HOW TO ARGUE AGAINST MORAL POSTURING UNDER PRETENSE OF VALUE, EQUALITY OR KINSHI

HOW TO ARGUE AGAINST MORAL POSTURING UNDER PRETENSE OF VALUE, EQUALITY OR KINSHIP

(from elsewhere)

Did you just make a psychological rather than empirical argument? Oh wait. your first response was a moralism not a scientific one, or one of demonstrated preference. So yes, it’s not surprising that you would make a sentimental distraction rather than a scientific argument yet again.

Or that you would give freudian evidence of your feminine cognition and lack of evidentiary understanding by using the example of ‘great at parties’ rather than ‘great at business, science, and law.” I mean. Talk about a subconscious confession of animal intuition masked by language using the pretense of reason….. lol.

Debtors are debtors. Period.

We aren’t equal, we aren’t allies, we aren’t family, we aren’t friends. Your value to me and mine is only what is our interests, evolution’s interests, and as a consequence, and the future of mankind’s interest.

All your attempts to create the pretense of equality, value to one another, or social political military obligation due to reciprocity or advantage is just a fraud to create the peacock-tail of value. My only question is whether you are a cost, not a cost, or a contributor to me and mine, evolutionary excellence, and the transcendence of mankind.”

Your method of ‘argument’ (non-argument, fraudulent positioning) only works if (a) you are kin, and (b) you are a woman and can create future kin. Otherwise you are just an opportunity or a cost.

A man in rhetorical petticoats has nothing to trade.

You have no intrinsic value.

None.

You are dead weight on humanity’s Transcendence into the gods we imagine – and gods we must be – or be chained to the lifecycle of this rock.