|
On July 14 2015 00:32 bookwyrm wrote:
No! Thats YOUR methodological premise.
ill give you a proposal for modest progressivist policy changes when you give me a ruthless critique of everything existing
Show me you are capable of real critical thought (ie outline a real problem for no easy feel good answer) and I will show that I can think 'pragmatically'
You want him to give a ruthless critique of everything existing throughout the entire world before you'll even explain on a basic level what you think should actually be done?
You seem like a reasonable guy.
|
On July 14 2015 00:32 bookwyrm wrote:
No! Thats YOUR methodological premise.
ill give you a proposal for modest progressivist policy changes when you give me a ruthless critique of everything existing
Show me you are capable of real critical thought (ie outline a real problem for no easy feel good answer) and I will show that I can think 'pragmatically'
I think you're the one who's shown you're incapable of critical thought. I've admitted that the current state of affairs is deeply flawed, brought up solutions which I know to be limited in scope, I've agreed that the current state of affairs in fact creates as you've said (at least partially) the hunger problem, I've agreed that the way it's handled benefits the richer countries which you've described as neoimperialism, yet you continue to accuse me of "refus[ing] to acknowledge the way in which aid in fact creates the problem it purports to solve". And at this point you're asking me to showing that I'm capable of critical thought before you actually open up and give me some content. How do you have so much to hide?
My friend... there is no question in my mind that your heart is in the right place, but this is a shit show.
|
Yes, thats what I want. I do believe that that is the way to proceed. Otherwise you are just trapped in the dead thought of others
|
|
|
On July 14 2015 00:40 bookwyrm wrote:
Yes, thats what I want. I do believe that that is the way to proceed. Otherwise you are just trapped in the dead thought of others
Everything you've ever said or done is stupid and I have all of the answers. But before i'll tell you anything you must tell me right now what the last number of pi is.
I think this is reasonable because if you can't it shows that you cannot understand even basic logical ideas.
|
Well I'm done. I'll happily discuss this with others 
|
What you wont even respond to my policy suggestion???
also youre a hypocrite... at no point have you made a policy suggestion... youve just made vague appeals to pragmatism and gradual change...
weve been arguing purely at the level of methodology so its pure hypocrisy to accuse me of failing to make concrete proposals...
Glass houses man. Im going back through the thread and youve literally never said a single specific thing about what you think should be done. You just say 'concrete specific proposals shoild be made!!' Which is not in itself a concrete proposal
So here's my proposal. Eliminate all us govt subsidies to agriculture. That means water subsidy and everything. Implement a true free market in ag sector. Then peg minimum wage to food inflation. Balls in your court bro
please respond so you dont forfeit your own game as soon as I agree to play!
|
it depends how anal you want to be about the definition of altruism. most people would think of it as volunteering your time for a charity, donating money, etc. This is all inherently good, unless you're one of those retards who pisses and moans that companies get tax credits for charity, or that it's only (arbitrary percentage) of this company's total revenue, or that it's only done for PR purposes, etc.
if you expand altruism to things you think are good (ie. Adrian Peterson whoopin his kid for his own good) then this obviously does not hold up well at all.
|
On July 14 2015 00:46 bookwyrm wrote:
please respond so you dont forfeit your own game as soon as I agree to play!
If somebody asks you if you want to play a game of basketball you probably shouldn't spend an hour throwing dog shit on the court and then agree to play right as the other person figures out that you're not interested in playing.
Just saying.
|
This shit flinging is mutual. And he hasnt lived up to his own challenge which is infuriating
But youre right. The relentless TINAism of the TL population puts me in a bad affect and im not at my most charming. Thank god this place is actually very politically regressive and the male gamer demographic is not representative of the world at large. Back to the forest for me. I dont think dj is actually going to ever present one of those conccrete suggestions he values so highly- not sure hes capable of it so i wont hold my breath
|
On July 14 2015 01:17 bookwyrm wrote:
This shit flinging is mutual. And he hasnt lived up to his own challenge which is infuriating
The shit flinging is mutual because you initiated it and he responded with more. He hasn't "lived up to his own challenge" because what you were asking for is completely unreasonable becuase he asked for you to put forward a proposition for what could be done about world and how it could be done and you asked him to make a ruthless critique of everything wrong in the world. Those two things are nowhere near the same level. That's like me asking for you to lend to me 20 bucks and you telling me that before you'll do that I need you to crash at my place for 4 months and that it's hypocritical if I don't.
Yet all of that doesn't really matter. If I knew a real world solution to a problem like world hunger I wouldn't demand that other people have to put forward their ideas first so I can criticize them. I would put my idea forward the first opportunity I could because if it's a good idea then it'll spread. If it's a bad idea it'll be criticized and i'll either need to rework it or abandon it. Which is fine. I'd rather be shown to be mistaken about something rather than continue being mistaken in secret.
Now you might ask me why am I not putting forward a real world solution to world hunger. It's because I don't know (and it's fine not to know) how to fix it but i'm not implying that I do. But you seem to be implying that you do know. So here's your opportunity to put up or shut up.
On July 14 2015 01:17 bookwyrm wrote:But youre right. The relentless TINAism of the TL population puts me in a bad affect and im not at my most charming. Thank god this place is actually very politically regressive and the male gamer demographic is not representative of the world at large. Back to the forest for me. I dont think dj is actually going to ever present one of those conccrete suggestions he values so highly- not sure hes capable of it so i wont hold my breath
It's really sad when the people that know how to fix everything decide not to share with the rest of humanity because other people are not sharing what are (according to the know it all) bad ideas because reasons.
|
Ive never claimed I knew how to fix everything!! Ive claimed precisely the opposite!!
this entire argument started when I said that critique comes first before you can even begin to contemplate proposing solutions. And then dj said that if you dont have a policy solution your critique is invalid. How can you go around accusing me of the thing i was arguing against???
I dont understand you people
|
On July 13 2015 14:47 bookwyrm wrote:
shrug. if you're not willing to commit violence in order to create a better world, you're complicit with the violence that already exists. it's a lose lose situation. welcome to reality. this is what i mean when i say there are real problems with the world.
only the retaliatory use of physical force against humans is moral.
initiating the use of force against a human is against the fundamental nature of what makes us human.
"moralists" classify this as "evil". which just adds emotional fuel to a very subtle and tricky issue making it even more difficult to discuss than it already is.
the fundamental nature of a human is "rational animal".
i'm not even going to bring up Francisco D'anconia though ... or even Ludwig Von Mises because that would drag this way off topic.
|
It is irrational for a supposedly "rational" being to posit the boundaries of his own rationality.
|
humans act against their fundamental nature all the time.
|
Humans can't know their own fundamental nature.
|
ah , the old.. "i know that i know nothing" thing
it is up to humans to discover their fundamental nature.. and it is not an easy thing to do.
this is why things like the Declaration of Independence and the novel The Fountainhead are such incredible achievements.
but we're going way off topic here.
back on topic... if human fundamental nature is unknowable than the question of altruism is unanswerable.
this morning an elderly lady was having a problem carrying a small package to the info/kiosk/security desk of my #1 customer... seeing her struggle.. i carried it for her.... am i an altruist?
EDIT: just noticed we have a casualty on the forum battlefied.. bookwyrm is no longer with us.
|
I hope I don't have this blood on my hands.
Edit: Looks this thread pushed him over the line. RIP 
|
Baa?21245 Posts
|
@TinaTurner- Is this really altruism though? Or is this just a a more generalized self interest because they expect the favor to be repaid?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
