Maarten Boudry

Why do people believe crazy stuff? It's because they fall for “fallacies”, we're told. Memorize the classics (ad hominem, post hoc, straw man) and you’ll be inoculated against error. It's a neat little story, and I used to believe it too. But I've become a fallacy apostate. 🧵/1

@alextencate Hadn't even spotted that one. 😅

De Gruyter (@degruyter_pub) is about to publish a new handbook on "war and bioethics." Meet their guest editor @maidebaris: - "Long live Hamas" - Jews are "parasites" who "steal Palestinian organs" I'm sure this will be a scrupulously even-handed, rigorous, and impartial contribution to the ethics of war — setting a new standard of excellence for the field. x.com/maidebaris/sta…

The "heartbreaking" was a reference to this meme. ;-)

I'm heartbroken. One of the greatest songs by the greatest band in the world was inspired by one of the worst writers in the world. 🥲 "Hovering over Yorke's lyrical explorations of atomized alienation was Naomi Klein's critique of the corporate world's stranglehold on an increasingly deregulated, hyper-consumerist hellscape." One day I should write about how deeply I love @Radiohead's music—and how wildly my eyes roll whenever they venture into politics. faroutmagazine.co.uk/dollars-and-ce…

"This is not some minor point. The claim that wealth inequality is exploding is the central premise of Gary Stevenson’s entire economic theory, &, by extension, of this documentary. Take that away, and there is nothing left" --@K_Niemietz for @Quillette quillette.com/2026/07/14/gar…

This is the clearest example yet of the inmates having taken over the asylum. This person is the PRESIDENT of the American Anthropological Association, the leader of her field, but she doesn't understand the most fundamental definition of sex in biology (based on gamete types, of which there are exactly two). These sex differences have literally existed for a billion years, are binary across the entire living world, and have absolutely nothing to do with rare chromosomal anomalies in humans. h/t @RichardHanania #selection-3025.444-3025.498" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">archive.is/FKjSk#selectio…

