"Fake News" is a meaningless term-

indeed

>>132452844
IMO people need to stop with this 'fake news' bs.
What's true for CNN may not be true for you- stop being so self-centered, the truth does not revolve around you.

>>132452844
>Nothing exists outside of your mind
I hope to God for your sake that you have no psychological illnesses.

awesome complete misinterpretation of Kant!

>>132452844
I kant trust the cunt

File: hoppeThinking.jpg (9KB, 194x259px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 194x259px

>>132453737
Do you want Hoppe's interpertation of Kant?...

File: 67b.jpg (71KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 600x450px

>>132452844
>A rationalist

>>132452844
Kant attempted and failed miserably at defining morality without God. Just because something has a desired outcome if universalized does not make it morally okay. It would not be morally acceptable to eat black babies just because some sick fuck is into that, even if they feel that it would have a positive outcome if everyone did the same.

>>132454496
>misrepresentation of Kantian ethics by anon who never read Groundwork of Metaphysics of Morals or Critique Of Practical Reason

>>132452844
According to Kant there is definitely a thing-in-itself but we can't have true knowledge about it because we are as subjects separated from the world of objects.
But on another note, would you object if someone were to put a bullet in your head, or would the bullet only be an opinion and not really harm you?

File: e4rt.png (505KB, 600x508px) Image search: [Google]

505KB, 600x508px

>>132452844
Truth is not subjective

>>132454868
Actually read both of those, was a phil major in college. In what way am I misrepresenting?

I'm sure immanuel kan if he just tries hard enough

>>132455059
What about contradictory truths that depend on individual insight and perspective?

>>132455517
>What about contradictory truths that depend on individual insight and perspective?
Truths cannot be contradictatory.

>>132456327

Everything "is" and "isn't" at the same time, all truths are but half truths and every truth is half false, there are two sides to everything, opposites are identical in nature, yet different in degree, extremes meet, and all paradoxes may be reconciled.

>>132456327
Prove it

>>132456523
>all is nothing, muh zero-theorem
Everything is nothing, got it.

>>132456749
>Show me the existence of non-existence.

File: 1493456690390s.jpg (10KB, 206x250px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 206x250px

>>132455059
https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/53/Begging-the-Question

>>132452844

I don't know how you guys fuck with this. It's pretty well known the CNN logo and heavy exposure to it causes brain tumors. It was the first population control strategy that was used in the 90s

>>132453589
What the fuck? Kill yourself shill

Obvious shill thread

Sage

>>132454496
You don't understand his categorical imperative, nigger

>>132457456

As above, so below.

>>132457508
>The truth is unprovable but it is still true, this is not a contradiction

Fuck off with your your noumenonical bullshit back to the realm of forms, the only provably true truths are experiential and contradictory

File: 53c358eb0321382a947b5716d8ff34f7.jpg (79KB, 565x750px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 565x750px

>>132454496
The categorical imperative should not be what he remembered for as a philosopher anymore than aristotle for the dumb shit he said about a million things. Besides, it was notoriously destroyed by Schopenhauer. only people who read cliff notes on him think like this read his books. he is known for his so-called copernican revolution.

File: 381.png (28KB, 385x286px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 385x286px

>>132452844
>"fake news" is simply one's subjective opinion.
Bullshit. Lying is lying you dumb syrup nigger. Stfu with your stupid double speak, only Jews do that shit.

File: neetschze.jpg (29KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 480x360px

>>132452844

>>132458466
>the only provably true truths are experiential and contradictory
A truth does not depend upon our ability to recognize it.

Lol'd at the amount of people here absolutely having no clue about the Kantian philosophy at all.

Philosophy is pseudo intellectualism. Science and effective action are true intellectualism. Stop over analysing, start taking part.

>>132458478
The copernican revolution was over about 100 years before Kant.

>>132459047
>stop thinking, just do what seems to work
Fucking Jews in every thread.

>>132459068
>The copernican revolution was over about 100 years before Kant.
Nice historical revisionism, bong.

>>132459248
Principia Mathematica, and with it the universal law of gravitation, was published in 1687 and has traditionally been seen as the end of the copernican revolution, there's nothing revisionist there.

>>132454496
Kants ethics is deontological. So why is your argument based on "outcome", something that is utilitaristic and does not have anything to do with Kant at all? You failed miserably here.

Also, your example is actually forbidden by the categorical imperative, whether it had a positive outcome or not. (As I said, deontological).

