|
T-man posted:"I fail to understand how this would be harassment (given my knowledge and social position)" and "this is not harassment (for someone else)" are not equal. But screw it, I'm done discussing this. Reality is subjective and there's no truth and we all die alone yadda yadda. lol
|
# ? Nov 3, 2018 07:43 |
|
|
# ? May 29, 2024 22:14 |
|
Lol
|
# ? Nov 3, 2018 07:44 |
|
|
# ? Nov 3, 2018 07:44 |
|
why did the n word cross the road
|
# ? Nov 3, 2018 07:50 |
|
Former DILF posted:why did the n word cross the road to liberate the markets because that is a moral necessity
|
# ? Nov 3, 2018 07:50 |
|
you ever notice how neoliberals drive like this and socialists dont drive but instead barricade themselves inside (previously) unmapped caves?
|
# ? Nov 3, 2018 07:51 |
|
so this neoliberal was walkin around a tesla dealership the salesman walks up and says "i bet you're thinking about buying a tesla" the neoliberal replies "no, i know im buying a tesla. i'm thinking about raping children in the basement of a pizza restaurant" the salesman says "well i can put you down on the waiting list for a deposit"
|
# ? Nov 3, 2018 07:54 |
|
Jazerus posted:i mean, fishmech literally can't post in cspam, he's not allowed because we told him to gently caress off extremely hard. it is in general a place you can tell anybody to gently caress off though and people should do so i contend that none of this is true merely because you assert it in earnest, and prefer previously existing scholarly explanations of this behavior instead. i have provided more support for my ideas than you or PJ for yours, because i've read things about this subject and shared a couple of them--though not nearly enough things to begin formulating grand unifying explicatory theories of my own. do you understand the problem? at least the authoritarian personality didn't need to make people refer to a blog of Terminology in order to interpret empirical fieldwork. Sheng-Ji Yang posted:how the gently caress is this harassment lol im still half worried im biting down too hard on a bored grad student's Foucalt's Pendulum style troll but dialed down for goons seeking whatever it is they're looking for, and that the punchline is the thread is creating within it the thing it's purporting to describe. actually no im not worried because that would be fuckin' great Willie Tomg has issued a correction as of 08:01 on Nov 3, 2018 |
# ? Nov 3, 2018 07:59 |
|
Al! posted:lol i dont think yall " " get " " cspam
|
# ? Nov 3, 2018 08:18 |
|
argas please explain your behaviour wrt authoritarian personalities and narrative disorders
|
# ? Nov 3, 2018 08:21 |
|
Sheng-Ji Yang posted:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxXEPk3dzFg
|
# ? Nov 3, 2018 08:28 |
|
So uhh, to try and get things back on topic, I posted this and I don't know if PJ ever got a look at it. I was kinda proud of it, so posting it here again. "So I found what I think is the most clear cut case of a narrativist being put on the spot by having exposed the inner narrative. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7hYxYZbqtQ&t=2558s This is Mark Collett. At the time of this video, he was something of a rising star in the BNP, which is literally the British Nazi Party. First thing he does when the reporter comes in and tells him that he's a reporter, and he's been writing a report about him, is to deny everything. Because he doesn't have any proof. then when the reporter tells him he recorded everything he looks like a deer caught in headlights because he said some *Really* nasty poo poo. First he demands he leave because he has betrayed him, then immediately begs for him to stop it from airing. He repeatedly asks the reporter to turn off the camera for five minutes, the reporter refuses to. It is. . . Glorious, and at the same time terrifying, seeing someone realize that their brilliance 'superiority' to everyone else was tricked. That he said so many things, and got caught saying them. It's like two different people. One smug and so cocksure of himself, the other one is terrified. Terrified of what he's done, and how he got caught. He probably fakes trying to quit the BNP and it devolves from there." If nothing else, watching someone's world suddenly collapse inward as the carefully constructed lie is destroyed by his own hand, is incredibly cathartic.
