I’m actually a fan of splatter painting since I recognize it not as art but as decoration. I don’t consider tattoo’s art, nor the decoration of dinner plates art, and I don’t consider splatter painting art, but decoration. And as decoration of the modern postwar apartment it served its purpose. Postwar art in particular, due to (((certain))) influences, is decoration, not art. And decoration is just fine. Especially for apartment living.
Form: Critique
-
REMINDER: WHEN YOU ASK ME TO REVIEW WORK I WILL DO SO – BUT YOU COST ME TIME. HE
REMINDER: WHEN YOU ASK ME TO REVIEW WORK I WILL DO SO – BUT YOU COST ME TIME. HENCE DON’T GIVE ME POSTMODERN JUNK.
Review of a Bolivian Paper on the Alt Right.
(ouch. remember that if you ask me to review academic work I will do my job. And if you are giving me postmodern drivel I’m gonna be very unkind in my analysis)
0) First, I can improve on the understanding of the manifesto section a bit. However I am extremely critical if not hostile to the method of argument you are using because it contains nothing testable and as far as I can tell is just postmodern critique. So I won’t comment on it.
1) The correct framing would be that the current generation of thinkers has adopted the marxist techniques (ridicule, shaming, rallying) simply by being exposed to them for decades.
2) The movement was made possible by a)end of socialism, b) genetics, c) cog sci (d)immigration.
3) the movement is merely a cyclical return to nationalism in the face of immigration – first Hispanic since hispanics have one to one replacement of whites, but secondly and more emphatically, muslim immigration which we perceive as even more hostile than jewish.
4) Trump is an ally of the alt right simply because he is pursuing a strategy of nationalism and the restoration of the balance of powers instead of the single superpower of America that is too expensive for Americans to continue paying for.
5) the alt right is possible because the internet allows people who are naturally apolitical to mirror the propaganda strategy of the marxists who are highly political. So the economics of collaboration have been reversed from favoring the left to the right.
6) closing down stormfront and others merely drove the movement to use symbolic language, private message boards, video and podcasts, and made it possible for the right leadership to charge money for content. It backfired.
7) For the rest of the article I had to give up translating and reading at page 50 because (a)you do not put forth a testable argument and then demonstrate how you defend it, and (b)you then engage in opinion measurement (intellectual gossip) rather than any form of measurement.
8) This kind of argument passes for pseudo-academic work in literature (its all they have to measure) but not in social science where it is nothing more than formally outlined gossip.
9) I am sorry if this offends, but you have clearly been taught that this form of argument is acceptable academic work. It isn’t.
https://www.academia.edu/36845752/El_esquema_ideol%C3%B3gico_de_la_derecha_alternativa
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-30 17:35:00 UTC
-
REMINDER: WHEN YOU ASK ME TO REVIEW WORK I WILL DO SO – BUT YOU COST ME TIME. HE
REMINDER: WHEN YOU ASK ME TO REVIEW WORK I WILL DO SO – BUT YOU COST ME TIME. HENCE DON’T GIVE ME POSTMODERN JUNK.
Review of a Bolivian Paper on the Alt Right.
(ouch. remember that if you ask me to review academic work I will do my job. And if you are giving me postmodern drivel I’m gonna be very unkind in my analysis)
0) First, I can improve on the understanding of the manifesto section a bit. However I am extremely critical if not hostile to the method of argument you are using because it contains nothing testable and as far as I can tell is just postmodern critique. So I won’t comment on it.
1) The correct framing would be that the current generation of thinkers has adopted the marxist techniques (ridicule, shaming, rallying) simply by being exposed to them for decades.
2) The movement was made possible by a)end of socialism, b) genetics, c) cog sci (d)immigration.
3) the movement is merely a cyclical return to nationalism in the face of immigration – first Hispanic since hispanics have one to one replacement of whites, but secondly and more emphatically, muslim immigration which we perceive as even more hostile than jewish.