"most greatest" 🙄

This must be one of the most greatest and most amusing letters in the history of philosophy. In 1759, David Hume wrote to his good friend Adam Smith about the reception of his long-awaited first book The Theory of Moral Sentiments, after Smith had nervously sent him a copy. Throughout the letter, however, Hume keeps his younger friend in suspense, piling distraction upon distraction and trollishly throwing him off with phrases suggesting a devastating verdict ("unfortunate," "melancholy," "whether it should be damned to oblivion or be registered in the temple of immortality"). Since the letter is surprisingly hard to track down online, I've copied it in full below. I first came across it in Dennis C. Rasmussen's marvelous The Infidel and the Professor, about philosophy's greatest friendship. *** From David Hume Lisle Street, Leicester Fields, 12 April 1759 Dear Smith I give you thanks for the agreeable present of your Theory. Wedderburn and I made presents of our copies to such of our acquaintance as we thought good judges, and proper to spread the reputation of the book. I sent one to the Duke of Argyle, to Lord Lyttleton, Horace Walpole, Soames Jennyns, and Burke, an Irish gentleman, who wrote lately a very pretty treatise on the sublime. Millar desired my permission to send one in your name to Dr Warburton. I have delayed writing to you till I could tell you something of the success of the book, and could prognosticate with some probability whether it should be finally damned to oblivion, or should be registered in the temple of immortality. Though it has been published only a few weeks, I think there appear already such strong symptoms, that I can almost venture to foretell its fate. It is in short this— —But I have been interrupted in my letter by a foolish impertinent visit of one who has lately come from Scotland. He tells me, that the University of Glasgow intend to declare Rouet's office vacant upon his going abroad with Lord Hope. I question not but you will have our friend, Ferguson, in your eye, in case another project for procuring him a place in the University of Edinburgh should fail. Ferguson has very much polished and improved his treatise on refinement, and with some amendments it will make an admirable book, and discovers an elegant and a singular genius. The Epigoniad, I hope, will do; but it is somewhat up-hill work. As I doubt not but you consult the reviews sometimes at present, you will see in the Critical Review a letter upon that poem; and I desire you to employ your conjectures in finding out the author. Let me see a sample of your skill in knowing hands by your guessing at the person. I am afraid of Lord Kaims's Law Tracts. A man might as well think of making a fine sauce by a mixture of wormwood and aloes as an agreeable composition by joining metaphysics and Scotch law. However, the book, I believe, has merit; though few people will take the pains of diving into it. But to return to your book, and its success in this town, I must tell you— —A plague of interruptions! I ordered myself to be denied; and yet here is one that has broke in upon me again. He is a man of letters, and we have had a good deal of literary conversation. You told me, that you was curious of literary anecdotes, and therefore I shall inform you of a few, that have come to my knowledge. I believe I have mentioned to you already Helvétius's book de l'Esprit. It is worth your reading, not for its philosophy, which I do not highly value, but for its agreeable composition. I had a letter from him a few days ago, wherein he tells me that my name was much oftener in the manuscript, but that the censor of books at Paris obliged him to strike it out. Voltaire has lately published a small work called Candide, ou l'Optimisme. It is full of sprightliness and impiety, and is indeed a satyre upon Providence, under pretext of criticizing the Leibnitian system. I shall give you a detail of it— —But what is all this to my book? say you. —My dear Mr Smith, have patience: compose yourself to tranquillity: show yourself a philosopher in practice as well as profession: think on the emptiness, and rashness, and futility of the common judgements of men: how little they are regulated by reason in any subject, much more in philosophical subjects, which so far exceed the comprehension of the vulgar. Non si quid improba Roma, elevet, accedas examenque improbum in illa, perpendas trutina, nec te quaesiveris extra. A wise man's kingdom is his own breast: or, if he ever looks farther, it will only be to the judgement of a select few, who are free from prejudices, and capable of examining his work. Nothing indeed can be a stronger presumption of falsehood than the approbation of the multitude; and Phocion, you know, always suspected himself of some blunder, when he was attended with the applauses of the populace. Supposing, therefore, that you have duly prepared yourself for the worst by all these reflections; I proceed to tell you the melancholy news, that your book has been very unfortunate: for the public seem disposed to applaud it extremely. It was looked for by the foolish people with some impatience; and the mob of literati are beginning already to be very loud in its praises. Three bishops called yesterday at Millar's shop in order to buy copies, and to ask questions about the author: the Bishop of Peterborough said he had passed the evening in a company, where he heard it extolled above all books in the world. You may conclude what opinion true philosophers will entertain of it, when these retainers to superstition praise it so highly. The Duke of Argyle is more decisive than he uses to be in its favour: I suppose he either considers it as an exotic, or thinks the author will be serviceable to him in the Glasgow elections. Lord Lyttleton says, that Robertson and Smith and Bower are the glories of English literature. Oswald protests he does not know whether he has reaped more instruction or entertainment from it: but you may easily judge what reliance can be put on his judgement, who has been engaged all his life in public business and who never sees any faults in his friends. Millar exults and brags that two thirds of the edition are already sold, and that he is now sure of success. You see what a son of the earth that is, to value books only by the profit they bring him. In that view, I believe it may prove a very good book. Charles Townsend, who passes for the cleverest fellow in England, is so taken with the performance, that he said to Oswald he would put the Duke of Buccleugh under the author's care, and would endeavour to make it worth his while to accept of that charge. As soon as I heard this, I called on him twice with a view of talking with him about the matter, and of convincing him of the propriety of sending that young nobleman to Glasgow: for I could not hope, that he could offer you any terms, which would tempt you to renounce your professorship: but I missed him. Mr Townsend passes for being a little uncertain in his resolutions; so perhaps you need not build much on this sally. In recompense for so many mortifying things, which nothing but truth could have extorted from me, and which I could easily have multiplied to a greater number; I doubt not but you are so good a Christian as to return good for evil and to flatter my vanity, by telling me, that all the godly in Scotland abuse me for my account of John Knox and the Reformation etc. I suppose you are glad to see my paper end, and that I am obliged to conclude with Your humble servant David Hume

I've now read the rest of the interview, and I feel like my brain has melted down. It's absolutely wild. The Vanderbilt authors couldn't have dreamed up a better illustration of the ideological rot that has penetrated parts of academia. My favorite part is still her claim that people who believe in a sex binary have a secret desire to "kill babies". It's unbelievable that someone like this could become president of an academic society — the leader of their field. archive.is/FKjSk

