General anti-Trump sentiment from SA'ns

daveza

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 5, 2004
Messages
34,185
That's not really true. Reality and therefore truth is objective even though we view and interpret it through our own subjective senses. So a person like rambo can theoretically be conscious and enlightened enough to understand the narratives at play and put himself outside of that if he has enough controls over his emotions. It's difficult and people aren't really good at it but it is possible.

Gravity is a certain objectively truth.

Unless you're a flat-earther.
 
Joined
Nov 6, 2018
Messages
1,252
I agree with the other guy, you are overcomplicating this too much for personal reasons.
I'm not overcomplicating anything. I'm pointing out problems you have to solve if you want to justify your claim that you operate according to objective truth. In fact, it is much more likely that you are simply deluding yourself and deflecting from this delusion by casting aspersions regarding MY motivations.

And just for the record, my only motivation here is to get you to see the tools that you were born with that enable you to engage meaningfully in the world politically, given that the world is embroiled in a culture war. If you want to handicap yourself into irrelevance by becoming a passive consumer, then that's your business and forget I said anything.
 

OrbitalDawn

Ulysses Everett McGill
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
40,356
^ It was your culture war post really... Still, you seem to be saying you have read Andrew's site (only once and out of curiosity)... Perhaps you're more a Drudge, Daily Caller, Pundit kinda guy?

EDIT: Gingerbeardman, this is obviously for rambo919
Strikes me more as a run of the mill right wing YouTube drone. Repeats all the same inane talking points.
 

rambo919

Expert Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2008
Messages
1,816
Says the two that resort to low brow mud slinging instead of actually addressing any issues properly. Character assasination as a main strategy is a clear sign of not being able to defend your own position.
 

rambo919

Expert Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2008
Messages
1,816
I'm not overcomplicating anything. I'm pointing out problems you have to solve if you want to justify your claim that you operate according to objective truth. In fact, it is much more likely that you are simply deluding yourself and deflecting from this delusion by casting aspersions regarding MY motivations.

And just for the record, my only motivation here is to get you to see the tools that you were born with that enable you to engage meaningfully in the world politically, given that the world is embroiled in a culture war. If you want to handicap yourself into irrelevance by becoming a passive consumer, then that's your business and forget I said anything.
I refuse to play by the rules of an enemy that wants to use semantic warfare to dominate my mind especially when those rules change when anthropomorphic entity starts loosing ground. I'm not referring to you btw. I admit that my position is not logically complete but I repeat that I am more able than most to sidestep most narratives due to a strange ability to "smell" most BS.... which tends to make me unpopular.

I can appreciate your position but it comes with a set of blinders namely primarily thinking with the thoughts of dead men.... relying even on live men will always fail you because no mortal man is capable of seeing the big picture properly, all lenses are flawed. Though admittedlty a lot of this is is partly due to me having a terrible memory for details in the long term, patterns and forms are almost all I tend to be able to retain.
 

Emjay

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2005
Messages
4,960
I refuse to play by the rules of an enemy that wants to use semantic warfare to dominate my mind especially when those rules change when anthropomorphic entity starts loosing ground. I'm not referring to you btw. I admit that my position is not logically complete but I repeat that I am more able than most to sidestep most narratives due to a strange ability to "smell" most BS.... which tends to make me unpopular.

I can appreciate your position but it comes with a set of blinders namely primarily thinking with the thoughts of dead men.... relying even on live men will always fail you because no mortal man is capable of seeing the big picture properly, all lenses are flawed. Though admittedlty a lot of this is is partly due to me having a terrible memory for details in the long term, patterns and forms are almost all I tend to be able to retain.
So what is the big picture then politically in the USA?
 

rambo919

Expert Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2008
Messages
1,816
So what is the big picture then politically in the USA?
That is a very open ended question you will have be be a bit more specific as to what kind of answer you want. Also I'm not american so there are many nuances that are mostly alien to me anyway. I have seen too much american ignorance of foreign issues (and the same with europeans, etc) to be able to believe I myself understand anything about them completely.... no one on the outside really understands the inside when it comes to countries because most of the contact we have with each other is through a click-bait biased media.... that is prone to over reaction or propaganda.

I actually did recently (this week actually) get asked by a swede or norweigian I think if anyone here has lions for pets.... we joke about it but some actually still think it.

BTW my head is a bit thick this morning so I ramble a bit.
 

Emjay

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2005
Messages
4,960
That is a very open ended question you will have be be a bit more specific as to what kind of answer you want. Also I'm not american so there are many nuances that are mostly alien to me anyway. I have seen too much american ignorance of foreign issues (and the same with europeans, etc) to be able to believe I myself understand anything about them completely.... no one on the outside really understands the inside when it comes to countries because most of the contact we have with each other is through a click-bait biased media.... that is prone to over reaction or propaganda.