4) Trump is an ally of the alt right simply because he is pursuing a strategy of nationalism and the restoration of the balance of powers instead of the single superpower of America that is too expensive for Americans to continue paying for.
5) the alt right is possible because the internet allows people who are naturally apolitical to mirror the propaganda strategy of the marxists who are highly political. So the economics of collaboration have been reversed from favoring the left to the right.
6) closing down stormfront and others merely drove the movement to use symbolic language, private message boards, video and podcasts, and made it possible for the right leadership to charge money for content. It backfired.
7) For the rest of the article I had to give up translating and reading at page 50 because (a)you do not put forth a testable argument and then demonstrate how you defend it, and (b)you then engage in opinion measurement (intellectual gossip) rather than any form of measurement.
8) This kind of argument passes for pseudo-academic work in literature (its all they have to measure) but not in social science where it is nothing more than formally outlined gossip.
9) I am sorry if this offends, but you have clearly been taught that this form of argument is acceptable academic work. It isn’t.
https://www.academia.edu/36845752/El_esquema_ideológico_de_la_derecha_alternativa https://www.academia.edu/36845752/El_esquema_ideol%C3%B3gico_de_la_derecha_alternativa
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-30 17:35:00 UTC
-
SPLATTER PAINTING IS DECORATION NOT ART – AND THATS WHY ITS OK I’m actually a fa
SPLATTER PAINTING IS DECORATION NOT ART – AND THATS WHY ITS OK
I’m actually a fan of splatter painting since I recognize it not as art but as decoration. I don’t consider tattoo’s art, nor the decoration of dinner plates art, and I don’t consider splatter painting art, but decoration. And as decoration of the modern postwar apartment it served its purpose. Postwar art in particular, due to (((certain))) influences, is decoration, not art.
And decoration is just fine. Especially for apartment living.
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-30 16:22:00 UTC
-
MORE ON SOPHISTRY OF CONFLATING AXIOMS AND THEORIES Axioms can exist only in for
MORE ON SOPHISTRY OF CONFLATING AXIOMS AND THEORIES
Axioms can exist only in formal logic (and mathematics), laws between men – and conversely theories provide explanatory power about the universe.
An axiom in formal logic is declared the equivalent of true, and therefore we assume it’s no longer contingent or externally correspondent for our purposes of further (subsequent) construction and deduction.
So in that sense we can use axioms for ‘what if’ scenarios in logic, and the interpretation of moral norms, and legislation and law, and textual analysis including scripture – which is where all this form of verbal reasoning comes from: non correspondence with reality, only internal consistency.
Whereas we can only use hypotheses theories and laws when we are making a contingent truth claim about the existential rather than the verbal and ideal. Hypotheses theories and laws originated in the description of correspondence with reality.
As such the use of axioms helps us test logical internal consistency, and the use of theories helps us test external correspondence – since nature is always internally consistent: it can’t help it. That’s what determinism *means*. As such Axioms and Theories are polar opposites.
And using one in the place of the other is generally either a matter of ignorance or attributing the correspondence and consistency of that which is deterministic under logical declaration to that which is underdeterministic under physical description.
I don’t find this very difficult because in math we use axioms, in science we use laws, and only sophists in philosophy seem to attempt to either conflate the two, or to attribute the properties of axioms to that of theories and laws – and that means there are a lot of sophists (like Mises and Rothbard, not to mention Hoppe and every marxist that ever lived). And as I’ve said, as far as I know math survives, but formal logic was a dead end, the grammars replace them, and philosophy is reduced to the preferable and good not the true. And what we call science (due diligence) and law (testimony) determine truth.
So, at present, In my understanding – which I have serious doubts that I’ll ever be refuted – the word axiom is archaic and has no use outside of mathematics and symbolic logic that seeks to imitate mathematics through conversion of reality (operations) to ideals (sets). Axiom = Arbitrary, and Theory = Existential.
