|
|
Post by Matheus on Jun 22, 2006 20:53:00 GMT -5
Matheus, thanks for the reminder. Heh? I'm drunk, remember. |
|
|
|
Post by pauledwardwagemann on Jun 22, 2006 20:53:05 GMT -5
Matheus, thanks for the reminder. My lack of understanding you say? What is it that I am lacking to understand? The words 'left wing' and 'liberal' do exist right? These words are founded on some ideological grounds, no? So then why weasle out of the question and say, "Uh, well its all kinda murky really, we are actually abunch of undecisive, confused dipshits who cant agree on anything so...um, therefore we do not actually exist--yeah, yeah, that's right. We are undefinable, and therefore we do not have to have a confrontation with you..." I'm asking Mary to show that she has the gift--ooops, I forgot, I'm not allowed to use the word gift either, since "miracle" is another idea that is 'undefinable'--so I'm asking Mary to stand up and say, yes, I do have a mind. I am capable of perceiving the universe and thinking about things and make judgements about them and define terms and so and so forth...instead of all this "Well a soul is the botom of my shoe" gibberish she's trying to feed me... |
|
|
|
Post by Matheus on Jun 22, 2006 20:54:51 GMT -5
Matt - we may not agree about abortion, but on a fundemental level we're not that different. I think we both want to believe in things, but just can't make that final leap, I know I can't. In keeping with my shitty mood, I'm left to just once again quote Adam Duritz ... believe in me, 'cause I don't believe in anything, and I want to be someone who believes ...
God, I love Jack & Coke. Good quote. BTW, we don't really disagree on abortion that much... I see your point of view, and in many ways I agree with it, but I'm trying to believe in something... |
|
|
|
Post by kmc on Jun 22, 2006 21:21:21 GMT -5
Yeah, this place is grad central. Not that it matters. I can't prove souls exist. My doctorate in English will be worthless.
|
|
|
|
Post by kmc on Jun 22, 2006 21:22:26 GMT -5
Fucking liberals, always believing liberal things. Why don't you think for yourselves instead of letting the Democrats tell you what to think, right PEW?
You sure have us pegged.
|
|
|
|
Post by Matheus on Jun 22, 2006 21:25:34 GMT -5
Matheus, thanks for the reminder. My lack of understanding you say? What is it that I am lacking to understand? The words 'left wing' and 'liberal' do exist right? These words are founded on some ideological grounds, no? So then why weasle out of the question and say, "Uh, well its all kinda murky really, we are actually abunch of undecisive, confused dipshits who cant agree on anything so...um, therefore we do not actually exist--yeah, yeah, that's right. We are undefinable, and therefore we do not have to have a confrontation with you..." I'm asking Mary to show that she has the gift--ooops, I forgot, I'm not allowed to use the word gift either, since "miracle" is another idea that is 'undefinable'--so I'm asking Mary to stand up and say, yes, I do have a mind. I am capable of perceiving the universe and thinking about things and make judgements about them and define terms and so and so forth...instead of all this "Well a soul is the botom of my shoe" gibberish she's trying to feed me... Why all the picking on Mary? School is the hardest thing ever... it challeges you to no end... and she has a PhD. I have nothing but respect for that. I'm not even through my associates degree and I know how much school makes you think about the world, and Mary isn't the type to just sail through anything. I'm sure it challenged her as much as it did me. Not that the work was ever hard, but the thought process. She's been nothing but respectful, and as far as I can tell, you've treated her like nothing but shit because she disagrees with you. For that, you get a big fucking F. |
|
|
|
Post by Mary on Jun 22, 2006 21:28:33 GMT -5
Let me put it this way--I know you like to fog things up (kinda like Ken) by clouding things over by saying such and such is undefinable. And that's fine. If you want to think its impossible to define soul or impossible to define a Leftist party line or impossbile to define every other thing I've tried talking to you about, then that's your right. But Jesus it seems like that is just an excuse so that you dont have to actually take a HONEST look at an opposing opinion. Sure, anytime someone enters a territory in which my line of thinking is challenged or has loopholes in its logic I could just as easily start declaring that everything is undefinable too. I could say its impossible to define Women's rights because every woman is an individual and no two women are in the exact same sitauation and some women have had sex change operations and there are some androgenous people who are born with both the male and female genetailia and then there are those simese twins connected at the ass, one a boy and