|
# ? Nov 3, 2018 09:42 |
|
Willie Tomg posted:i contend that none of this is true merely because you assert it in earnest, and prefer previously existing scholarly explanations of this behavior instead. i have provided more support for my ideas than you or PJ for yours, because i've read things about this subject and shared a couple of them--though not nearly enough things to begin formulating grand unifying explicatory theories of my own. do you understand the problem? Have you considered that the reason why a tome of a book does not require you to know jargon beforehand is because it’s a book, and it can explain its concepts within the text, so that you naturally understand what the author means when words come up later? Very unlike the humble forum post. Of course it’s made worse because PJ is not an academically educated person that could easily refer to existing, better known concepts and had to create her own instead to be able to communicate her ideas efficiently. But they aren’t arcane or overly vague as her detractors tend to assert, they just are not immediately obvious without reading the blog or the old thread. There is a lot of criticism that stems from putting PJ alongside professional academics’ published books with a humongous amount of person-hours put into making sure everything works. Even if PJ was some kind of mythical genius that was right about everything she asserts somehow, her current work would still pale in comparison because of pretty obvious realities. Preferring real books is only logical, and reading a whole lot is ultimately the only way to refine this kind of stuff to academic standards, but good books existing is not an argument for dismissing someone’s work, only for others to start somewhere else if they haven’t yet and want to learn about the subject right now. I’m yet to see an actual takedown that shows a correct understanding of PJ’s framework and uses knowledge of academic work to show it to be based on assertions that are untrue. ”It’s bad because it’s false”, rather than ”it’s bad because I don’t understand it / it’s nowhere near academic standards / it covers ground that is already trodden”. Your crit is firmly in the ”I haven’t put in any effort to understand it so it’s vague gibberish, here’s some counterevidence to it as I misunderstand it” camp.
|
# ? Nov 3, 2018 10:08 |
Willie Tomg posted:i contend that none of this is true merely because you assert it in earnest, and prefer previously existing scholarly explanations of this behavior instead. i have provided more support for my ideas than you or PJ for yours, because i've read things about this subject and shared a couple of them--though not nearly enough things to begin formulating grand unifying explicatory theories of my own. do you understand the problem? i mean it's not true because i'm asserting it in earnest. that would be stupid! i am explaining prester's ideas to you. they are not necessarily accurate and need a much more scientific approach to be shown to be "true" inasmuch as science can approach the concept of "truth", but i personally feel there is value in exploring explanations based on this framework as prester develops it even if it is still rough and has not been empirically tested. all models start out untested. unlike prester i am educated in this field and do have an awareness of the scholarly explanations about all of these things which is why i'm not asserting that everything PJ says is true - however, PJ's framework is not really in opposition to anything i have ever read. it is a very different perspective that has some overlap with existing scholarly writing but also raises new points worthy of discussion and eventually study, once she's in a position to do so. you are kind of coming into this mid-stream and making assumptions that the people posting in this thread are hanging on prester's every word to discern the Truth or whatever. that is not the case - we're well aware that this isn't the most solid set of ideas ever created. prester is aware of that, even - the whole point is to help prester, who is passionate about this but not well-educated, to assimilate these ideas into the previously existing scholarly explanations while retaining the parts that seem to have new explanatory power. if it was just nonsense i wouldn't be posting, and if it was a super-solid academic theory that required no further discussion, i wouldn't be posting either. Al! posted:big jordan peterson fans itt lol
|
|
# ? Nov 3, 2018 16:35 |
Sheng-Ji Yang posted:
what the gently caress show yourself, coward. i will never stop lmaoing.
|
|
# ? Nov 3, 2018 16:36 |
|
Jazerus posted:what the gently caress Lol.
|
# ? Nov 3, 2018 16:37 |
Former DILF posted:pj is unironically the best socialist on this forum, not only is she using her labor to directly create material of benefit to the proletariat, that material is useful for direct contravention against fascist thought on the levels it needs to be addressed.
