It looks like Kyle is distracted...

Yesterday, March 9 2022, Russia bombed a children's hospital in Mariupol City, Ukraine . The Red Cross has called conditions in the city apocalyptic. People have to go seek shelter underground because the bombardment has been unceasing. They have barely any access to essentials like food, water, or power. And it's winter time. This was despite Russia's agreement to a ceasefire so civilians could get out of the city.  If true, then this would be an egregious violation of international humanitarian law (IHL).  I understand that most people know of IHL and of war crimes, but not the specifics. For people who know even some IHL (like me, emphasis on the "some"), the violation there is really clear. For people who are unfamiliar with IHL, they would still know that bombing a hospital is generally fucked up. That being said, just because it's fucked up doesn't necessarily mean it's illegal. That's why people often ask me at times like these "is this

Ever since Vice President Leni Robredo announced her candidacy for President, there has been a trend of universities lighting their buildings with pink, Leni's campaign color. Last year, Universidad de Sta. Isabel, Leni Robredo's alma mater, lit the façade of its building with the color pink. Adamson University did the same in October 2021. San Beda University (Pres. Duterte's alma mater) followed suit later that December. Hundreds of educators from UST, ADMU, La Salle, (and many more!) have also publicly endorsed Leni's bid for the presidency.  Why do universities show their support, if not their formal endorsement, for certain political candidates? People often answer very simply: "the candidate exemplifies the values of the university." This answer implies more than it seems. At the very least, it implies: That universities have a set of values that it wants to uphold, and That upholding that set of values means endorsing political candidates who exemplify

WHAT ARE THE OPTIONS? Depending on how one views the conflict, it is either (a) a genuine move by Russia to defend minorities in the Donbass region of Ukraine, (b) a Russian retaking of territory it has a right to possess through historical occupation, or (c) a continuation of Cold War-era tensions between Russia and the US and its allies. The first and second views are widely criticized by Western media as Russian propaganda. The third view takes on a more realist approach to international relations, though, as will be explained, it can be used to justify inaction and some “moral dessert” arguments that tend to shift the focus away from the humanitarian cost of the conflict. For the first view, it is pointed out how strange it is for Russia to claim that it wants to “deNazify” a country with a Jew as the head of state. Some activists have warned against believing Western propaganda while at the same time repeating pro-Russia propaganda discussion points. [1]   It’s certainly important

" Laozi, I don't mean no disrespect, but you need to fill your bowl with shit that makes some sense!" said Sun Tzu in the Eastern Philosophers vs Western Philosophers episode of Epic Rap Battles of History .  Except it makes a lot of sense. The function of a bowl is to hold something. If it has already been filled, then it ceases to be useful. Taoism (of which Lao Tzu was the founder) is, in many ways, about Emptiness. Chapter 11 of the Tao Te Ching, its central text, reads: Thirty spokes are joined together in a wheel, but it is the center hole that allows the wheel to function. We mold clay into a pot, but it is the emptiness inside that makes the vessel useful. We fashion wood for a house, but it is the emptiness inside that makes it livable. We work with the substantial, but the emptiness is what we use. Philosophical Taoism concerns itself with understanding and living the Tao or the Way. The problem is that the Way is full of apparent contradictions and paradoxes th