one a female, so how can they/it have woman's rights, and so and so on. But where does that really get me? For practical purposes, most people think about things, examine them, come to understand them somewhat and then define them (if even on a temporary basis). So in the spirit of co-operation, in the spirit of progress, shit, in the spirit of entertainment, can you at least try to imagine a leftwing party line--imagine any issue out there and then imagine what the leftist ideology would think about that issue-- and then can you tell me of one single thing you have ever disagreed about in regard to that party line. I don't know what you're asking me. I'm not being disingenuous. First you asked me if there was anything I disagreed with "liberal Democrats" about, and I told you I disagreed with them about nearly everything, because I'm way to their left. I answered your question in a completely straightforward manner. Now you're asking me about an imaginary "leftwing party line" and whether I disagree with any of it. Well, since it's completely imaginary, of course I don't disagree with any of it, because I'm the one making it up. So I'm honestly totally confused about what you want. I disagree with typical American liberals about many things, though. Their whole approach to the world seems to be based on a piecemeal reformist approach to taming the most excessively harsh and brutal effects of capitalism. I think there's a real self-delusion involved here, which refuses to critically examine capitalism itself. My perspective is that capitalism is necessarily and fundamentally unjust. Good luck finding a single American Democrat who will agree with that position. That position on economics is fundamental to my entire world outlook, and it makes me feel totally alienated from American politics, because free-market capitalism is a totally unquestioned premise of the American system, whether you're a Republican or a Democrat. As for whether I seriously try to understand opposing viewpoints, yes, that's part of my job and I take it seriously. This is where you're simply out of your element - I suspect even chrisfan, wherever she is, will tell you that I really do make a sincere effort to understand the conservative position. First of all, I seriously read conservative thinkers. I don't mean Ann Coulter. She's not a thinker. But I read Leo Strauss, Allan Bloom, Edmund Burke, Joseph de Maistre, Oakeshott, Hayek, Milton Friedman, Alasdair MacIntyre, etc etc. I think many of these people are brilliant thinkers and I take them very seriously. Secondly, on nearly every single political issue, I consider what the basis of the opposing viewpoint is. I've thought this through very seriously on abortion, and what's ironic here is that I've made dozens of statements on this board about the basis of a pro-life position, and said dozens of times that I respect that position and don't expect anyone with that position to be persuaded by my logic because there's a fundamental disconnect on how we view the fetus, whereas you have consistently refused to even try to understand the pro-choice viewpoint, and you've responded to it again and again by insinuating that anyone who is pro-choice is cold, clinical, pessimistic, evil, and narrow-minded, to name just a few of your select insults. I would have to say that my attitude to abortion appears far more open-minded in its willingness to try to understand my philosophical opponents than yours, yet you want credit as the "independent" thinker simply because you're not towing some imaginary "Democratic" party line. The measure of your open-mindedness is not the positions you ultimately take. It is your ability to imagine the world through the mind of someone who thinks differently. And I would say that I do this all the time, whereas so far you have displayed not one iota of self-doubt. That makes you the narrow-minded ideologue, my friend. M |
|
|
|
Post by strat-0 on Jun 22, 2006 21:32:31 GMT -5
Isn't Dr. Drum also a Ph.D.? There's three. We should link to MENSA! Alas, I have but a lowly BS in education. Grad school just hasn't been that alluring, nor necessary.
But one can learn in many ways.
|
|
|
|
Post by kmc on Jun 22, 2006 21:34:47 GMT -5
Of course, strat! No one doubts your mental pedigree. We're all a bunch of smart bastards here. Why else would we argue with each other?
|
|
|
|
Post by sisyphus on Jun 22, 2006 21:37:09 GMT -5
me too. lowly b.f.a. i need to get my ass back to school..
|
|
|
|
Post by sisyphus on Jun 22, 2006 21:38:34 GMT -5
Matt - we may not agree about abortion, but on a fundemental level we're not that different. I think we both want to believe in things, but just can't make that final leap, I know I can't. In keeping with my shitty mood, I'm left to just once again quote Adam Duritz ... believe in me, 'cause I don't believe in anything, and I want to be someone who believes ...
