(Thread IKs:
dead gay comedy forums)
|
"Free will" is a meaningless concept anyway. The point is that there's a collective will which can meaningfully impact the material world, and the ideas we develop through living with material reality can dialectically shape it when applied by the collective will. "Material reductionism" is a rejection of material dialectics you ninny.
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2022 20:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 15:19 |
|
|
The Voice of Labor posted:lol yeah sorry. the world is cold and mechanical, rule governed and tractable. super structure is ephimeral over base. the soul and freewill are infantile superstitions 
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2022 20:43
|
|
|
The Voice of Labor posted:lol yeah sorry. the world is cold and mechanical, rule governed and tractable. super structure is ephimeral over base. the soul and freewill are infantile superstitions alright, so take a commodity and empirically measure its Value
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2022 20:49
|
|
|
The Voice of Labor posted:as a materialist, historical or otherwise, you have to countance the fact that material reductionism is real and true and good. dawkins and pinker are poising the well against a central tenet not just of marxism but of science. that is some high liberal 4th dimensional chess. while eldredge is pretty much right on, I worry he might likewise be throwing the reductionism baby out with the bathwater because it got hard coopted by nazi shitheads who want to rationalize their crimes with a bogus inference that because all of reality boils down to physics, the development of the human species boils down to something they're smart enough to understand and manipulate The Voice of Labor posted:lol yeah sorry. the world is cold and mechanical, rule governed and tractable. super structure is ephimeral over base. the soul and freewill are infantile superstitions 
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2022 21:03
|
|
|
Nihilism is correct but boring, existentialism is wrong but cool. Thus, by the helgelian dialectic, you're wrong and boring.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2022 21:05
|
|
|
tokin opposition posted:Nihilism is correct but boring, existentialism is wrong but cool. Thus, by the helgelian dialectic, you're wrong and boring. read Nietzche again ya ditzy broad
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2022 21:08
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/qualziaa/status/1487632001540710400?s=20&t=Rl5DMqDcfIC30cM2qIRLkA
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2022 21:28
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:https://twitter.com/qualziaa/status/1487632001540710400?s=20&t=Rl5DMqDcfIC30cM2qIRLkA The questions of a man with steel in his spine.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2022 21:43
|
|
|
The Voice of Labor posted:as a materialist, historical or otherwise, you have to countance the fact that material reductionism is real and true and good. dawkins and pinker are poising the well against a central tenet not just of marxism but of science. that is some high liberal 4th dimensional chess. while eldredge is pretty much right on, I worry he might likewise be throwing the reductionism baby out with the bathwater because it got hard coopted by nazi shitheads who want to rationalize their crimes with a bogus inference that because all of reality boils down to physics, the development of the human species boils down to something they're smart enough to understand and manipulate The Voice of Labor posted:lol yeah sorry. the world is cold and mechanical, rule governed and tractable. super structure is ephimeral over base. the soul and freewill are infantile superstitions Baby-brained axiomatic bullshit. Yes, in theory, understanding a phenomenon makes dependent phenomena understandable too; the nature of truth is that all true things must agree. That'd be really useful, if we actually understood anything completely. In reality no field of study is complete and the slightest omission can produce a drastically different result overall. Forget to carry the 2, and your carefully designed social order ends up running on Soylent Green. If you're going to put that which is material first, you can't go around mistaking your materialism for the material itself.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2022 22:23
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:"Free will" is a meaningless concept anyway. The point is that there's a collective will which can meaningfully impact the material world, and the ideas we develop through living with material reality can dialectically shape it when applied by the collective will. "Material reductionism" is a rejection of material dialectics you ninny. unless you're prepared to accept dualism and miracles, that collective will is functionally identical to brain states in human beings, which are deterministic as is everything else in a material world . that's a fact. if you reject that because of doctrine, you are no longer operating on belief, you are opperating on faith. we've put rockets on the moon, we've made bitchin' video games, we can produce food surpluses and keep people from dying in their 30s. you can attribute that to the world spirit or whatever, but those things came about beause people studied phenomena, hypothesized about them, tested those hypotheses and shared their reasoning and results to see if they were replicable. you can't do that if the phenomena keeps shifiting, that process only works when things are governed by regular laws. how so ever your logos is reified by your praxis, there is a material chain of cause and effect from start to finish
