As a scientist did he ever ask for empirical evidence like a valid driver’s licence? Or did he simply take these “19 to 23” year old women at their word?
As a scientist did he ever ask for empirical evidence like a valid driver’s licence? Or did he simply take these “19 to 23” year old women at their word?
“As a scientist” is the most up-his-own-ass way of starting a statement. It’s like his claim about “empirical evidence” isn’t strong on its own, so he had to pull some bona fides to shore it up. The whole statement is an attempt to wield an ethos argument as a cudgel to invalidate the question.
These guys are *super* emotion-driven and equally convinced that they're inherently and completely rational.
I think it would have been easier if he just said "I'm a monster that believes in eugenics." In the long run, it certainly would have saved time for everyone.