|
|
# ? Nov 3, 2018 16:47 |
|
Sheng-Ji Yang posted:
lol
|
# ? Nov 3, 2018 16:50 |
|
Jazerus posted:unlike prester i am educated in this field and do have an awareness of the scholarly explanations about all of these things which is why i'm not asserting that everything PJ says is true - however, PJ's framework is not really in opposition to anything i have ever read. it is a very different perspective that has some overlap with existing scholarly writing but also raises new points worthy of discussion and eventually study, once she's in a position to do so. That is precisely the problem. There is nothing controversial about the idea that people and groups approach their lives and the world through the framework of "narrative" or whatever you want to call it (As RD pointed out). It is, however, overly general and provides little real insight into how any given group behaves. This "theory" is dressed up in an ever expanding and unnecessary proprietary vocabulary which makes these ideas completely impenetrable to most readers. This superfluous mass of terminology further allows its proponents to insist that if you haven't mastered it you aren't in a position to offer any criticism. None of these terms are necessary to express these ideas but the provide cover for serious flaws and shortcomings with an appearance of comprehensiveness. To my mind, these shortcomings include, as others have pointed out, a serious lack of attention to historicity, material conditions, or power relations. What happened to the Anabaptists over 500 years in Europe and North America that might have shaped that community? There is no consideration of this in PJ's point and little in your own that isn't obscured by this terminology. Do the Republicans act the way they do because they are capital N narrativists who only see part of the chessboard or are they a party that exists to defend the material resources of the propertied class? Others ITT have pointed this out and been dismissed out of hand as harassers or insufficiently schooled in the unnecessary and irritating vocabulary. In conclusion, Al! posted:lol
|
# ? Nov 3, 2018 17:43 |
|
Willie Tomg posted:i contend that none of this is true merely because you assert it in earnest, and prefer previously existing scholarly explanations of this behavior instead. i have provided more support for my ideas than you or PJ for yours, because i've read things about this subject and shared a couple of them--though not nearly enough things to begin formulating grand unifying explicatory theories of my own. do you understand the problem? I found your appeals to authority rather weird. Adorno is well out of date, even Altermeyer is out of date, you also chose a Philosophy Phd thesis to back your claim which isn't properly related to the group sociology we're effectively discussing and it is also out of date, coming in the same year as Stenner's work but only quoting her initial paper. Unfortunately for you, if you had read Stenner you'd certainly need to read up on sociological/statistics jargon if you weren't already well-versed in that field, and since Stenner is relentlessly empirical your references are at least on similar shaky ground to PJ's which are after all still at the level of working theory.
|
# ? Nov 3, 2018 17:51 |
|
uncop posted:There is a lot of criticism that stems from putting PJ alongside professional academics’ published books with a humongous amount of person-hours put into making sure everything works. Even if PJ was some kind of mythical genius that was right about everything she asserts somehow, her current work would still pale in comparison because of pretty obvious realities. Jazerus posted:i mean it's not true because i'm asserting it in earnest. that would be stupid! i am explaining prester's ideas to you. they are not necessarily accurate and need a much more scientific approach to be shown to be "true" inasmuch as science can approach the concept of "truth", but i personally feel there is value in exploring explanations based on this framework as prester develops it even if it is still rough and has not been empirically tested. all models start out untested. there is no "work" here. work would be hunting down and collating a collection of texts that positively proves the argument or else performing field work on people who are not the author and creating one. you don't build a framework of reckons and read back on it later to confirm. that's a conservative's parody of humanities departments they're trying to remove. it is not insurmountable! we are all on the internet right now. it is the single largest collection of information ever assembled in human history and if you can't find what you're looking for then you can instantly contact someone who can. the problem isn't a hitherto undiscovered demographic of mentally ill people upset at the disturbance of their hermeneutic circles of sacredness and profanity, its that we're all on the internet and nobody meaningfully uses the motherfucker.
|
# ? Nov 3, 2018 17:53 |
|
ewe2 posted:I found your appeals to authority rather weird. Adorno is well out of date, even Altermeyer is out of date, you also chose a Philosophy Phd thesis to back your claim which isn't properly related to the group sociology we're effectively discussing and it is also out of date, coming in the same year as Stenner's work but only quoting her initial paper. Unfortunately for you, if you had read Stenner you'd certainly need to read up on sociological/statistics jargon if you weren't already well-versed in that field, and since Stenner is relentlessly empirical your references are at least on similar shaky ground to PJ's which are after all still at the level of working theory. this is all true except for calling it a working theory. i'd quibble that at least sociological and stat terms have applicability in places outside one thread on a forum.
|
# ? Nov 3, 2018 17:54 |
|
the most useful part of this thread is understanding how and why it's insanely toxic
|
# ? Nov 3, 2018 17:57 |
|
Al! posted:the most useful part of this thread is understanding how and why it's insanely toxic
|
# ? Nov 3, 2018 17:58 |
|
the worst part of this thread is when PJ politely asked R. Guyovich to leave instead of telling him his kosovorotka look like a dishrag
|
# ? Nov 3, 2018 18:07 |
|
I found your appeals to authority rather weird.
|
# ? Nov 3, 2018 18:08 |
|
Al! posted:the most useful part of this thread is understanding how and why it's insanely toxic Seriously, if you or anyone else is here to poo poo all over the thread, can you not?