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 00:11
|
|
|
this sort of material determinism may be true, but it's sterile. we get no useful insights about the world by adopting this stance about higher-order phenomena. crucially, it may not even be true; we have no way of knowing. if it were true, you'd think that three generations of the most annoying nerds imaginable, anglophone philosophers, would've been able to produce a workable account of it by now, which they simply haven't (apart from dennett-style eliminationism which may be true but accounts for consciousness by basically closing its eyes, stopping its ears and humming very loudly)
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 00:29
|
|
|
The Voice of Labor posted:unless you're prepared to accept dualism and miracles, that collective will is functionally identical to brain states in human beings, which are deterministic as is everything else in a material world . that's a fact. if you reject that because of doctrine, you are no longer operating on belief, you are opperating on faith. So what?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 00:47
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 00:54
|
|
|
Yes there's a real material world out there. However, understanding it to the extent that your various modes of conceiving of it are interchangeable (i.e. everything is physics) is a distant horizon. What seems to get us closer to that horizon is continually engaging in a dialectical process between the world and our conceptions. In the here and now, if you're trying to explain a social movement in terms of its molecular makeup, I find it hard to see that as anything but a retreat into the realm of ideas.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 01:15
|
|
|
i gestured at this before but there's a difference between being materialist and being, like, a logical positivist or whatever you call it. marxism is the scientific analysis of social forces like class and value which exist in purely spectral, social form and cannot be reducible to the kind of matter and energy that one can isolate and measure in a lab
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 01:23
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 01:25
|
|
|
"free will" or "god" or whatever are totally irrelevant to the question. what matters is such completely psychic phenomena as "capital". grind a factory down into dust and show me a single atom of capital. you can't do it. and yet, capital real, strong, and my enemy
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 01:27
|
|
|
The Voice of Labor posted:unless you're prepared to accept dualism and miracles, that collective will is functionally identical to brain states in human beings, which are deterministic as is everything else in a material world . that's a fact. if you reject that because of doctrine, you are no longer operating on belief, you are opperating on faith. You're just gonna have to think your way to the other side of this one buddy, you're wrong.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 03:00
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:i gestured at this before but there's a difference between being materialist and being, like, a logical positivist or whatever you call it. marxism is the scientific analysis of social forces like class and value which exist in purely spectral, social form and cannot be reducible to the kind of matter and energy that one can isolate and measure in a lab what Voice of Labor is talking about is more like deterministic Fatalism. Everything that happens only occurs due to prior material causes, which means every point in time is already fixed by that narrow causal window. There's not really any such thing as a "future" or a "past" because it's already determined. It doesn't take much to figure out that's anti-dialectical. Even if how we develop ideas is influenced by material reality, you are nonetheless engaging with the realm of ideas - which cannot be defined or measured in material terms.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 03:07
|
|
|
The Voice of Labor posted:lol yeah sorry. the world is cold and mechanical, rule governed and tractable quantum mechanics says otherwise lol
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 03:08
|
|
|
How do you empirically define a concept like "communism?" Does it have length or width? Does it have mass? It's stupid to even think about it. The fact is that even our own definition of communism is socially determined, and there's more than one definition for it. You can't say the same of an iron compound, which has objectively measurable qualities - and how we define it can only be wrong in terms of a lack of understanding rather than differences in interpretation. No matter how we think about it, iron is iron.
