I'm not giving up my seat

I’d amend his conclusion. Most humans have adopted a retributive morality. We take it for granted that others will follow certain codes and punish them disproportionately when they fail to do so. I’d also be interested in further research about conservatism and ease of navigating the moral spectrum. Would that be that they comprehend fully Rawlian, Kantian or Utilitarian ethical arguments and discard them, or that they form heuristics by which they ignore ethical arguments with outcomes which dissatisfy them?

Edit: Wait, no, Haidt is a joke. Just remembered who he was. There’s fuck all equivalence between the two parties.

Well, the primary theory of dyslexia is that of the phonological deficit - dyslexics have a harder time reconstituting the phonemes that comprise words. Of particular note in correcting typographical errors would be the lower activation of the parietotemporal region and the occipitotemporal region, which would make it easier to miss typos for a dyslexic person. This would be amplified when the typos themselves are both correct words (so wouldn’t register on a spellchecker) and more or less homophones (depending on the accent). If the dyslexic person uses the heuristic of sounding out the words to determine their acceptability, the error is unlikely to register.

I think it may be to do with the poisoning of the well with the term “entitled”, which carries considerable political second order signifiers. For instance, here’s Santorum complaining about entitled children wanting food and healthcare. These issues are a matter of framing, something Republicans have historically been very good at. As I mentioned above, humans tend to adopt retributive systems (no comment on the validity of such systems, I accept Hume’s Is/Ought distinction). Humans are incensed at the notion of exploitation - this informs both Marxist and Libertarian thought. In the former, the bourgeoisie are sustained at the expense of the proletariat, who by indoctrination and repression fail to throw off their masters. In the Libertarian, the unproductive exist at the mercy of the entrepreneurs while hindering their progress. The tyranny of the majority prevents the quashing of this group. Such terms can induce very interesting politicised responses. In fact, I’d consider the following an example of a Labriolan praxis.

Editing mine. I found the juxtaposition amusing. The “bad things happen to bad people” expressed a belief in a Just World (unless it was a typo) and the UDHR declares that every human has the right to be considered a human under law (rather than an entitled privilege!). Those declarations are supposed to bind governments, though, not citizens.