The Tragedy of Cultural Relativism

Started by pr126, January 11, 2019, 01:30:43 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

pr126

@ PickelledEggs

You have decided long ago that everything I post are lies and garbage.

Why do you even click on them and read?
Would it not be better to ignore them and save yourself the trouble?

There is an ignore button on the forum.
Unless you think that I am posting for you personally? No, I don't.


Cavebear

Quote from: pr126 on January 12, 2019, 01:36:53 AM
@ PickelledEggs

You have decided long ago that everything I post are lies and garbage.

Why do you even click on them and read?
Would it not be better to ignore them and save yourself the trouble?

There is an ignore button on the forum.
Unless you think that I am posting for you personally? No, I don't.

The ignore button is a last resort.  And not really an option for an Administrator.  They have to read even YOUR ultra-right posts.
Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead!

pr126

That's a new one. Ultra-right. A notch up from far right.

Can I best Hitler? 

Cavebear

Quote from: pr126 on January 12, 2019, 01:47:11 AM
That's a new one. Ultra-right. A notch up from far right.

Can I best Hitler?

Beats me.  Are you trying?  But of course he was a Socialist.  You do seem right of him.  Do you deny Hitler was a Socialist?
Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead!

pr126

Quote from: Cavebear on January 12, 2019, 01:51:42 AM
Beats me.  Are you trying?  But of course he was a Socialist.  You do seem right of him.  Do you deny Hitler was a Socialist?

Not at all. Socialist are leftist.

The EU is socialist.



Cavebear

Quote from: pr126 on January 12, 2019, 02:12:13 AM
Not at all. Socialist are leftist.

The EU is socialist.

Do you forget that NAZI stands for "National Socialism" and that Hitler took control of the industries for the purpose of the State?  How is that not "socialism"?  The Nazis and the Communists were not all that far apart is methods or approaches.
Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead!

pr126

Quote from: Cavebear on January 12, 2019, 02:22:31 AM
Do you forget that NAZI stands for "National Socialism" and that Hitler took control of the industries for the purpose of the State?  How is that not "socialism"?  The Nazis and the Communists were not all that far apart is methods or approaches.

Context.

QuoteDo you deny Hitler was a Socialist?

My reply was:
Not at all. Socialist are leftist.

Baruch

I think you both oppose authoritarianism.  But I think Cavebear is more open to materialist progressivism (aka an iPhone is progress, even while people don't make much progress at all).

Both Hitler and Stalin were socialist, so was Trotsky.  But communism was carefully defined to not be socialism.  Communism involves the elimination of private property, which Stalin did but Hitler did not.  That was the propaganda for the Cold War, but not earlier.  Socialism has more than one form, one of which is communism.  Hitler's nationalist militant racist socialism was ... horrendous too.

Really both went wrong by being authoritarian.  Without that, they would have both been raving lunatics on a street corner.

individualism and society's interests will be balanced one way or the other.  I think most of us prefer something relatively free from our personal lives.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Cavebear

Quote from: pr126 on January 12, 2019, 02:27:50 AM
Context.


My reply was:
Not at all. Socialist are leftist.

Are you serious that you don't understand that Hitler was a National Socialist?  I didn't realize that.  The only real difference between NAZIs and the Soviets was that the Nazis wanted to expend their Socialism along Aryan racial lines and the Soviets thought of Socialism internationally through the Workers.

They are basically the same...
Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead!

Baruch

Quote from: Cavebear on January 12, 2019, 02:34:34 AM
Are you serious that you don't understand that Hitler was a National Socialist?  I didn't realize that.  The only real difference between NAZIs and the Soviets was that the Nazis wanted to expend their Socialism along Aryan racial lines and the Soviets thought of Socialism internationally through the Workers.

They are basically the same...

Both embrace the idea that the means justify the ends (agree with those ends or not) ... including mass violence.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Cavebear

Quote from: Baruch on January 12, 2019, 02:31:14 AM
I think you both oppose authoritarianism.  But I think Cavebear is more open to materialist progressivism (aka an iPhone is progress, even while people don't make much progress at all).

Both Hitler and Stalin were socialist, so was Trotsky.  But communism was carefully defined to not be socialism.  Communism involves the elimination of private property, which Stalin did but Hitler did not.  That was the propaganda for the Cold War, but not earlier.  Socialism has more than one form, one of which is communism.  Hitler's nationalist militant racist socialism was ... horrendous too.

Really both went wrong by being authoritarian.  Without that, they would have both been raving lunatics on a street corner.

individualism and society's interests will be balanced one way or the other.  I think most of us prefer something relatively free from our personal lives.

Well I'll be damned.  Another rare sensible and well-thought-out post from Baruch.

First, thank you.

Second, I don't think of iPhones as the example of progressivism.  That's a materialism concept.  I'm more into better heath care and honest political elections (less gerrymandering and more voter enabling).

But I really do appreciate this post.  You should try to do it more often. 
Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead!

Baruch

Quote from: Cavebear on January 12, 2019, 02:43:38 AM
Well I'll be damned.  Another rare sensible and well-thought-out post from Baruch.

First, thank you.

Second, I don't think of iPhones as the example of progressivism.  That's a materialism concept.  I'm more into better heath care and honest political elections (less gerrymandering and more voter enabling).

But I really do appreciate this post.  You should try to do it more often.

Then you fit here as badly as I do.  Most here are hard core materialists (ontology) and adhere to a materialist version of teleology ... that per Aristotle, the oak tree is the means that an acorn uses to make more acorns, so is fire a means by which oxygen makes more carbon monoxide.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Cavebear

Quote from: Baruch on January 12, 2019, 08:09:38 AM
Then you fit here as badly as I do.  Most here are hard core materialists (ontology) and adhere to a materialist version of teleology ... that per Aristotle, the oak tree is the means that an acorn uses to make more acorns, so is fire a means by which oxygen makes more carbon monoxide.

You could get away with the acorn analogy, but not the fire one.  The first has a direct relation between tree and seed.  The latter is the opposite of what is wants.  But, if you wish, support the oxygen analogy more.  No one is watching except everyone.
Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead!

Baruch

Quote from: Cavebear on January 12, 2019, 09:21:44 AM
You could get away with the acorn analogy, but not the fire one.  The first has a direct relation between tree and seed.  The latter is the opposite of what is wants.  But, if you wish, support the oxygen analogy more.  No one is watching except everyone.

It was a contrast.  Unbeliever made a post under the evolution thread, about "chemical evolution".  I countered with "chemical change".  Molecules don't have competition for mates (a big part of evolution).  So a careless use of verbiage, or NewSpeak.  Your guess is as good as mine.

Now I don't support universal teleology (something bigger than living being or molecular) ... that is Aristotle's analogy (over generalization).  I do think that teleology applies partially to living beings, particularly conscious beings.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Cavebear

Quote from: Baruch on January 12, 2019, 11:38:13 AM
It was a contrast.  Unbeliever made a post under the evolution thread, about "chemical evolution".  I countered with "chemical change".  Molecules don't have competition for mates (a big part of evolution).  So a careless use of verbiage, or NewSpeak.  Your guess is as good as mine.

Now I don't support universal teleology (something bigger than living being or molecular) ... that is Aristotle's analogy (over generalization).  I do think that teleology applies partially to living beings, particularly conscious beings.

Well, given my interest in evolution, my guess is actually better then yours.  BUT allowing for basic "nothing to something" about evolution, the increase to intelligence is a more macro debate. 

I can sure say I have more neurons than the chimps, but that doesn't perforce prove why I am typing here and a chimp isn't. 
Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead!