> If you've found an interesting creature in nature, then write what makes that creature interesting.
this is literally what they did.
I think you just have a bias against queer people. you say in another comment “actual cool people laugh at those blue-haired weirdos” and in this one that an article “doesn't (ever) need to include what a lesbian writer thought.”
these aren’t legitimate criticisms, and your claim that an unfalsifiable argument is meaningless is not a valid criticism either. you can’t falsify the theory of evolution, but the the theory still has meaning. in many cases, you can’t ethically set up control groups for medical interventions which save lives, but that doesn’t mean you can’t reason about those interventions. an unfalsifiable argument can certainly still have meaning and utility, and claiming otherwise is ridiculous.
saying “actual cool people laugh at those blue-haired weirdos” is also ridiculous. first because it’s obviously biased. second because cool is subjective, and you were just complaining about OP being subjective.
> you can’t falsify the theory of evolution, but the the theory still has meaning.
The theory of evolution is falsifiable.
As you say, medical interventions often cannot ethically be falsified. However, medical trials are typically set up in a way designed to test if they work with an eye towards also detecting if they do not. Which is to say trials enable falsifying them. This happens quite often when pharmaceuticals fail trials.
this is literally what they did.
I think you just have a bias against queer people. you say in another comment “actual cool people laugh at those blue-haired weirdos” and in this one that an article “doesn't (ever) need to include what a lesbian writer thought.”
these aren’t legitimate criticisms, and your claim that an unfalsifiable argument is meaningless is not a valid criticism either. you can’t falsify the theory of evolution, but the the theory still has meaning. in many cases, you can’t ethically set up control groups for medical interventions which save lives, but that doesn’t mean you can’t reason about those interventions. an unfalsifiable argument can certainly still have meaning and utility, and claiming otherwise is ridiculous.
saying “actual cool people laugh at those blue-haired weirdos” is also ridiculous. first because it’s obviously biased. second because cool is subjective, and you were just complaining about OP being subjective.