Pener Kropoopkin has issued a correction as of 03:14 on Jan 31, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 03:11
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:How do you empirically define a concept like "communism?" Does it have length or width? Does it have mass? It's stupid to even think about it. The fact is that even our own definition of communism is socially determined, and there's more than one definition for it. You can't say the same of an iron compound, which has objectively measurable qualities - and how we define it can only be wrong in terms of a lack of understanding rather than differences in interpretation. No matter how we think about it, iron is iron. this is right, in a sense, but iron as an object isn't necessary. there was a time in human history when iron was something you put in cosmetics and not a something that you made pots or swords from. it became a thing distinct from the compounds it was in when it had other uses, and this distiction became clearer when modern chemistry was able to do more things with it i'm saying this because iron as a type of atom with a certain number of protons existed, but it wasn't iron, not in the way we mean it now. and when you think of it now, i'm sure you think of it ways that are historically contingent, relations that are not strictly related to it's physical properties. all human modeling is like this, it's not just question of whether something quantifiable is involved. modeling is not the thing; it is how we make the the very real world intelligable if you go deeper into the physics, iron disappears. iron is only a certain configurations of protons, neutrons and electrons, of which the protons and neutrons are also configurations. iron ceases to be a thing with an essence and something that is only a label, a reference this is not an argument against there being a human-independent world, it's an argument against there being a thing that isn't socially constructed to some degree
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 04:03
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:what Voice of Labor is talking about is more like deterministic Fatalism. Everything that happens only occurs due to prior material causes, which means every point in time is already fixed by that narrow causal window. There's not really any such thing as a "future" or a "past" because it's already determined. It doesn't take much to figure out that's anti-dialectical. Even if how we develop ideas is influenced by material reality, you are nonetheless engaging with the realm of ideas - which cannot be defined or measured in material terms. the nice thing about everything being predetermined is that so is your response to everything being predetermined, and others' responses to that, and so on, so who could possibly care
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 05:15
|
|
|
hey kid I’m a computer, stop all the organizing
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 05:27
|
|
|
Virtual Russian posted:Well there's your problem. 
BrutalistMcDonalds has issued a correction as of 12:01 on Jan 31, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 05:30
|
|
|
Brain Candy posted:this is right, in a sense, but iron as an object isn't necessary. there was a time in human history when iron was something you put in cosmetics and not a something that you made pots or swords from. it became a thing distinct from the compounds it was in when it had other uses, and this distiction became clearer when modern chemistry was able to do more things with it "iron" is perceptually defined in terms of affordances and effectivities for a particular perception-action system, and economic systems and ideologies are no different. social relations and constructs, too, are structured physical properties of the animal-environment system we perceive via ecological information in the optic array, via neural arrays of conventional information, etc. this is not the same as being reducible to any set of parts or any lower scale; as you say, language is only a map of the behavior, and itself recursively defined by affordances and effectivities for new behavior. I can never eat a description of a pizza, or hold a picture of a coffee cup by the handle, no matter how perfect. many systems exhibit large scale behaviors that are irreducible and nondecomposable, including human beings ourselves. for these, "what" something is has little scientific or practical relevance in the absence of a "where." where are material conditions? where is socially necessary labor? where is social construction? maybe these are not questions we can give answers to yet, but that doesn't mean they will never yield at all. it took a couple millennia between humanity coming up with atoms and observing them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 07:11
|
|
|
iron is what you use to make your shirts flat you loving dorks
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 07:58
|
|
|
BrutalistMcDonalds posted:goons talking a lot about bread but they're forgetting the flowers For all the many failings of the pre-Marxist socialists, plus his contemporaries that took a non-scientific approach, I will say the one thing that is never forgotten or missed is that socialism will liberate the human spirit. It will allow us to finally reach our artistic, philosophical, and even spiritual zenith, things which capitalism will forever keep just out of reach. Without socialism we will forever be infants grasping in the dark towards that which we know we want, yet cannot ever achieve. In casting off capitalism we shall transcend our mortal confines and live forever in beautiful splendor. Virtual Russian has issued a correction as of 09:41 on Jan 31, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 08:44