|
# ? Nov 3, 2018 18:18 |
|
E-Tank posted:So uhh, to try and get things back on topic, I posted this and I don't know if PJ ever got a look at it. I was kinda proud of it, so posting it here again. or he's an idiot kid realizing he skullfucked his entire arc in the movement before it began because he ran his mouth on camera thinking he was getting publicity. quote:At the center of the conspiracy in Foucault's Pendulum is a short cryptic text brought to the attention of the young editors, Belpo and Casaubon, by a mysterious Colonel Ardenti. It holds the secret of the Templars in code, he says. Years later, Belpo, Casaubon, and their kabbalistic colleague, Diatallevi, will invent a elaborate parody conspiracy, "The Plan," based on their interpretation of Ardenti's text. Later, Casaubon's lover, Lia, will research and offer her own interpretation of the text. Far from a cryptic statement of the Templar's plan, she finds it a merchant's miscellaneous delivery list.
|
# ? Nov 3, 2018 18:21 |
|
WampaLord posted:Seriously, if you or anyone else is here to poo poo all over the thread, can you not? why contain it? 'scool
|
# ? Nov 3, 2018 18:23 |
|
WampaLord posted:Seriously, if you or anyone else is here to poo poo all over the thread, can you not? im just an antibody to the discourse friend
|
# ? Nov 3, 2018 18:28 |
|
so i read 'when prophecy fails' last night and it's very good! surprised how good the prose is for like, 1950s sociology?? cool stuff
|
# ? Nov 4, 2018 01:02 |
|
So while reading the first chapter it got me thinking back to some things that have come up before in other discussions. In the NT the letters of Paul (the ones that are actually his) are the earliest books. The story behind his travels is that he is collecting from all these churches he visits to give a collection to the church in Jerusalem (he wants to jump starts the return of Jesus) it goes bad (so bad that it's not in the canon). The four Gospels are probably written down in response to the Jewish War and destruction of the temple. Pauline apocalyptic thought is before a predicted apocalyptic event. The gospels are written down after a disconfirmation event. Apocalyptic thought at its core always has a couple of assertion: poo poo's hosed. hosed poo poo is going to end someday. But when ever there is a concrete: this specfic hosed poo poo will end this way and on this time frame that always leads to a disconfirmation. Eventually the apocalypse (if the group affirming it survives and continues to affirm it) gets pushed back to the end of history and / or it gets immanatized (and one sees this combination in liturgical Christianity).
|
# ? Nov 4, 2018 04:50 |
|
BrandorKP posted:So while reading the first chapter it got me thinking back to some things that have come up before in other discussions. In the NT the letters of Paul (the ones that are actually his) are the earliest books. The story behind his travels is that he is collecting from all these churches he visits to give a collection to the church in Jerusalem (he wants to jump starts ah christ i think if you read my posts in the past couple of pages you'll know i'm not closed minded but this poo poo really waffles my batter, im not a liturgy boi
|
# ? Nov 4, 2018 05:13 |
|
Former DILF posted:but this poo poo really waffles my batter, im not a liturgy boi I've stopped giving a poo poo about what we each are. But this is the larger issue (seperate from Prester related discussion ) poo poo's hosed, concretely that poo poo is modernity and Capitalism. The nature of apocalyptic thought needs looking at.
|
# ? Nov 4, 2018 06:32 |
|
Jazerus posted:in conclusion, now im
|
# ? Nov 4, 2018 16:21 |
|
Narrativists gonna narrative https://twitter.com/Anarchists_RUB/status/1058670022359478273 https://twitter.com/Anarchists_RUB/status/1058780063745933321
|
# ? Nov 4, 2018 22:33 |
|
Time for a stress test. https://mobile.twitter.com/travis_view/status/1060018472988508160?fbclid=IwAR0HED-r0g67EgUxD9Qeepezrdo8oUREDBh6BGf2Wfxe64sCXgXwdMScFfM
|
# ? Nov 7, 2018 09:26 |
|
when that one says, “I’ve worked so hard,” what do they mean by that?
|
# ? Nov 7, 2018 09:49 |
|
Antifa Turkeesian posted:when that one says, “I’ve worked so hard,” what do they mean by that? Posting incomprehensible bigoted conspiracy babble on social media presumably
|
# ? Nov 7, 2018 09:56 |
|
|
# ? May 29, 2024 22:14 |
|
Worked meme-magic over many hours.
|
# ? Nov 7, 2018 10:06 |