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-29 13:52:00 UTC
-
PETER THEIL: UNIVERSITIES ARE AS CORRUPT AS THE CATHOLIC CHURCH 500 YEARS AGO (T
PETER THEIL: UNIVERSITIES ARE AS CORRUPT AS THE CATHOLIC CHURCH 500 YEARS AGO
(The church and academy that sprung from it, have master the art of profiting from the distributing of information under the promise of future good, without warranty of their claims. This is why propertarianism is necessary: to prevent profiting from goods, services, and information, that are not warrantied.)
26 Jul 2018
Technology giant Peter Thiel argued this week that American universities are as corrupt as the Catholic Church of 500 years ago.
Speaking to a group of conservative students on Wednesday night, tech legend Peter Thiel compared American universities to the Catholic Church of 500 years ago.
“The analogy that I’ve used is that perhaps the universities today are as corrupt as the Catholic Church was 500 years ago,” Thiel said. “If you think about the eve of the Reformation when Martin Luther posted his 95 theses on the church doors, there were all these priests that did not do very much work in much the same way that college professors and administrators are today. You had to pay these indulgences the way that you have to pay runaway tuition today.”
Thiel went on to argue that American society teaches young people that the quality of their lives will be determined by their success at college. “It’s also a story of salvation,” he added. “If you get a college diploma, you will be saved. If you don’t get one, you will end up in a very bad place. We need a sort of reformation. I’ve often described the universities as the atheist church. It’s not going to reform itself from within. The reformation will come from without.”
Thiel also made the case that universities simply aren’t working the way that they used to. Decades ago, a college education was the key to a vibrant and lucrative future. Now that college degrees have become the standard, more debt-carrying students find themselves without fruitful employment even once they have their diploma.
“Universities are supposed to provide a one size fits all education for everybody,” Thiel said. “They are not working the way they used to. We have an education bubble in this country. There is no single thing in this country where the costs have gone up more than they have gone up in education for the last 40 or 50 years.”
“It’s like the opposite of technology,” he finished. “With technology, you do more with less. With education, we are doing less and less but spending more and more every year.”
You can watch Thiel’s remarks below.
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-27 19:15:00 UTC
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status. Interesting that Chomsky heaps undue praise o
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
Interesting that Chomsky heaps undue praise on Galileo, but not Copernicus, Descartes, Newton or others. He always has an agenda. I think his agenda is anti-everything. And so he gives Galileo undue praise for his battles with the church.
—“The Aristotelian scientific tradition’s primary mode of interacting with the world was through observation and searching for “natural” circumstances through reasoning. Coupled with this approach was the belief that rare events which seemed to contradict theoretical models were aberrations, telling nothing about nature as it “naturally” was.
By the start of the Scientific Revolution, empiricism had already become an important component of science and natural philosophy. Prior thinkers, including the early 14th century nominalist philosopher William of Ockham, had begun the intellectual movement toward empiricism.
The term British empiricism came into use to describe philosophical differences perceived between two of its founders Francis Bacon, described as EMPIRICIST, and René Descartes, who was described as a RATIONALIST.
(CURT: IT BEGINS WITH DESCARTES.. EVEN BEFORE ROUSSEAU)
Thomas Hobbes, George Berkeley, and David Hume were the philosophy’s primary exponents, who developed a sophisticated empirical tradition as the basis of human knowledge.
