There’s also a “simple english” Wikipedia: simple.wikipedia.org

Dang, in which country are you talking about Liège in elementary school?

Totally agree. But I’m a bit pessimistic that modern fascism and extreme wealth concentration stops at one man. In my view, it’s more of a systemic issue. If he dies, the system that put him in place still thrives.

I agree. “One of the most important day in modern history” though? That’s a bit exceptionalistic IMO.

Ooh, whoosh on me. Thanks!

I do it all the time :'( But if it’s an important subject or if someone asks for a serious answer, I’m always frank

E: also, isn’t Machiavellianism “the ends justify the means”; aren’t you thinking of narcissism?

The argument I have seen is that other animals share some needs with humans, but not all. All animals don’t have the same social behavior, and so they don’t have the same social needs. We know that humans have a perception of reality different from any other animal, like projecting oneself far into the future etc. I think it’s not far-fetch that all beings don’t share the same physical, psychological, and social needs.

I’d like to emphasize that humans wouldn’t have more needs than other animals, just different ones.

So the question is: if the animals’ needs are met, could they be happier if we gave them opportunities that satisfy human needs? Or is that projecting a human perception onto another being that’s just different?

But the same argument was probably made by white people towards slaves: “they don’t have the same needs than us”. We know that slaves did have the same needs. Maybe something similar could happen with our perception of animals’ needs?

Well, you do need a flat surface below the tram. A lawn will dampen more sound and re-emit less heat than concrete or asphalt.

In Belgian French it’s 70, and in French² it’s 1000