The problem for Trump supporters is on their end, not mine, and this is objectively true. — RogueAI
I am honest, when I tell you I have no interest in making peace with political correctness. Indeed, given its postmodern rejection of values, and a neo marxian preoccupation with power for power's sake, — counterpunch
"Yes, Donald Trump did call climate change a Chinese hoax" — RogueAI
If you think I'm using a "strategy," let me go back to the abortion issue as an example. — FlaccidDoor
This is echt Jordan B Peterson. I'm not trying to be a dick but can you make the connection between those ideas? I don't think postmodernism or neo-Marxism (whatever that is) exists in this way. A postmodern rejection of values does not align with the notion that postmodernists often hold critical Marxist views of culture. These are not a rejection of values. Marxism is redolent with values and positions. — Tom Storm
I can make the connection between neo Marxism, post modernism, critical theory and political correctness; yes, they are all related. It would be a work of some number of volumes to describe the development of these philosophies and compare and contrast their ideas. Let us be much more shallow, and simply describe what actually happened.
Communism failed, and Marxists needed another chicken to pluck. The white working class majority refused to cast off their chains and hand absolute power to the Commies! So the Commies cast around and discovered a rich untapped vein of resentment to exploit, in identity politics. But that's quite a leap - and they needed a stepping stone. Post modernism provides that stepping stone precisely because it rejects such trivialities as truth and morality as socially constructed.
The aim of political correctness is not peace, harmony or social progress. That's a pretence that post modernism doesn't object to, because - on what possible basis could they object? That it's not true? Truth is relative! Because it's immoral? Morality is relative! Post modernism is the perfect vehicle for neo Marxism because such questions are moot.
Power is, and always has been the aim of Marxism; and so political correctness is a concerted attack against the "white male patriarchy" of Western civilisation, with the white working class majority suffering the philosophical and political equivalent of collateral damage. That's why they voted for brexit and Trump; because they are despised by the left. And if you don't believe me; read "Despised" by Paul Embery. — counterpunch
I don't like political correctness either, and I'm curious if you thought I was postmodernistic or neomarxian, and if so, why? — FlaccidDoor
Do you think this acts as a catalyst for the polarization of people, and people would be more inclined to talk with each other otherwise? — FlaccidDoor
My comment wasn't a criticism and thank you for responding as you have. I don't dislike Peterson the ways some do. I have watched a lot of his videos and find some of them very interesting. But he has spawned many neophytes who quote his idea almost verbatim without making actual contact with the concepts in these ideas. Is he a brilliant public speaker? I think his presentation is too strained and anxious to qualify for this - he can be hard to watch because it seems so difficult for him to share his ideas. — Tom Storm
Are you just confident that you are smarter than the "Trump supporters?"
hank you for teaching me the word "echt" — counterpunch
I'm a philosopher of science, and view religion from the outside as the philosophy and politics of primitive people. — counterpunch
Peterson is a genuine believer - and maddeningly, makes no effort to reconcile these antithetical narratives, while depending on both religion and science for his arguments! — counterpunch
There's that toy, the 'echt-a-sketch" -- police use it to make authentic drawings of suspects. — Bitter Crank
True enough, if the several great religions (Hindu, Buddhist, the 3 Abrahamic faiths) didn't originate with primitives, they were certainly picked up by them. The relatively small group of people who were critical in forming the great religions were probably sophisticated creative types. Just my guess. — Bitter Crank
I don't think that one can actually reconcile them; one lays them down side by side--separate, not equal, one not advancing the other. I am no longer a believer, but I took my moral core from Christianity. Way too late to renovate that part of the castle. I look to science too. Science though wasn't intended to provide moral or ethical guidance. Guidance doesn't have to come from religion, but it's the handiest source for most people. — Bitter Crank
This is echt Jordan B Peterson. — Tom Storm
I was referencing "people in general", not you in particular. For "people in general" acting as if they were deliberating is a strategy, because most people's thinking (maybe everyone's) is, to a significant extent, shaped by their biases and steered by their emotions. — Bitter Crank
My experience with Trump supporters has been: they can't do nuance, they think they're bigger victims than minorities, they believe ridiculous things, and they don't like "demographic change", and when you drill down on that, "demographic change"="country getting browner", and they're a lot more racist than the population at large. — RogueAI
people can be civil about these contentious topics — FlaccidDoor
Yes I am self centered, but that doesn't necessarily mean I am trying to belittle your position or even trying to prove you wrong in the topic, but merely trying to convince you that conversation isn't futile. — FlaccidDoor
I'm a philosopher of science, and view religion from the outside as the philosophy and politics of primitive people. — counterpunch
Mea culpas is not in order. You've started a good thread and you are tending to it. Looking forward to more good topics from you. — Bitter Crank
But I am optimistic. I see these as the growing pains of an ever-expanding freedom in speech and thought. People now have access to information unlike any time in history, and also many means by which to express their views. If we can come to grips with this, perhaps after a generation or two, we’ll have both the freedom and the thick skin required to handle it. — NOS4A2
I'm actually a big fan of Jordan Peterson as well. I grew up in a rather religious family, and he helped me bridge the gap I held between the world of the sciences and religion. I view them to be one in the same thing now, so what you said confuses me a bit. What is science if not a religion that follows a bible written by countless scientists and praises a God that is the progression of knowledge? I guess where I mainly disagree is the part where you say you "view religion from the outside," but I think that's impossible because you cannot not be religious. — FlaccidDoor
They absolutely can be civil. A civil discussion between a Trump lover and a Trump loather probably won't result in changed positions, but if they can at least get to what it is about Trump (or any other politician, political issue, religious question... all sorts of things) that they love or loathe, that would be good. — Bitter Crank
Family is one of the places where children (and parents) can stake out claims for what they believe, or what they don't believe, as the case may be, then defend the territory. Family argument is the cradle of opinion making, and learning the skills to have and deploy opinions. — Bitter Crank
""The election was not stolen, climate change is not a hoax, Q-anon is a bunch of nonsense, Sandy Hook really happened, Hillary Clinton is not a murderer, etc" the only apparent reason I understand, for you to believe you are right, is that you believe that the other side is just wrong."
is that we didn't switch out those presumed truths, when actual truths emerged. — counterpunch
Do you actually think Q-anon might be right? — RogueAI
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.