#121
[account deactivated]
#122

guidoanselmi posted:

c_man posted:

i think opinion is kinda similar to what i said here
i don't claim to be an expert so im curious what you think about what i said there.



i dunno what steven pinker wrote but he sounds like he's still in college w/ that attitude. if i do find someone who actually acknowledge other fields, it's seldom with a disparaging opinion.

i will say that theoretical work doesn't always mesh with the existing framework of scientific progress. like string theories & quantum gravity are just there waiting for tests - many of which are fundamentally impossible (as far we have understood).


Have you read Smolin's new book? What do you think of it?

#123
[account deactivated]
#124
[account deactivated]
#125
its got the dots above the o, its smoldy
#126
i dont think smolin has any data, imo
#127
[account deactivated]
#128
0_0
#129

swirlsofhistory posted:

guidoanselmi posted:
c_man posted:

i think opinion is kinda similar to what i said here
i don't claim to be an expert so im curious what you think about what i said there.



i dunno what steven pinker wrote but he sounds like he's still in college w/ that attitude. if i do find someone who actually acknowledge other fields, it's seldom with a disparaging opinion.

i will say that theoretical work doesn't always mesh with the existing framework of scientific progress. like string theories & quantum gravity are just there waiting for tests - many of which are fundamentally impossible (as far we have understood).

Have you read Smolin's new book? What do you think of it?



like a physics graduate student has the time to read.

ok, well i can read wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Reborn i presume?)and tell you a definite "maybe". i know next to nothing despite having studied as much as i have, but i've felt at times maybe everything is wrong up till this point. there was some paper on arxiv in february someone discussed at a journal club in summary which disbanded with the big bang. the author was legit and it was a serious, potentially compelling argument (if anyone understood it). like people can think of alternative theories but to get them consistent & correct is the hard part.

#130

COINTELBRO posted:

tpaine posted:

the backlash against science and atheism is probably the number one thing holding any kind of popular communism movement back aside from external factors

actually it's scientists and atheists who are against communism, no wonder when STEM people are all socially retarded manchildren. it's also true that too much scientific inquiry is undesirable since certain discoveries w/r/t human nature could unravel communist ideals, some level of delusion is always required

why would anyone want to do away with social technology like religion anyway. it's no different to childish anarchists demonizing "the state". religion is unmatched in harnessing social cohesion, which is why traditionalist patriarchal forms like fascism and islam will last forever while communism will remain a dead 20th century fantasy. it's also no coincidence that atheists live less & are more depressed than religious people

also albania, the most retarded commie state, was also the most atheist



When I say political will, not only do I stress that revolution is not inevitable, I also emphasize the importance of proletarian struggle to be grounded in more than survival. The necessity of an affirmative (rather than negative of passive) political struggle is of prime importance. It is necessary for a Communist mythology, our own ideological space to bring the class struggle to universal proportions. Essentially, we must create a moral paradigm in which the fight for our cause is a just one with the blessing of universality itself (which is the ideological dimension by which class struggle is conducted, against bourgeois mythology).

#131
The social foundations of life are not laws created by the state, or policies. Social foundations are not organizations or institutions, they are the summation of social relations to the production and distribution of life, recources, whatever. When one sais "within capitalism" it implies within capitalist relations as they are reinforced by the state, within the process of capital accumulation. I was alluding to and comparing (proletarian revolution) to the rise of the bourgeois class and explaining how it cannot be the same. And whie this would still exist, the existence of proletarian dictatorship of the state actively undermines and struggles against the classes that form these social relations. Luckily enough, I have said this before, here, on this website. So if I have said prescisely before this thread, that, what brings you to the conclusion that I changed my mind? Why would I say political will is of prime importance if I said the social foundations for a new life cannot form even when the proletariat posesses political power? Maybe, just maybe, you didn't understand my post correctly. I'm the one who made the post and a quick glance at the posts I've made in this thread suggests a single consistent argument being made. When I change my position, or if I was in the wrong, I say so, and adopt whatever new position as my own. I have in the past. I'm not afraid of admitting I am wrong, but here, I am not. I'm not so immature as to argue in this manner. I don't care about what users think of me. You're acting like a child and honestly, it really discredits your posts. Especially since you can't respond with a comprehensive and coherent argument, you have to split up my posts and say "no", repeat the same phrases when I have addressed them, and then claim I'm being ridiculous. It's frustrating. You ask me to show you where I said this to back it up, and did, numerous times. I quoted myself exactly, and you said "no that isn't what you said!". But the quote is right there... ?(!)
#132
tpaine, you've gone too far. you're a loose cannon!
#133
#134

goats_ebooks posted:

it's cool that in like 50 years we'll never be able to get into space because we've put so much useless self-propagating junk up there you can't safely launch anything.



do you think theres any way we could give NASA complete regulatory administration over the airspace and coastal waters immediately surrounding North America?

#135
a tragedy of the commons huh? guess we need to privatise the sky
#136
[account deactivated]
#137
[account deactivated]
#138
#139
RIP
#140
[account deactivated]
#141
#142
Are You There God? It's Me, Lil Fug Nuggy
#143
"just imagine something as tall as a mother fucking giraffe"

i can do this easy. its a giraffe isnt it