Egyptian Revolution Was Against Neoliberalism- The Best Opinion Piece I've Seen In A While
505 replies, posted
How do you not forget to breathe?
All you have is perception. You have nothing but perception. How you see and perceive things is only that. You do not know the definite nature of anything because you're based only on your perception.
[editline]8th March 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Strider*;28501414]Yes.[/QUOTE]
As much as i agree every human bases every action on purely selfish motivations, that doesn't mean outright selfishness and greed is a good thing. You're still acting like people can't be corrupted, if people held greed to be a core principle, more than we already do, what do you suppose the effect would be?
[editline]8th March 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Strider*;28501072]Mirrored Ayn Rand? I'm defending the teachings of Objectivism on my own premises.
Besides, she didn't formulate the laws of identity that would be Aristotle.
If my conscious exists then there must be something to be conscious of or I would not be conscious.
Think about that.[/QUOTE]
That is literally what we heard in metaphysis 101 first day, within 5 minutes. Way to go man, you just repeated a fucked up view of objectivism and descartes my teacher said to explain how messed up people can interpret this shit.
Your consciousness exists, but what does that mean? You do realize that our brains aren't magic and our identity are JUST chemical reactions and neuro transmissions, it means that at a level, you're just reactions. That's just one line of thought.
Your consciousness exists but what does that mean? Your ability to think only demonstrates you can think, not that you exist as a physical form. Not that you exist as an objective form. Only that you exist in some perception.
[editline]8th March 2011[/editline]
You're using a line of thought of "we know enough and we can account for enough to be certain". Something, that literally every day since that line of thought has first existed since the dawn of man, been disproven wrong by progress at every stage.
My line of view is based on "I really don't know shit all but my perception". What seems more realistic for one fucking man on earth to know?
[QUOTE=The LocalFlavor;28501295]so you think people should all be selfish and greedy and it's perfectly good?[/QUOTE]
he also thinks a global cabal of ex-hippies (who somehow have enough money to creating and disseminate enough false scientific studies to rival the pr departments of global conglomerates) propagates the idea of anthropogenic climate change because they want to destroy individuality (apparently that's a real motive that people actually have irl)
[editline]a[/editline]
like it totally defused my desire to argue with him because there's only sport in engaging people whose beliefs are tethered, at least somewhat, with reality because you are able to demand of them certain agreements. but arguing with someone who has straight-up let go of the golden cord of reason is like trying to punch smoke
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;28503459]Your ability to think only demonstrates you can think, not that you exist as a physical form. Not that you exist as an objective form. Only that you exist in some perception.
[/QUOTE]
Okay you actually have a solidified and correct understanding of Descartes.
I agree with you 150 % though, the only thing we can be sure of is that we exist not necessarily in physical form or even in the realm we perceive ourselves to be. But the very nature of existence requires there to be something to be conscious of and the act of existing requires a definite nature to provide distinction from non-existence.
As far as the brain in a vat argument goes it only discounts the idea of relying solely on sensory perception to seek out knowledge. In fact the argument implies that we simply have mistaken reality but in order for us to have made that mistake there must then exist the true reality that is definite to compare to.
The argument really shouldn't lie in the existence of definite reality but how we become aware of it i.e
epistemology.
damn, broke my automerge
ILL GET YOU INDIVIDUALISTS FOR THIS
[QUOTE=Strider*;28503842]Okay you actually have a solidified and correct understanding of Descartes.
I agree with you 150 % though, the only thing we can be sure of is that we exist not necessarily in physical form or even in the realm we perceive ourselves to be. But the very nature of existence requires there to be something to be conscious of and the act of existing requires a definite nature to provide distinction from non-existence.
As far as the brain in a vat argument goes it only discounts the idea of relying solely on sensory perception to seek out knowledge. In fact the argument implies that we simply have mistaken reality but in order for us to have made that mistake there must then exist the true reality that is definite to compare to.
The argument really shouldn't lie in the existence of definite reality but how we become aware of it i.e
epistemology.[/QUOTE]
if im like you at 47 i'm going to kill myself
you're worse than glaber, and he's 24. age has actually caused you to regress.
glaber ain't 24 that guy 5
Does he also think Hillary Clinton is a Lizard?
[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;28503771]he also thinks a global cabal of ex-hippies (who somehow have enough money to creating and disseminate enough false scientific studies to rival the pr departments of global conglomerates) propagates the idea of anthropogenic climate change because they want to destroy individuality (apparently that's a real motive that people actually have irl)[/QUOTE]
The hippies were the ones who were exploited into following the asinine peace movement by the Marxist power struggle. The motive behind the leaders but not the masses of the movement was to further the global communist cause.
Shortly after the end of the Vietnam war the train had lost steam and like all revolutions it needed a spark to reignite the undeterred masses into furthering its agenda.
The environmental or ecology movement serves as that spark.
[editline]9th March 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=The LocalFlavor;28503891]Does he also think Hillary Clinton is a Lizard?[/QUOTE]
No.
peace movements are asinine?
[QUOTE=Strider*;28503895]The hippies were the ones who were exploited into following the asinine peace movement by the Marxist power struggle. The motive behind the leaders but not the masses of the movement was to further the global communist cause.
Shortly after the end of the Vietnam war the train had lost steam and like all revolutions it needed a spark to reignite the undeterred masses into furthering its agenda.