I actually did recently (this week actually) get asked by a swede or norweigian I think if anyone here has lions for pets.... we joke about it but some actually still think it.

BTW my head is a bit thick this morning so I ramble a bit.
So you don't see the big picture then.
 
Joined
Nov 6, 2018
Messages
1,252
I refuse to play by the rules of an enemy that wants to use semantic warfare to dominate my mind especially when those rules change when anthropomorphic entity starts loosing ground. I'm not referring to you btw. I admit that my position is not logically complete but I repeat that I am more able than most to sidestep most narratives due to a strange ability to "smell" most BS.... which tends to make me unpopular.
I don't mean to suggest that you should play by their rules. My claim is that trying to fight for your position by appealing to objectivity is a losing move, that's all. It's entirely possible to build a culture predicated on deception, and behaving as if the truth takes care of itself is behaving as if your victory is such a foregone conclusion that you don't even need to contest it.

I can appreciate your position but it comes with a set of blinders namely primarily thinking with the thoughts of dead men.... relying even on live men will always fail you because no mortal man is capable of seeing the big picture properly, all lenses are flawed. Though admittedlty a lot of this is is partly due to me having a terrible memory for details in the long term, patterns and forms are almost all I tend to be able to retain.
Right, but if all lenses are flawed, then we are perpetually doomed to operate with a set of blinders, and we have no way of figuring out which lens works best without resorting to using another lens to get our answers.

And like it or not, but the thoughts of dead men largely make up the terrain of the culture war's battlefield. Or perhaps it's better to think of the thoughts of dead men like the chess pieces on the battlefield that we have to work with. If you want to think up your own piece to add to the battlefield, fair enough, but my suspicion is that the major players are going to stick with the oldies but goodies.
 

rambo919

Expert Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2008
Messages
1,816
Like I said my head is thick today so don't expect the best replies, for now I will largely have to agree to disagree on many points.

The truth is what it is, appealing to it as a sole strategy has never worked for anyone because there is always someone on the other side that prefers deception either of the self or of others. In general believing victory is a foregone conclusion leads to defeat because you stop properly fighting.

To reclarify I guess, culture itself is passive but the main actors of it are active. No car drives itself. The most visible parts of culture are NOT it's main actors. Most of the people involved in producing mass media themselves are not active but merely regurgetators and as such give the illusion of being active but you see the same type of garbage being generated all the time with almost no originality to see at all. The main actors are the active sources of income, profits in isolation are not always active but can be completely passive given the right conditions.

In general today the main active actors avoid the limelight preferring to keep up illusions such as the public being able to vote with their wallets which is true in some cases but mostly irrelevant because of a general sheeple mentality most prominent in teenagers but extended as far into middle age as possible. Id go on but I'm ranting.

The problem with relying on dead men's thoughts is you do no actual thinking yourself and most actually grossly misinterpret those dead thoughts anyway. Endless quoting is useless unless everyone involved actually understands what is being quoted beyond the obvious. Also many of those men went down dead end rabbit holes and too many rabbit holes at once only cause confusion. Also it's better to think "live" thoughts than "dead" one's.

When it comes to the "culture war" we already mostly lost it to a certain degree anyway, the active war now is between the far left and the "new center" with the right nevermind the far right being persona non-grata.... this imballance means the situation is doomed to implosion eventually no matter what anyone does. Too many people thinking dead thoughts with no understanding as to their true meanings.

The organized religions fell into the same trap with most of protastantism for example thinking with the thoughts of the "church fathers" even though half of them were proven gnostics or even generaly heretics in some aspects. Now the old guard is dying out and the "emergent church" is basically merging what's left of the "church" with the world creating an unholy chrimera that is all things to all people and such such nothing to anyone.... but here too I will rant on.
 

Emjay

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2005
Messages
4,960
Now you seem to be trolling....
You claim to see the bigger picture, are able to cut through all the BS and this sets you apart from everyone else. You have confessed that you cannot do so in terms of US politics because you are not up to date with everything, so what exactly are you carrying on about here?
 

Emjay

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2005
Messages
4,960
The problem with relying on dead men's thoughts is you do no actual thinking yourself and most actually grossly misinterpret those dead thoughts anyway. Endless quoting is useless unless everyone involved actually understands what is being quoted beyond the obvious. Also many of those men went down dead end rabbit holes and too many rabbit holes at once only cause confusion. Also it's better to think "live" thoughts than "dead" one's.
WTF?

