Sounds like you made shit up so you can argue against it.
this post was submitted on 10 Aug 2023
0 points (50.0% liked)
Chapotraphouse
14158 readers
715 users here now
Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.
No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer
Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
๐จ ATTENTION ๐จ
Your account has been flagged for bot-like activity.
Please review the Posting Policy Bulletin and post hog for account verification.
This is an automated message. If you believe you have received this in error, click here to opt out of future communications.
We really need more bots. Amber bot, for old times sake, a bot bot, a combat liberalism bot that uses an LLM to make up completely unhinged mao quotes about doing kung-fu at Rothbard.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Right because not being a shill for Xi makes me "pro-west." Please.
Ah yes, because the only way we could possibly admire the achievements of the Chinese state is because we were being paid to do so. Fuck off, creep.
No I think you're just in an echochamber that didn't wanna go full doomer because of how capitalist the entire world is. You wanted some hope for socialism so you clung onto China for false hope.
What do you propose people do?
Also, 
catholic
What do you propose people do?
Not support a capitalist hellscape.
Is my religion a joke to you?
Maybe
less kids and I'd like your religion more.cw
rape
I thought your name was ironic, lmao.
Didn't the Rerum Novarum strictly reject socialism? Affirms the right to private property? Or was it the one time the pope was fallible?
I don't know. Jesus did not.
Its one of the foundational documents of modern Catholicism how could you not have read the part where the pope says worker unions ok, but socialism is bad?
Look, they are what I, when I was a Catholic, would describe as a 'bad Catholic'. Many liberal Catholics operate the same way, with a perverse attachment to the Church as it could be instead of seeing the Church as it has been and continues to be, that isn't to say that good things don't come out of the Church (hospitals, nursing homes, monasteries, etc), just that they are better the further they are away from the central worship and money-making operation. When I was a rigorous Catholic (10-15) I was a very conservative Catholic because I read the doctrine, listened to the scripture, and understood the scripture and how it ought to be interpreted.
If was during my confirmation when I was continuing my theological study, when I stumbled upon Aquinas, Hume, Kant, Nietzsche and other metaphysical philosophers and it struck me that not only was my understanding of Catholicism incredibly shallow, but it confirmed my increasing suspicion that everyone else's understanding of Catholicism was also, if not more, shallow. Upon reading, especially people like Hume and Kant, it became clear that not only did I not actually have very rigorous grounds for what I believed, but that in order to be a 'good Catholic' you had to be a 'bad person' and that 'bad Catholics' were constantly having to deal with this juxtaposition, fighting against the structure of a Church that wants their money, but doesn't actually want them or their ideas.
It wasn't that they were 'bad Catholics' it's that they were 'good people' attempting to be 'Catholics'. That's when I rejected the entire thing and tried to start from scratch to the best of my abilities. It's been a long road and I still don't know where I will end up ideologically, but I do know that I will not make the mistake of seeing 'what could be' for 'what is'.
Nietzsche and other metaphysical philosophers
There's a little bit of metaphysics in Nietzsche, but what makes you call him a "metaphysical philosopher"? I struggle to think of any metaphysical statement from him that wasn't just a rephrasing of Schopenhauer, which is fair enough since that wasn't really what he was into as far as I know.
In any case, immense respect for successfully parsing Kant. I can only get the extremely easy texts like Foundation of the Metaphysics of Morals
I call him a meta-physical philosopher because much of what he talks about is derivations of ethics and the nature of religion and God in relationship to those ethical categories. It's arguably more tangential to metaphysics than metaphysics itself, but claims like 'God is dead' and the historical-socio-ethical reasoning behind that are incredibly metaphysical statements. However, you are correct that most of his actual metaphysical work is derived from an re-phrasing Schopenhauer, but I didn't read any Schopenhauer until college, so I didn't know that and at the time it blew my little freaking mind.
I will be honest, my preference is for Hume, as Kant is an enormous windbag, though tiny compared to Hegel. That said, you really should give 'Critique of Pure Reason' another go-around, it's one of those seminal texts that will be constantly referenced in everything forever, and really makes up the majority of his and everyone's groundwork for literally everything afterwards particularly liberalism. Regardless if or not you think he actually solved Hume's is-ought pincer and problem of causality, it is basically impossible to understand why Kant leans so hard into deontology without reading it. But if you really want to piss people off, just read and retort with Hume, he is basically the philosophical linebacker for Western philosophy.
Thanks for explaining and I'll take the bit about Critique into account.
Hume is easily one of my favorites too. Even when I think he's being incredibly stupid (e.g. missing shade of blue) you really can see that he's being genuine even about his faults, which is unusual among philosophers.
Of course, I enjoy (most of) Schopenhauer as well, but mainly the short essays he wrote as an afterthought to World as Will, like On the Vanity of Existence. I find the morbidness of it entertaining and there was a time that I was genuinely in one of the worst depressive episodes of my life and I read some of his works for the first time and howled with laughter. I can't not bear some affection for his writing after that. It's like a Kafka Comedy but where the protagonist is a metaphysicist who is just torturing himself with his own ideation, if that makes sense.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
With the alternative being, what, exactly? Flaccid, impotent doomerism?
Well the world is almost all neoliberal hell so maybe that'd be better than supporting a fascistic hellscape because they have socialist aesthetics.
I support Cuba and various socialist movements... I don't pretend Xi is a well-meaning person.
Nothing about Xi indicates that he isn't well meaning, and much more importantly the lives of hundreds of millions of people have been vastly improved during his governance as head of a dedicated communist party.
If you think the CCP is genuinely dedicated to communism I cannot take you seriously.
Oh hey it's you again, I think you forgot to answer me in the other thread as well: what is your solution to the Ukranian puppet government's ongoing genoicide in the Donbas?
Honestly if Russia ONLY invaded Donbas I think I would support that. But you guys are clearly warmongerers that want as many dead Ukrainians as possible.
you guys are clearly warmongerers that want as many dead Ukrainians as possible
This doesn't even make any sense. People normally criticize us for wanting Ukraine to surrender to end the war -- are you just making this up, or??
Literally people endorsing Russia bombing major cities in Ukraine two seconds ago.
people endorsing Russian bombings
Again, please don't compare us to Zelensky, that's really fucked up.
Keep blowing Putin, tankie. I've made it clear I don't like Zelensky either, but there's NO justification for waging war anywhere outside of Donbas.
Do you really think Russia could've just invaded the Donbass? Obviously Ukraine would call it an invasion and try to retake it, at which point Russia would advance into Ukrainian territory to repel them. We'd be in the exact same situation, except Russia & the Donbass would be in a worse situation.
Why the hell would Russia bother with any of that?
Or maybe, get this, they could defend the border of Donbas and keep the war within there?
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(6 replies)
load more comments
(19 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
Catholic
Worship Gnosticism as preached by 
or be burned alive you fucking heretic.
WTF does this even mean
Dumb fuck!
Who the fuck is the short chubby guy asshole?
short
HERESY!!! You dare doubt St. Bhagavan Shree Matt Christman's (PBUH) holy LARGE ADULTNESS? TRIAL BY MOUNTAIN DEW FOR THIS HERETIC!
Man you guys are weird.
Ah denial is but a pit stop on the road of acceptance, my devil worshipping brother in Satan!