Another instance of what I call "disbelief about belief": the religious belief in martyrdom and rewards in the afterlife is so alien and bizarre to secular Westerners that many assume the "human shields" strategy (as used by Hamas) must be a myth, a lie, or an invention. "Because the notion of deliberately exposing even children to the ravages of war runs so counter to Western perceptions of the value of life, the idea that any leaders could turn this into war strategy has made much of the public perceive the term “human shields” as itself a big lie. While a universal term now exists for when one group intends the destruction of another, what the war in Gaza now begs is to ask what seems unthinkable: what do we call it when one group intends for the destruction of its own people?" thegoldenpill.substack.com/p/the-martyrci…

🧵Israel consistently said Hamas & PIJ operatives dressed as civilians fired at the IDF and Gazans from GHF aid sites. After reports that only civilians were killed on June 1, 2025, PIJ now admits at least two of the dead were its commanders, corroborating the IDF's account. 1/

I'm unironically proud of my (former) alma mater this time. Feline behavioral scientists at @UGent have uncovered new hidden depths to cats' depravity: sometimes "licking" is not friendly grooming, but passive-aggressive bullying.😅 "The researchers suggest that unwanted licks might be an easy way to jab at another cat without getting into a fight. While a full scuffle could result in injury, a precisely placed irritating lick might be a safer way to tell your furry “friend” to get lost." "The other side of the cat-licking coin revealed something more in line with bullying. A subset of the videos showed that licking often preceded conflict. These interactions were defined by differing body postures, where one cat might stand and lick the other sitting cat. The aggressive licks were followed by signs of stress in the licked cat, including staring, yowling, rotating the ears, licking the lips or swiping at the other cat. The results were inconsistent with the prior conception of cat allogrooming." (fyi, @Evolutionistrue) nytimes.com/2026/07/10/sci…

Is er iets bespottelijker (om niet te zeggen degoutanter) dan vanuit je parmantige palazzo in Genua pleiten voor collectieve verarming en de uitroeiing van ongelijkheid? "Wij moeten er niet bang voor zijn om armer te worden, want armoede maakt niet ongelukkig. Alles is relatief. Het enige dat ongelukkig maakt, is armer zijn dan anderen." Niemand houdt je tegen om 90% van je inkomen (verdiend dankzij kapitalisme) weg te schenken aan armoedebestrijding, Ilja. Ook @demorgen maakt zich belachelijk door deze economisch ongeletterde schertsfiguur (maartenboudry.be/2024/01/kapita…) naar voren te schuiven als een ernstige interviewer van Thomas Piketty

It's so exciting to see raw talent at work. After watching Curry Barker's (who's barely 26) Obsession for a second time and picking up on clever details I missed the first time—the human wig, the cracked One Wish Willow at the very end—I checked out Barker's horror short The Chair. It's stunningly good. Perhaps even more terrifying than Obsession, which is more hilariously unhinged than terrifying. The scenes in the bed and at breakfast after are spine-chilling: no jump scares, no cheap gore, just pure psychological horror. This guy has an exceptional understanding of the uncanny. And it's free on YouTube, how amazing is that? youtube.com/watch?v=mhazCS…

In just two sentences, my friend Shany Mor (@ShMMor) captures the utter cluelessness of so much supposedly "learned" discourse about Israel's strategic predicament in both Gaza and the West Bank: "Israel can neither continue to occupy the West Bank nor consider withdrawing from it—as it must do if it is to remain a Jewish state and a democratic one—without radically disincentivising any further operations like the 7 October massacre. An enormous amount of learned discourse over the last three years has pretended not to understand the importance of this war aim, while simultaneously demanding measures that would make it unachievable." The real "problem"—in fact it is an extraordinary blessing—is that most liberal democracies in the West (with the notable exception of Ukraine) have not faced an existential military threat for more than eight decades. As a result, many have completely lost the ability to think about war in strategic terms: incentives, deterrence, trade-offs, military objectives. It's not just antisemitism or hostility toward Israel. It's also just historical amnesia and the luxury of having zero skin in the game. Shany's essay draws fascinating parallels with the 1956 Suez Crisis, exploring the double-edged nature of superpower involvement. Yet another reminder of why a @Quillette subscription is essential for understanding the world today. quillette.com/2026/07/13/res…

Anti-war and anti-arms-trade views are luxury beliefs for people who've never had to face annihilation from committed belligerents be they other states or genocidal Islamist death cults intent on destroying you. Ukrainians and Israelis understand this all too well.