i second that sentiment... |
|
|
|
Post by pauledwardwagemann on Jun 22, 2006 21:42:40 GMT -5
I don't know what you're asking me. I'm not being disingenuous. First you asked me if there was anything I disagreed with "liberal Democrats" about, and I told you I disagreed with them about nearly everything, because I'm way to their left. I answered your question in a completely straightforward manner. Now you're asking me about an imaginary "leftwing party line" and whether I disagree with any of it. Well, since it's completely imaginary, of course I don't disagree with any of it, because I'm the one making it up. So I'm honestly totally confused about what you want. I disagree with typical American liberals about many things, though. Their whole approach to the world seems to be based on a piecemeal reformist approach to taming the most excessively harsh and brutal effects of capitalism. I think there's a real self-delusion involved here, which refuses to critically examine capitalism itself. My perspective is that capitalism is necessarily and fundamentally unjust. Good luck finding a single American Democrat who will agree with that position. That position on economics is fundamental to my entire world outlook, and it makes me feel totally alienated from American politics, because free-market capitalism is a totally unquestioned premise of the American system, whether you're a Republican or a Democrat. As for whether I seriously try to understand opposing viewpoints, yes, that's part of my job and I take it seriously. This is where you're simply out of your element - I suspect even chrisfan, wherever she is, will tell you that I really do make a sincere effort to understand the conservative position. First of all, I seriously read conservative thinkers. I don't mean Ann Coulter. She's not a thinker. But I read Leo Strauss, Allan Bloom, Edmund Burke, Joseph de Maistre, Oakeshott, Hayek, Milton Friedman, Alasdair MacIntyre, etc etc. I think many of these people are brilliant thinkers and I take them very seriously. Secondly, on nearly every single political issue, I consider what the basis of the opposing viewpoint is. I've thought this through very seriously on abortion, and what's ironic here is that I've made dozens of statements on this board about the basis of a pro-life position, and said dozens of times that I respect that position and don't expect anyone with that position to be persuaded by my logic because there's a fundamental disconnect on how we view the fetus, whereas you have consistently refused to even try to understand the pro-choice viewpoint, and you've responded to it again and again by insinuating that anyone who is pro-choice is cold, clinical, pessimistic, evil, and narrow-minded, to name just a few of your select insults. I would have to say that my attitude to abortion appears far more open-minded in its willingness to try to understand my philosophical opponents than yours, yet you want credit as the "independent" thinker simply because you're not towing some imaginary "Democratic" party line. The measure of your open-mindedness is not the positions you ultimately take. It is your ability to imagine the world through the mind of someone who thinks differently. And I would say that I do this all the time, whereas so far you have displayed not one iota of self-doubt. That makes you the narrow-minded ideologue, my friend. MSo the only example you are giving me of how your thinking is different from the typical Liberal democrat is that you think captialism is necessary and unjust. This board is mostly Democrats, isnt it? You said I'd be hard pressed to find a Democrat who agrees with you that capitalism is necessarily and fundamentally unjust, so I would like to ask the Democrats here if they disagree with Mary on this? Is there any democrat here who thinks captialism is just? Is there any democrat here who thinks capitalism is unnecessary? |
|
|
|
Post by sisyphus on Jun 22, 2006 21:45:14 GMT -5
mary said: My perspective is that capitalism is necessarily and fundamentally unjust. i think i agree with this, but i'm a little wishy washy on the matter... i'm inclined to say that capitalism, especially on the corporate level, is wrong, but that on a local scale would be more acceptable. Mary, in your opinion, what would be the basis for a more ideal system? Maybe we could start a new thread entitled "ideal government/economic system" or something...
|
|
|
|
Post by Mary on Jun 22, 2006 21:46:44 GMT -5
Huh? I never said anything about whether capitalism was "necessary" or "unnecessary". I said it was necessarily unjust. Once again your reading comprehension skills are lacking.
|
|
|
|
Post by pauledwardwagemann on Jun 22, 2006 21:47:22 GMT -5
mary said: My perspective is that capitalism is necessarily and fundamentally unjust. i think i agree with this, but i'm a little wishy washy on the matter... i'm inclined to say that capitalism, especially on the corporate level, is wrong, but that on a local scale would be more acceptable. Mary, in your opinion, what would be the basis for a more ideal system? Maybe we could start a new thread entitled "ideal government/economic system" or something... Gee, that wasn't so hard to find afterall. Is there anything ELSE that you so vehemently depart ways ftom the typical Liberal democrat way of thinking , Mary? |
|