An influential formulation of empiricism was John Locke’s An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1689), in which he maintained that the only true knowledge that could be accessible to the human mind was that which was based on experience. He wrote that the human mind was created as a tabula rasa, a “blank tablet,” upon which sensory impressions were recorded and built up knowledge through a process of reflection.”—
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-23 21:31:44 UTC
-
Chomsky Heaps Undue Praise on Galileo
Interesting that Chomsky heaps undue praise on Galileo, but not Copernicus, Descartes, Newton or others. He always has an agenda. I think his agenda is anti-everything. And so he gives Galileo undue praise for his battles with the church. —“The Aristotelian scientific tradition’s primary mode of interacting with the world was through observation and searching for “natural” circumstances through reasoning. Coupled with this approach was the belief that rare events which seemed to contradict theoretical models were aberrations, telling nothing about nature as it “naturally” was. By the start of the Scientific Revolution, empiricism had already become an important component of science and natural philosophy. Prior thinkers, including the early 14th century nominalist philosopher William of Ockham, had begun the intellectual movement toward empiricism. The term British empiricism came into use to describe philosophical differences perceived between two of its founders Francis Bacon, described as EMPIRICIST, and René Descartes, who was described as a RATIONALIST. (CURT: IT BEGINS WITH DESCARTES.. EVEN BEFORE ROUSSEAU) Thomas Hobbes, George Berkeley, and David Hume were the philosophy’s primary exponents, who developed a sophisticated empirical tradition as the basis of human knowledge. An influential formulation of empiricism was John Locke’s An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1689), in which he maintained that the only true knowledge that could be accessible to the human mind was that which was based on experience. He wrote that the human mind was created as a tabula rasa, a “blank tablet,” upon which sensory impressions were recorded and built up knowledge through a process of reflection.”—
-
Chomsky Heaps Undue Praise on Galileo
Interesting that Chomsky heaps undue praise on Galileo, but not Copernicus, Descartes, Newton or others. He always has an agenda. I think his agenda is anti-everything. And so he gives Galileo undue praise for his battles with the church. —“The Aristotelian scientific tradition’s primary mode of interacting with the world was through observation and searching for “natural” circumstances through reasoning. Coupled with this approach was the belief that rare events which seemed to contradict theoretical models were aberrations, telling nothing about nature as it “naturally” was. By the start of the Scientific Revolution, empiricism had already become an important component of science and natural philosophy. Prior thinkers, including the early 14th century nominalist philosopher William of Ockham, had begun the intellectual movement toward empiricism. The term British empiricism came into use to describe philosophical differences perceived between two of its founders Francis Bacon, described as EMPIRICIST, and René Descartes, who was described as a RATIONALIST. (CURT: IT BEGINS WITH DESCARTES.. EVEN BEFORE ROUSSEAU) Thomas Hobbes, George Berkeley, and David Hume were the philosophy’s primary exponents, who developed a sophisticated empirical tradition as the basis of human knowledge. An influential formulation of empiricism was John Locke’s An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1689), in which he maintained that the only true knowledge that could be accessible to the human mind was that which was based on experience. He wrote that the human mind was created as a tabula rasa, a “blank tablet,” upon which sensory impressions were recorded and built up knowledge through a process of reflection.”—
-
Interesting that Chomsky heaps undue praise on Galileo, but not Copernicus, Desc
Interesting that Chomsky heaps undue praise on Galileo, but not Copernicus, Descartes, Newton or others. He always has an agenda. I think his agenda is anti-everything. And so he gives Galileo undue praise for his battles with the church.
—“The Aristotelian scientific tradition’s primary mode of interacting with the world was through observation and searching for “natural” circumstances through reasoning. Coupled with this approach was the belief that rare events which seemed to contradict theoretical models were aberrations, telling nothing about nature as it “naturally” was.
By the start of the Scientific Revolution, empiricism had already become an important component of science and natural philosophy. Prior thinkers, including the early 14th century nominalist philosopher William of Ockham, had begun the intellectual movement toward empiricism.
The term British empiricism came into use to describe philosophical differences perceived between two of its founders Francis Bacon, described as EMPIRICIST, and René Descartes, who was described as a RATIONALIST.
(CURT: IT BEGINS WITH DESCARTES.. EVEN BEFORE ROUSSEAU)
Thomas Hobbes, George Berkeley, and David Hume were the philosophy’s primary exponents, who developed a sophisticated empirical tradition as the basis of human knowledge.
An influential formulation of empiricism was John Locke’s An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1689), in which he maintained that the only true knowledge that could be accessible to the human mind was that which was based on experience. He wrote that the human mind was created as a tabula rasa, a “blank tablet,” upon which sensory impressions were recorded and built up knowledge through a process of reflection.”—
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-23 17:31:00 UTC