas har sterkt svekket palestinernes sak og ofret mange av sitt folk. Hamas må bort. Netanyahu også.
Daniel Joachim Kleiven retweeted
It is interesting how the word "supernatural" has come to mean "anything that escapes my oversimplified world view."
Daniel Joachim Kleiven retweeted
My absolute favorite Roger Scruton quote:
"A conservative is someone who has found something to love and wants to retain it, and to protect it from all the sources of decay. It is a philosophy of love."
Daniel Joachim Kleiven retweeted
My review of @hemingquay's The Transhumanist Temptation and Paul Kingsnorth’s Against the Machine appears in the Fall 2026 issue of the Claremont Review of Books: claremontreviewofbooks.com/g…
Daniel Joachim Kleiven retweeted
USNs professor Glenn Diesen må jo vite det alle vet: At disse russiske «valgene» er bare tull. Skulle nesten tro han hadde fått i oppgave å hvitvaske dem
Dette nærmer seg psykiatri. Tenk å hevde at en feig massakre av uskyldige unge mennesker på en musikkfestival var «hundre prosent legitimt og nødvendig».
Da er det kort vei til å hevde at samme type terror er legitimt middel for å oppnå ulike typer politiske mål.
Replying to @TheodorHODL @henrikbeckheim
Siden jeg har rett, var 7. oktober 2023 et hundre prosent legitimt og nødvendig motangrep mot et pågående folkemord.
Det skal visst være demonstrasjon 7. oktober, og både Rød Ungdom og Oslos fraksjon av Sosialistisk Ungdom er med. Overskriften er «Støtt den palestinske motstandskampen!» og teaseren er et bilde fra massakren 7. oktober 2023. Blir det egentlig mørkere enn dette?
Daniel Joachim Kleiven retweeted
If your work is neither true nor good you should “aspire” for it to “matter” as little as possible
I find this attitude from academic philosophers baffling
I have deep philosophical disagreements with EA (eg matthewmandel.com/writing/on…)
But it’s easily the most vital philosophical movement of the 21st century so far. Far from finding it embarrassing, other philosophers should aspire to do work that matters as much
Daniel Joachim Kleiven retweeted
On some serious misunderstandings of Aquinas and the doctrine of divine simplicity in William Lane Craig’s Systematic Philosophical Theology. “Craig on Aquinas and divine simplicity, Part I,” the first of a two-part series over at the blog: edwardfeser.blogspot.com/202…
Daniel Joachim Kleiven retweeted
This is a shockingly explicit instance of ableism motivating euthanasia of a non-terminal 2 year old in the Netherlands. Killing this child was justified by being insufficiently human: lack of expected improvement with regard to impaired motor skills, behavior, and personality.
We might now laugh of the proposition that AI can become a conscious agent, deserving of rights on its own, but that category error may become disastrous policy somewhere down the road.
AI ethics has focused too much on protecting humans and ignored the welfare of AI agents themselves.
We only ask: How do we align models for the flourishing of humanity?
We need to also ask: How do we design AI so that they can flourish?
^ this is what a new breed of AI-welfare theorists claim. This idea of AI-welfare seemed decadent to me at first glance, but some of the most important philosophers of our age argue that we need to take it seriously. Otherwise, we could be harming, enslaving, and killing trillions of beings.
If the arc of Western modernity is a series of expansions of the moral circle -- the abolitionists, women’s suffrage, the queer movement, animal-rights -- perhaps AI agents will be the next heated battleground of who deserves moral consideration.
My guest NYU Philosopher @LedermanHarvey (now at Anthropic) gives us a comprehensive overview of the burgeoning debate around AI-welfare.
1
3
399
Daniel Joachim Kleiven retweeted
Dying in Dignity praised Canada until people realised what was happening there. It then pretended it never did so.
Replying to @liturgicalben
Edward Leigh mentioned Canada and Kim Leadbeater did an OTT exasperated/horrified facial expression. But why shouldn't it work out like that? Why do they think they are so magically smarter and better that they can control for every eventuality?
Daniel Joachim Kleiven retweeted
“The so-called death of philosophy being regularly attended by its revival, some new dogmatism should now be at hand. In short, the first law to be inferred from philosophical experience is: Philosophy always buries its undertakers.”
- Etienne Gilson, The Unity of Philosophical Experience, p. 246)