The environmental or ecology movement serves as that spark.[/QUOTE]
global cabal of hippies, global cabal of marxists, pretty much if your theory ever involves a global cabal you've gotta take a step back and reevaluate your view of the world
[QUOTE=Strider*;28503895]No.[/QUOTE]
see, he doesn't even believe the one conspiracy theory that's actually true
[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;28503931]global cabal of hippies, global cabal of marxists, pretty much if your theory ever involves a global cabal you've gotta take a step back and reevaluate your view of the world[/QUOTE]
It's not much of a conspiracy most environmentalist leaders are not reluctant to admit their goals.
[QUOTE=Strider*;28503980]It's not much of a conspiracy most environmentalist leaders are not reluctant to admit their goals.[/QUOTE]
...to save the world from horrendous environmental effects.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;28504014]...to save the world from horrendous environmental effects.[/QUOTE]
no you're not looking at it right. if you cover your left eye and turn your head you'd see that those are just codewords for "destroy individuality because 'destroying individuality' is a real motive that real people actually have, honest"
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;28504014]...to save the world from horrendous environmental effects.[/QUOTE]
"Free Enterprise really means rich people get richer. They have the freedom to exploit and psychologically rape their fellow human beings in the process . . . Capitalism is destroying the earth." Helen Caldicott - Union of Concerned Scientists
"The only real good technology is no technology at all. Technology is taxation without representation, imposed by our elitist species (man) upon the rest of the natural world" - John Stuttleworth
"The answer to global warming is in the abolition of private property and production for human need. A socialist world would place an enormous priority an alternative energy sources. This is what ecologically-minded socialists have been exploring for quite some time now." - Louis Proyect, Columbia University
[QUOTE=Strider*;28504058]"Free Enterprise really means rich people get richer. They have the freedom to exploit and psychologically rape their fellow human beings in the process . . . Capitalism is destroying the earth." Helen Caldicott - Union of Concerned Scientists
"The only real good technology is no technology at all. Technology is taxation without representation, imposed by our elitist species (man) upon the rest of the natural world" - John Stuttleworth
"The answer to global warming is in the abolition of private property and production for human need. A socialist world would place an enormous priority an alternative energy sources. This is what ecologically-minded socialists have been exploring for quite some time now." - Louis Proyect, Columbia University[/QUOTE]
1. Capitalism does mean the rich get richer... You argue that yourself. I wouldn't say it's destroying things. But not helping.
2. That's honestly horse shit and I think who ever said it is an idiot for that.
3. Yeah, we SHOULD be looking for alternate energy. We should be doing anything but fossil fuels. We should be doing nuclear and a bunch of other things, but NOT fossil fuels, I hope to god you don't defend that too...
[QUOTE=Strider*;28504058]"Free Enterprise really means rich people get richer. They have the freedom to exploit and psychologically rape their fellow human beings in the process . . . Capitalism is destroying the earth." Helen Caldicott - Union of Concerned Scientists
"The only real good technology is no technology at all. Technology is taxation without representation, imposed by our elitist species (man) upon the rest of the natural world" - John Stuttleworth
"The answer to global warming is in the abolition of private property and production for human need. A socialist world would place an enormous priority an alternative energy sources. This is what ecologically-minded socialists have been exploring for quite some time now." - Louis Proyect, Columbia University[/QUOTE]
whoa, out of the literally tens of thousands of degreed scientists who support the theory of anthropogenic climate change there might be a few people critical of capitalism amongst them? i bet there are also a few of them who drive Toyotas. THE JAPANESE ARE IN ON IT TOO
college-educated people being liberal, who'd a thunk it
Also, it's still just quote mining bro.
[editline]8th March 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;28504087]whoa, out of the literally tens of thousands of scientists who support the theory of anthropogenic climate change there might be a few people critical of capitalism amongst them?
college-educated people being liberal, who'd a thunk it[/QUOTE]
quote mining is like finding coal in minecraft
it's easy as fuck and no one's impressed that you did it.
You're just leeching off the opinions of dead people.
I'm simply pointing out that is not overly ridiculous to believe that at the least a select group of ecologists intend to use environmentalism for the ends of socialism or vice versa.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;28504089]
quote mining is like finding coal in minecraft
it's easy as fuck and no one's impressed that you did it.[/QUOTE]
cept for when you gotta find surface coal on your first day lest you be blown up and eaten come nightfall
i bet there's a metaphor in there but i'm not really feeling up to divining it
[QUOTE=Strider*;28504110]I'm simply pointing out that is not overly ridiculous to believe that at the least a select group of ecologists intend to use environmentalism for the ends of socialism or vice versa.[/QUOTE]
But there are just as many problems with people who preach what you believe in.
People all over are fucked up and fuck up many things.
[editline]8th March 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;28504118]cept for when you gotta find surface coal on your first day lest you be blown up and eaten come nightfall
i bet there's a metaphor in there but i'm not really feeling up to divining it[/QUOTE]
:350:
deep man, deep
[QUOTE=Strider*;28504110]I'm simply pointing out that is not overly ridiculous to believe that at the least a select group of ecologists intend to use environmentalism for the ends of socialism or vice versa.[/QUOTE]
no it is because the scientific community runs on peer-review and the comparison of competing studies by separate groups, so unless a majority shared that view, then no it's not plausible
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;28504132]But there are just as many problems with people who preach what you believe in.
People all over are fucked up and fuck up many things.[/QUOTE]
You know what I'm going to agree with you.
I'll just leave it at that most ecologists are naive.
[QUOTE=Strider*;28504145]
I'll just leave it at that most ecologists are naive.[/QUOTE]
that's certainly a flat note to leave it at considering that statement comes apropos of no evidence or qualification other than "a few of them be socialists"
[QUOTE=Strider*;28504145]You know what I'm going to agree with you.
I'll just leave it at that most ecologists are naive.[/QUOTE]
I wouldn't say most, or even a good portion.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.