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?
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.
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).
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?
![](http://i.imgur.com/vTWXn4n.jpg)
i can do this easy. its a giraffe isnt it