That's the point of ongoing dialog : to learn how other people interpret our words, and to either change our words, or to change their minds. — Gnomon

I think it would be sufficient if you simply learned what most understand metaphysics to be and consequently used the word appropriately so as not to cause needless miscommunication.

Moral Progress — Gnomon

Pinker is definitely an optimist. Still, the claim that evolution is moving in a positive direction remains unjustified.

Destruction of unrelated storefronts, including ones owned by people who are struggling to make ends meet themselves, or especially (in that video posted earlier) some homeless guy's mattress, is not justified. — Pfhorrest

You evaluate that this is worse (an unjustified reaction) than the years of systematic racism and the incalculable suffering that it has caused now symbolized by the George Floyd murder?

Certain kinds of looting, sanctioned by the law and our morality, are not just tolerated but encouraged in our Glorious Republic. — Ciceronianus the White

Not to worry, it will trickle down to the lower classes like rain from heaven.

This means that you believe the rioting is unjustified or is worse than the original crime and the systematic racism that it stands for.
— praxis

The point of the post you're responding to is to argue that "unjustified" doesn't equal "worse that the original crime".

You can respond to harm with lesser harm and still be unjustified. It's not the amount of harm dispensed by whom that constitutes justice. — Pfhorrest

There are reactions and there is justice. Yes, they should not get confused. Maybe it would simplify things if you explain what you mean by the riots being an overreaction. It seems to be an evaluation of some kind.

I believe that people riot to demand justice, not to dispense it.

Justice isn't arithmetic like that. — Pfhorrest

You're the one claiming an "overreaction." This means that you believe the rioting is unjustified or is worse than the original crime and the systematic racism that it stands for. You can see how others might disagree, yes?

Everyone agrees the original crime was wrong, so there's nothing more to say about that. — Pfhorrest

Unfortunately, this is not true. It may be true for anyone who reads this topic but it's definitely not true everywhere. Also, claiming an "overreaction" means that you evaluate the riots to be worse than the original crime and everything it stands for. Many would see that as outrageous.

try not to think of metaphysics as something synonymous with spiritualism
— praxis
That correlation wasn't my idea. — Gnomon

Whatever, it was just a suggestion that would help to avoid misunderstandings when you say things like 'metaphysics was banished from philosophical discourse'.

Ironically, it was Science, not Religion, that revealed the teleological tendencies of the natural world -- that it is evolving in a positive direction. — Gnomon

Assuming that what's positive for human beings is positive for everything, how can we be sure that evolution is going well for us? Perhaps evolution took a very bad turn at some point and the earth will shortly end up a radioactive wasteland, or die a much slower death because of us. You're not a climate change denier, I trust.

Anyway , the important news is that Trump is going to get a second term on the back of leftist stupidity. — Chester

You sure, because it isn’t leftist stupidity that’s turning his own party against him.

Facebook makes good decisions?

“Coincidently this week, the Wall Street Journal’s peek at Facebook’s decision making over the past several years spotlighted a 2018 internal report acknowledging that “[o]ur algorithms exploit the human brain’s attraction to divisiveness. … If left unchecked [it will show users] more and more divisive content in an effort to gain user attention & increase time on the platform.” — Brett

Lol, as if anyone needed this peek so see the obvious.

There's the moral issue of objectifying women.

I guess it depends at least in part on how good she is at virtual sex, as well as how good virtual sex is, for that matter.

It's unclear what you mean by 'spiritualism' but it's odd that you believe metaphysics has been banished from philosophical discourse
— praxis
I have repeatedly contrasted Spiritualism with Materialism as antagonistic worldviews. FYI, I'm using "Spiritualism" in a broad sense, not limited to the 19th century table-tipping fad by that name. For those who have been living under a rock for the last century, I'll note that the "rift" between Science (physics) and Religion (metaphysics) has been a hot topic in philosophy since the Enlightenment. And the clear trend among philosophers has been to side with Physics. Or is that also Fake News? Are you just being contrary, or do you have something to add to the thread? — Gnomon

To help avoid potential confusion in the future, I suggest that you consider contrasting materialism with idealism and try not to think of metaphysics as something synonymous with spiritualism but rather something more like theorizing about the nature of reality.

I understand this oddity now, for what that's worth.

