Thank you, and happy cake day. I think that if you want to hold that chicken and egg can constitute propositions, then that is a good response. It seems plausible that chicken would be defined in terms of genetics, and since that is unchanged from egg to chicken, the egg came first.

But I of course take the semantic nihilist approach regardless.

Yes that is true, and I think a good idea. But if you know, yourself, that you are below average in bricklaying, or even just average, it might be best to let the people who are best vote.

Yes, I do think there is an obligation to be an informed voter, if you vote, but it is implausible to me that you ought to vote no matter what.

I also say, in the conclusion, that it is up to the individual to judge.

Reposted this, because I had a question in the title. In this post I argue that there is not an obligation to vote, and that uninformed people should not vote. I do this by arguing from an analogy of building a hospital. I defend the analogy, and try to draw out implications of it.

Here I ask the question of which came first, the chicken or the egg. I look at it from 3 angles, a naïve one, one looking at definitions, and a semantic nihilist approach. I conclude that the question has no answer, due to the vagueness of the terms.