Quite. And this is all I have to show for it.

Just kidding around. In all seriousness, I have a deep interest in your profession. I once considered becoming a top pastry chef, only I don't really knead the dough.

Don't give up the day job.

Fuck him.

Stop baiting, please. You're turning your own thread into a circus.

the idea that Marxism was constructed by Marx for personal gain and power is inexcusably idiotic. — Maw

Masterfully understated.

You know, judging by reports from his lectures, Kant was quite a cheeky chappy with all sorts of wild ideas, therefore I propose that the Critique of Pure Reason was a hoax. Now, of course, I don't know anything about Kant or his ideas because I haven't read him but I know I don't like his type much, so you should probably take me and my idea seriously and spend time debating this.

Oh, and here's some links to two articles critiquing Kant to make this seem substantive.

A right-wing internet random who obviously hasn't read Marx, doesn't understand his intellectual capacity, influence, method or anything about his life, presents a thesis that's it's all a hoax based on the fact that he thinks Marx was mischievous.

Advice: read "Capital", realize how clownish and unthought-out your idea is and then come back and write an at least half-serious critique.

Then maybe you can stop the others from constantly mentioning the book, too. Thanks. — Apollodorus

Yes, we'll keep it on topic.

trying to ban me from the forum — Apollodorus

We are not going ban you just for mentioning a book by a fascist scumbag. I expect it was unintentional. I’ve removed the name and title from the OP. The topic of discussion is fine. Try to steer clear of neo-nazi resources in future though as you might be misinterpreted.

Pearce is sticking around for an impressively long time. — bert1

And we much appreciate it!

I don't recall anyone arguing for blind faith in their healthcare provider.

Interesting design, more Space Fart than Space Force, but if the cap fits as they say. :party:

Well done. :up: Don't spend it all on MAGA hats. :monkey:

:cool:

Nothing in crypto doesn't have the potential for a 4 digit apr, only talking about guaranteed returns here. Still, I understand you on BTC. What's the platform you're using anyhow?

Or you can get up to 30% (or more) apr on a Bitcoin carry trade. Short a quarterly future and buy an equivalent amount of the underlying. Only risk is custody, which you're taking anyway.

Thanks.

(Please only tag or reply to David with comments or questions in the main thread. I don't want these two mixed up.)

We're going to keep the main thread tightly on topic. You have more freedom to maneuver on this one.

Welcome, David! We appreciate any time you can give us, so please do proceed at your own pace. :smile:

(Just want to add that we'd like to keep this thread for questions to and interactions with David. Comments on this thread and debates among yourselves can be posted in the accompanying discussion posted previously. So, if your comment disappears, it's probably been moved there.)

May need to wait for a Netflix drama on the subject.

This is not a place for posting bare literary analyses. It's a philosophy forum. OPs are expected to have a point of philosophical, political or sociological debate to them. You posted a short analysis on a relatively obscure book with no apparent context or relevance. My question also is why this happened?

David has accepted our invitation. :party: If everyone interested could please read up on his ideas and prepare some questions for him. We'll start with an AMA thread soon (anyone can contribute to the thread but please keep all questions to a 250 word limit, and please be respectful and considerate of our guest, thanks).

Alright thanks, let's see if he replies to that. If not, I'll chase him up elsewhere.

@Shawn Please see your PMs with the invite for David. If you'd rather we contact him directly, maybe you can suggest the best way.

The cats have been herded and we would be delighted to have David on board. We are putting together a formal invitation and details of how we'll organize this.

I'll be maintaining my homeostasis at a level away from suffering on that score. Anyhow, if we do a formal invite and David gracefully accepts, just... trust us, everything will be fine.

Getting the mod team to make a collective decision is like trying to herd cats. Of course, folks have other lives outside of PF to deal with. Give us a day or two more.

If you're working for Putin, you probably better check your underwear, mate, because this ain't up to scratch.

Bumden — Bartricks

:lol:

I'm sure he has thicker skin than that and like the rest of us doesn't give a damn what Barprick thinks.

It hovers in an uncomfortable space between the shallow, the callous, and the ludicrous, and has probably already received more attention than it deserves.

It's a psychological malady but it sells advertising space on Breitbart, so someone's making mint at least.

All the evidence about Trump being a rapist and serial sexual abuser doesn't matter because it hasn't been proven in court but someone threw Hunter's gun in the trash and some anonymous source claims the secret service tried to cover it up. Scandal!!! You are one twisted mf if you think you can get away with that level of hypocrisy on a philosophy forum.

(And fucking hell if this is the best the muckrakers can come up with re Biden, give me the job. I've got a healthy imagination and zero qualms about taking out the rich and powerful on either side. This is bloody pathetic).

He does recognize facts... when they suit his political narrative, which is the only thing that ever matters to him.

And if this was the Trump family, you'd be telling us this was just 'gossip'. :yawn:

And what exactly am I advocating? — synthesis

My intepretation of your position is pretty much as @Hanover outlined it. If it's more nuanced than that, feel free to clarify.

Ok, so we reject expert opinion and learn it all ourselves. Who do you think we learn from if not experts? Who do you think write medical books and papers, for example, if not medical experts? (often the same ones guiding government policy). In order to cease our reliance on experts, we'd have to get into some fairly kinky experimentation on ourselves and others, and, in my experience, that is not always appreciated. In short, your position appears not just impractical, but essentially incoherent.

*Damn, Hanover said this already. Note to self: read Hanover's posts even though you don't want to.