Perhaps God informed you that this was a correction to an error?
— praxis
No. It was just a personal opinion. Do you know what "IMHO" means? If you disagree with that opinion, start another thread. — Gnomon

It's not that I disagree with your opinion, rather I'm curious about how you arrived at it, given the curious way you present the opinion as a 'correction'. If you say there's a correction it implies that there's a plan or grand design that the correction helps to fulfill. I'm not aware of any teleological destination that the enlightenment helps to achieve. In any case, you seem to believe that the enlightenment is inadequate in itself for this grand end and may even hinder its fruition.

You've created a false dilemma so that you can try to provide a false solution. It shouldn't be a surprise that no one is buying.
— praxis
Are you also a Global Warming denier?

I suspect that Possibility is aware and concerned about this philosophical dilemma, for which the Fifth Dimension theory is a proposed partial solution. If the "Rift" is no concern of yours, please butt out. — Gnomon

No, I'm not a global warming denier, nor do I deny that modernity has serious issues. The problem is that your focus on this rift doesn't address these issues. It's like you're mistaking mild symptoms for the disease.

I haven't been following your discussion with Possibility. However, having read several posts from both of you my impression is that Possibility is doing philosophy and you're doing something else. I think that you could do what you're doing much better if you realized and fully embraced what it is that you're doing, rather than pretending to be doing something that you're not doing. I acknowledge that you may know perfectly well what you're trying to do but are simply not good at it.

The point about the economy is that a downturn was inevitable. It only takes the slightest prick to deflate a balloon. A wide range of things could do it. You can't blame 'leftists' or even the virus for spoiling the Ponzi scheme, though you might take partial blame yourself for playing up the lefty/righty bullshit rather than looking at the real problem.

...even the Norwegians are admitting that lock down may have been a bad idea because of the economic costs and the fact that they have built no herd immunity unlike Sweden. — Chester

Sweden isn’t even close to herd immunity. And what, if there were no lock-downs people would dutifully go to work and continue being good consumers, regardless of the risks?

If I might butt in for a sec.

the concepts of Metaphysics and Spiritualism, which were banished from scientific and philosophical discourse — Gnomon

It's unclear what you mean by 'spiritualism' but it's odd that you believe metaphysics has been banished from philosophical discourse.

The so-called "Enlightenment" was a necessary correction to the Dark Ages. — Gnomon

Also odd, like blanketly claiming that a natural development is correct. How do we know that things developed the best (correct) way possible? Perhaps God informed you that this was a correction to an error?

It ["Enlightenment"] was justified in rebelling against the dogmatic magisteria of the combined church & state of the Holy Roman Empire. — Gnomon

The rebellion was justified because of the dogmatism or because of something else? I'm sure bad stuff happened during the dark ages but it's not like whatever bad that was happening went **poof** after the "so-called" "enlightenment."

The third oddity is how you seem to simultaneously acknowledge the value of the enlightenment and question its value. It was a correction (for some reason) to the dark ages but caused the "attempted amputation of Soul from Body" or "Reason vs Emotion" rift, and therefore requires a patch for the "Matter vs Mind" split.

There is no attempted amputation and there's no rift or split. You've created a false dilemma so that you can try to provide a false solution. It shouldn't be a surprise that no one is buying.

A loss of meaning can only be resolved with something that is meaningful.

Why fret about flesh and blood human beings when you can making sweeping generalizations? That’s why human beings are often the brick and mortar of socialist schemes. Can’t make an omelette without breaking a few eggs. — NOS4A2

Do they dock your rubles for going off-script? I think you’re supposed to say that ‘blue lives matter’. Anyway, indeed, change isn’t always easy, especially when the deck is stacked against you.

They professionally managed so-called “protesters” at the White House had little to do with the memory of George Floyd. They were just there to cause trouble. The @SecretService handled them easily. Tonight, I understand, is MAGA NIGHT AT THE WHITE HOUSE???

— Donald J. Trump

Could he be a worse leader and bigger asshole?

The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness, by Michelle Alexander, makes a strong argument for what I think StreetlightX is talking about. Government/law enforcement supporting capital interests, etc.

Tragically beautiful.

my policy would be to help them, til a future date - where they would be sent back. Is this supremacy or proudness?
— remoku

No this is fair enough. Time to ship the immigrants out and leave the US to the native Americans. 300 years is time enough. Off you go. — StreetlightX

:lol: Maybe proudness? just not a proud American.

I kinda liked the way he could bend his mind in whacky directions.

I think it’s boring. I can’t even be bothered to read them, let alone respond. — NOS4A2

You never troll and never respond when I troll you.

