Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: still between a rock and a hard place

Expand Messages
  • tc
    ... So I need an epistemology (a right to believe what I believe is true) that the claim to value viability does not exist in an atheist positioned
    Message 1 of 7 , Feb 24, 2010
      > I think you need to establish the basis for your claims that somehow
      > epistemology must precede what is there.

      So I need an epistemology (a right to believe what I believe is true) that the claim to value viability does not exist in an atheist positioned existentialism without Marxism? Sartre was a communist because his existentialism had no method to appropriate any values. None. He moved away from it as anything other than an artistic expression of the human condition. Levy was too stupid to understand that.

      The capacity to accumulate wealth in not genetic. Utterly stupid idea. It's all just gambling for good highs, and sorrow avoidance. The most addicted gamble the most, in fact now they are willing to risk everything that anyone else could ever have. The accumulation of wealth is slovenly, and a materialist requires the management of it for the sake of people who actually are not lazy. A lot of American children are crack-babies allegorically. Nice future. A lot of Americans are utterly faddist and fat, in all their endeavors, often even their science. Bankers jump out windows in economic meltdowns because they are lazy, lazy in all things even their anthropomorphism. That my friend is apostasy in humanist terms, and pathetic.

      Philosophy is either theist or idealist. The whole concept of epistemology makes that obvious, in fact is THE THING that makes it obvious. Existentialism does not exist as a non-theist philosophy; it is without its theist basis a Marxism, an idealism.

      Values. Values. Values. Oops the planet is gone. That is absurd. Or maybe the universe is a slot machine?

      Be a materialist or a theist; I don't care which, because either one can improve things for the species; but don't argue that you are neither because that would be a less than human condition. Apostate in religious terms and in humanist terms. It is coming down to clans, and there are only two, and choices to work together in spite of that. Why is that surprising? Ancient systems presented women as materialist and men as religious. Why is that surprising? Make a choice "existentialist". You're either a commie or a catholic - if you're still human. Neither one shirks the responsibility of wealth management, or the regulation of science. So what the hell is an American these days?

      tc
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.