Alrighty, well, good morning everybody, hope you're doing well.

So somebody wrote me an essay sometime ago, I'm sorry it took me so long to get to it,

but he wrote me an essay which is wonderful, a great set of questions and really appreciate the pushback of the critiques.

So let's see if we can't sharpen this diamond to a slightly brighter hue.

He says the argument and consequentialism and he said let me use

Stephen's answer to the question can we be certain about the future which you can

find in his September 27th, 2023 Wednesday night live stream at one, 23 minutes and 7 seconds as an opportunity to publish

a short essay I've written after reading the art of the argument.

Motivation.

This is not a rebuttal to the art of the argument.

I would have to write a book to do that, which I have no intention to doing so,

I have no problem with 99% of what Stefan is saying in the book.

This is a criticism of Stephan's view of consequentialism and determinism, as an

empiricist he focuses on the evidence and I don't want to criticize empiricism. In my opinion

empiricism is critical, or crucial,

sorry, crucial to rationality and true freedom.

And Stephan is saving it where it needs to be saved

in our everyday lives.

But empiricism is only one side of the the coin and that's what this is about.

And he makes a note that quotes in italics are from the book The Art of the Argument

Western Civilizations Last Stand, Out of the Argument.com, you should totally check it out. What is consequentialism? So he

quotes from the satanic temple of Wikipedia and says, in ethical philosophy, consequentialism is a class of normative, teleological ethical

...