That's why people put up with you for short bursts. — Chester

You were rather disappointing today.

Truth shines in a free and open encounter with falsehood. — NOS4A2

Playing with trolls is nothing more than mild amusement.

The truth is good for everyone though.

they own the facts — Syamsu

Y'all own the copyright on the alternative ones.

Seriously thought, you guys are trying way too hard. Trolling is a subtle art.

Cheers, mate! :smile:

I can read you like a very simple child's book. — Chester

Frankly, I would be amazed if you could read any other sort of book.

...they gloried in their violence. — Chester

Should I care if you think it’s glorious?

I was pointing out the difference between glorifying violence and committing violence. You appear to be confused about this, as well as many other things.

The left glorifies violence when it involves smashing up Target though, doesn't it? — Chester

No, one commits violence when smashing up a target.

See , that kind of stuff gets written by teenagers. — Chester

Glorifying violence is adolescent, I must agree. Too much video game playing in the White House?

I guess they weren’t intimidated by the big scary orange man. :razz:

Trump’s Order on Social Media Could Harm One Person in Particular: Donald Trump

Man, he drags his feet on a pandemic but mess with his twitter account and he's bypassing congress and signing an executive order faster than you can say "dictator wannabe".

I imagine because it ridicules not just him but his followers as well, and touches on the cultish (and somewhat Jim-Jonesian in recent months) bond between them.

I don't know how to read this as anything other than Big Brother tracking critics. — Michael

Reminds me of a story I read this morning: https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/books/2020/may/28/trump-campaign-attempts-to-remove-satirical-cartoon-from-online-retailer

From the story:

In a statement, Anderson praised Redbubble for recognising the error, but said there were some “troubling issues” raised by the affair, including that the cartoon was removed less than 24 hours after he posted it, before he had received a single order.

“I doubt anyone had even seen it yet on the site,” he said. “This reveals that the Trump campaign has a system in place, trawling for material they find objectionable. If it happened to me so quickly, it likely has happened to others. How much other content has been removed this way on Redbubble and other sites?”

Claims of unsustainability have been made since Malthus, but so far technological progress has outstripped worries about carrying capacity, energy and resource shortages. — Marchesk

Not really, peak oil may have already occurred, and economic growth is dependent on energy that is relatively cheap. Increased efficiency, substitution, and technological progress may not be able to compensate for a declining supply of cheap energy. Clearly there's still a lot of oil, minerals, and water in the world, but all the low lying fruit has been picked, so to speak, and it will become increasingly costly to extract more in the future, not to mention more hazardous to the environment.

How can money be based on future growth if it looks like the future will be more expensive?

In the long run, we have a giant ball of nuclear energy in our sky, and the rest of the solar system for resources. We just need to make it through this century. — Marchesk

There's no technology in existence today where this can compare with oil or minerals and clean water found on earth. This points to an inevitable downturn. I can't imagine what a society/economy would look like where economic growth was possible with the enormous cost of harvesting minerals off-world, if that's the sort of thing you're suggesting.

Here's a counter question. How do you know that tapping the brakes on economic growth doesn't halt progress in fields needed to address climate change, pollution or feeding 10 billion people by 2050? — Marchesk

We already possess the technology to address climate change, pollution, and feeding every mouth on earth today. So why don't we use it? In other words, technology won't save us, we have to somehow decide to save ourselves.

So today an executive order to regulate social media and tomorrow an order to regulate the “enemy of the people” fake news media?

We’ve been told to live with less and less by not only Green Capital, but by the Church, by our liberal “friends,” and even by fellow comrades. Fuck that shit. Nah; if we’re going to be putting our shit out on the line it’s definitely not going to be so that I can live simply.
— StreetlightX

I agree with this sentiment. If you're going to create the Marxist "utopia", then aim for one that offers the same perks as the capitalist one. The majority of us don't want to go back to lifestyle of peasants or monks. That's not a good selling point. — Marchesk

Along the lines of what Isaac may have been suggesting, the capitalist imperative of economic growth is baked into our culture, is baked into us, and it is simply unsustainable. Also, a cultural shift is possible whereby the meaning of ‘well-being’ is more eudaemonic than economic.

Given the apparent lack of real well-being in our capitalist world, true well-being should be an attractive selling point.

Another example is that video. There is nothing manipulated in it. — NOS4A2

Right?!

it is right to use hate speech — NOS4A2

I knew you were a scumbag but, wow.