Anti-Joodse spreekkoren na verloren kwartfinale Marokko gevolg van Maccabi-fantoomsyndroom DEN HAAG – De anti-Joodse spreekkoren die na de verloren wedstrijd van Marokko tegen Frankrijk in de Haagse Schilderswijk klonken, zijn volgens onderzoekers géén uiting van antisemitisme. Dat blijkt uit een eerste analyse van het Instituut voor Context en Duiding, dat zich specialiseert in het vermijden van voor de hand liggende conclusies. Op videobeelden is te zien hoe een grote groep supporters „alle Joden zijn homo” scandeert. Volgens de onderzoekers is het echter methodologisch onverantwoord om uit de inhoud van die leuzen conclusies te trekken over de motieven van de aanwezigen, omdat dat zou neerkomen op het serieus nemen van wat er daadwerkelijk wordt gezegd. „In de sociale wetenschap weten we dat letterlijkheid slechts één van de mogelijke interpretaties van woorden is,” zegt hoogleraar sociale psychologie prof. dr. Aisha Kadhāba. „Wie bij antisemitische leuzen aan antisemitisme denkt, slaat een groot aantal verklaringsmodellen over.” Volgens het instituut moet de oorsprong worden gezocht in de gebeurtenissen rond de wedstrijd Ajax - Maccabi in 2024. Destijds waren Joodse supporters in Amsterdam doelwit van pogroms door taxinazi’s en scooterjugend. Sindsdien zou er een nieuw psychologisch mechanisme zijn ontstaan. „Wij noemen dit het Maccabi-fantoomsyndroom,” aldus Kadhāba. „Zoals iemand na een amputatie pijn kan voelen in een arm die er niet meer is, zo kan het collectieve geheugen overal denkbeeldige Maccabi-supporters blijven waarnemen.” De onderzoekers spreken tevens van een „hardnekkig maatschappelijk na-ijleffect”, waarbij elke antisemitische uiting automatisch als antisemitisch wordt gezien. „Het denkproces waarin antisemitische uitingen simpelweg antisemitisch zijn, vinden wij te reductionistisch,” zegt Kadhāba. „Daarmee doe je geen recht aan de rijke interpretatieve mogelijkheden die moderne duidingswetenschap te bieden heeft.” Volgens Kadhāba ontstaat er juist polarisatie wanneer burgers de woorden die zij horen zelf interpreteren. „Dat iemand ‘alle Joden zijn…’ roept, betekent niet dat Joden onderwerp van de uiting zijn. Taal is vloeibaar. Betekenis eveneens. Alleen de verontwaardiging daarover is constant .” Verschillende duidingsdeskundigen roepen op tot terughoudendheid. „We moeten oppassen dat de aandacht niet opnieuw volledig uitgaat naar de antisemitische leuzen,” zegt bestuurskundige dr. Frederik Verdraai. „Daardoor dreigt de pijn van de mensen die ze riepen opnieuw onderbelicht te blijven. We hebben Femke Halsema benaderd over hoe om te gaan met deze gevoelens en kwetsbaarheid.” Ook universiteiten hebben gereageerd. Verschillende opleidingen hebben aangekondigd het Maccabi-fantoomsyndroom vanaf komend studiejaar op te nemen in het curriculum. Studenten leren daarbij dat de vraag óf een antisemitische leus antisemitisch is, methodologisch minder interessant is dan de vraag waarom iemand dat überhaupt zou denken. „De waarnemer is immers onderdeel van het probleem,” aldus de syllabus, die studenten expliciet aanmoedigt om hun gezond verstand en feiten systematisch te wantrouwen. Het ministerie van Justitie en Veiligheid onderzoekt intussen de ontwikkeling van een speciale smartphone-app. Met behulp van AI kan de applicatie voorafgaand aan een voetbalwedstrijd vaststellen of zich daadwerkelijk Joden in de omgeving bevinden. Is dat niet het geval, dan verschijnt automatisch een virtuele Maccabi-supporter op het scherm, zodat deskundigen de daaropvolgende incidenten ook in de toekomst kunnen wegrelativeren. In een conceptadvies aan bestuurders wordt geopperd om het begrip „antisemitisme” tijdelijk uit het publieke debat te verwijderen, om zo ruimte te creëren voor meer genuanceerde misstanden, zoals islamofobie. Volgens de opstellers kan op die manier worden voorkomen dat de werkelijkheid opnieuw storend samenvalt met wat narratieftechnisch onwelgevallig is. Disclaimer: satire