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:grind a factory down into dust and show me a single atom of capital. you can't do it. and yet, capital real, strong, and my enemy it might have helped to understand what was going on if we understood the very simple reason why we couldn't see Capital. it's for the same reason people in times square can't see america. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 10:28
|
|
|
All you need to either smoke less weed or come up with better highdeas (high ideas)
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 11:36
|
|
|
Virtual Russian posted:For all the many failings of the pre-Marxist socialists, plus his contemporaries that took a non-scientific approach, I will say the one thing that is never forgotten or missed is that socialism will liberate the human spirit. It will allow us to finally reach our artistic, philosophical, and even spiritual zenith, things which capitalism will forever keep just out of reach. Without socialism we will forever be infants grasping in the dark towards that which we know we want, yet cannot ever achieve. In casting off capitalism we shall transcend our mortal confines and live forever in beautiful splendor. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4NKON3KmAY
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 11:57
|
|
|
the determinism "argument" is dumb as gently caress because even if it were 100% unambiguously true (which it probably is) it wouldn't matter because it is fundamentally impossible for you or anyone else to act as if they did not have free will. If it's an illusion it's one that you can't escape no matter what you do, so it's not worth pretending you can.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 15:08
|
|
|
Determinism is useful for understanding others, and how to manipulate them. Not great at the individual level but it obviously applies collectively. Helping people understand this helps destroy the myth of individualism and can help lead people out of liberalism
Harold Fjord has issued a correction as of 15:58 on Jan 31, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 15:48
|
|
|
Zodium posted:it might have helped to understand what was going on if we understood the very simple reason why we couldn't see Capital. it's for the same reason people in times square can't see america. hell, fly someone in times square up into space and ask them to show you america. when they point you can just be like "no that is a continental landmass. where are these 'states' and 'borders' you speak of? none of my instruments are detecting such things, sounds made up"
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 19:36
|
|
|
even in such a crowded field vol is the dumbest motherfucker in cspam
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 19:47
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:hell, fly someone in times square up into space and ask them to show you america. when they point you can just be like "no that is a continental landmass. where are these 'states' and 'borders' you speak of? none of my instruments are detecting such things, sounds made up" borders are trivially observable. launch a missile or send soldiers, try to drive some goods past, or you can just try walking from one country to another, then record the results. they're not psychic or spectral. they're not observable from space, as you note, which illustrates the importance of perceiving things at scales that are relevant for the control of action. i was just trying to be clever paraphrasing pratchett back at you, though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 21:20
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:quantum mechanics says otherwise lol the relative state formulation of qm perfectly captures all the existing behavior just as well as anything else and it does so in a way that doesn't require an "observer" waving a magic wand or rolling a pair of dice or anything else
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 21:46
|
|
|
croup coughfield posted:even in such a crowded field vol is the dumbest motherfucker in cspam You'll get there one day. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 22:09
|
|
|
Zodium posted:borders are trivially observable. launch a missile or send soldiers, try to drive some goods past, or you can just try walking from one country to another, then record the results. they're not psychic or spectral. they're not observable from space, as you note, which illustrates the importance of perceiving things at scales that are relevant for the control of action. i'm using the phrase "spectral" because marx did - he said that the value embodied by a commodity had a "spectral objectivity" (as opposed to that commodity's concrete, lab-demonstrable use-value). completely real and materially relevant, but only extant as emergent phenomena from social forces rather than anything a logical positivist would admit is real
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 23:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 15:19 |
|
|
MSDOS KAPITAL posted:that really depends on how you look at it the dice are there no matter how much bullshit about many worlds you want to put up: it is not possible to predict when a particular atom will decay, Heisenburg uncertainty is a real thing that the device with transistors you wrote your words with had to account for the future is open! even if it's only you have no idea which possible universe you'll end up at. there is no correct interpretation of QM that gets you back to the dreary clockwork of Kant and Newton
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 23:20
|
|