Are you arguing that we should overlook the entire philosophical foundation because it relies on the thoughts of dead men?
 
Joined
Nov 6, 2018
Messages
1,252
To reclarify I guess, culture itself is passive but the main actors of it are active. No car drives itself. The most visible parts of culture are NOT it's main actors. Most of the people involved in producing mass media themselves are not active but merely regurgetators and as such give the illusion of being active but you see the same type of garbage being generated all the time with almost no originality to see at all. The main actors are the active sources of income, profits in isolation are not always active but can be completely passive given the right conditions.
The main actors in culture are not the sources of income, that's nonsense. The main actors in culture are cultural institutions such as religious movements and Shakespeare's plays and the like. The lack of originality is a result of the fact that the entertainment industry is captured by special interests who only allow certain narratives to make the cut. If you want a practical example, look no further than what happened to the Roseanne show.

When it comes to the "culture war" we already mostly lost it to a certain degree anyway, the active war now is between the far left and the "new center" with the right nevermind the far right being persona non-grata.... this imballance means the situation is doomed to implosion eventually no matter what anyone does. Too many people thinking dead thoughts with no understanding as to their true meanings.
Right, and what are the tactics and strategy of the far left in this war? This question can be asked in another way: Why is Donald Trump of all people in the eye of the hurricane?

The organized religions fell into the same trap with most of protastantism for example thinking with the thoughts of the "church fathers" even though half of them were proven gnostics or even generaly heretics in some aspects. Now the old guard is dying out and the "emergent church" is basically merging what's left of the "church" with the world creating an unholy chrimera that is all things to all people and such such nothing to anyone.... but here too I will rant on.
Protestants thinking with the thoughts of the church fathers? Do you even sola scriptura, biatch? :cautious:

The fact of the matter is that the protestant churches are getting eaten up by the leftists culturally precisely because Protestantism takes your sort of line with respect to the objective truth and the words speaking for themselves and so forth.
 

rambo919

Expert Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2008
Messages
1,816
You claim to see the bigger picture, are able to cut through all the BS and this sets you apart from everyone else. You have confessed that you cannot do so in terms of US politics because you are not up to date with everything, so what exactly are you carrying on about here?
Your question was too open ended and/or vague, it could have been answered in too many ways. You did not clearly enough indicate which type of answer you required.

Differently put the big picture in terms of what? The short answer is "it depends".

WTF?

Are you arguing that we should overlook the entire philosophical foundation because it relies on the thoughts of dead men?
I am arguing that we should not think solely with the thoughts of dead men, that we should be able to set them all aside and think new thoughts when the foundation becomes too much of a quagmire.
 

Emjay

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2005
Messages
4,960
Your question was too open ended and/or vague, it could have been answered in too many ways. You did not clearly enough indicate which type of answer you required.

Differently put the big picture in terms of what? The short answer is "it depends".

I am arguing that we should not think solely with the thoughts of dead men, that we should be able to set them all aside and think new thoughts when the foundation becomes too much of a quagmire.
I think that philosophers, scientists, engineers et al already think with their own thoughts, as we have new ideas, advances and technologies popping up all the time.
 

rambo919

Expert Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2008
Messages
1,816
The main actors in culture are not the sources of income, that's nonsense. The main actors in culture are cultural institutions such as religious movements and Shakespeare's plays and the like. The lack of originality is a result of the fact that the entertainment industry is captured by special interests who only allow certain narratives to make the cut. If you want a practical example, look no further than what happened to the Roseanne show.
And who funds those institutions? Who has veto power? To paraqoute a influential dead guy of the left "it does not matter who votes, what matters is who counts the votes"

Right, and what are the tactics and strategy of the far left in this war? This question can be asked in another way: Why is Donald Trump of all people in the eye of the hurricane?
Because he is either controlled opposition or an knife in the eye of the left, they have NEVER taken effective opposition well.

Protestants thinking with the thoughts of the church fathers? Do you even sola scriptura, biatch? :cautious:

The fact of the matter is that the protestant churches are getting eaten up by the leftists culturally precisely because Protestantism takes your sort of line with respect to the objective truth and the words speaking for themselves and so forth.
No they are getting eaten up because they relied on the thoughts of dead men and relaxed into positions of automation. The bigger structures are intellectually impotent and have a long history of ostracizing any critics of the status quo. The rot has set in and the structures are collapsing. There are a few holdouts that don't bow to mammon but they are also in decline because of social and mounting legal preassure.

It's easier to just feel right than actually doing the work and being right, especially when peer preassure comes into play.
 
Top