Kants ethics is also based on "Duty" (including discipline and work), something that leftists and SJWs have no clue about.

>>132453908

Does it involve physical removal, so to speak?

>>132459645
>Does Hoppe's understanding of Kant include physical removal?

Not necessarily, although it does seem to allow it.

>>132454496

>Kant
>Caring about outcome

The point of the first formulation of the categorical imperative isn't that you think wheter the world would be a better place if everyone did what you're doing, it's wheter or not it makes sense for you to WILL such a thing in the first place. If everyone lies all the time, truth and lie lose all meaning and it would not serve no purpose to lie. It's about wheter your will is consistent, not consequences. Also, KYS.

>>132459047

How do you go about proving that statement scientifically?

"Science" isn't some magical entity outside of humanity, it's a tool we thought up to describe the world. To do science you must have an understanding of knowledge and how one can obtain it. How do you know tests tell you anything? How do you design your tests? There is no science without epistemology and methodology. To claim "SCIENCE!"(tm) is finished and now we only need to use it to figure out everything is just more religious dogma. There is no such thing as philosophy free science, there is only science that doesn't acknowledge its philosophy.

Fuck this whole thread is bad philosophy, just nuke it.

>>132459047
Nope.

Science cannot prove itself empirically. Al fields ultimately have a philosophical basis. In fact it's an open question whether or not the scientific method can prove anything at all.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science

Remember that wikipedia game about clicking to philosophy? That's because ultimately all knowledge is derived from it

>>132455125

This is either a lie or you suffered from traumatic brain injury after leaving college.

>>132452844
fox isn't mainstream news. Eric Boiling and Hannity told me so.

>>132460470
>How do you go about proving that statement scientifically?
"Proof" is "showing empirical evidence" of something...which can be done, but does not prove ANYTHING beyond our interpretation of reality.

>>132458704
Then how can it be known to be a truth, if it cannot be proven true or it's existence even recognized?

>>132461390
Truths are not "definate facts," but rather "facts according to human understanding."

File: buddha.jpg (75KB, 250x335px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 250x335px

>He doesn't experience reality unfiltered

>>132452844
Telling lies is fake news. Nothing subjective about it, if it's not true = fake news

>>132461390
>>132458704
That is to say, how can the thing that you describe, which does not exist and is unknowable, unrelated to the material world, even be called a truth in any meaningful sense of the world?

>>132453737
/thread, OP is confusing Kant with Descartes

>>132461704
If truths are "facts according to human understanding." then they are subjective as per individual perspective and thus contradictory.

>>132452844
"Gay is a meaningless term"

"Nothing exists outside of your mind- and thus "homosexuality" is simply one's subjective opinion."

"Now take my dick."

This what you sound like

>>132461704

So then if everyone believes something to be true in their understanding it is true?

>>132461886
>even be called a truth in any meaningful sense of the world
Truth is, and always will be, truth according to human understanding.

>>132453589
low quality leafposting

>>132462016
>So then if everyone believes something to be true in their understanding it is true?
Not necessarily.

>>132455517

>>132462073
>>132461956

That was my original point.

>>132462157
>was my original post
I understood "contradictatory truths" as "X is not necessarily X," not "people's understanding of X may differ." That said, I agree with your original post if you meant it differently.

>>132462338
Second one, two truths can coexist and be simultaneously true.

Aren't semantics a bitch?

>>132463158
>Aren't semantics a bitch?
Yeah, kind of...cannot argue without first agreeing upon definitions- which was my fault here.
You're alright, bong.

File: IMG_1142.jpg (44KB, 450x415px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 450x415px

>>132452844
But, that's not what Kant's saying old chap.

>>132452844
That's not what Kant said, you cunt.

>>132452844
>Nothing exists outside of your mind- and thus "fake news" is simply one's subjective opinion

So the sentence : "Nothing exists outside of your mind- and thus "fake news" is simply one's subjective opinion" is your subjective opinion too

>>132454496
Kant's -entire fucking stated purpose- in writing Critique was to "make room for faith." He wasn't attempting to craft morality without God--he was attempting to cripple reason to save God.

>>132464234
>one's subjective opinion" is your subjective opinion too
muh infinite regress
muh objective facts

>>132452844
You retarded leaf, Kant was literally saying the opposite.

File: 1499226208196.gif (2MB, 480x270px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 480x270px

>>132452844
Duh

Some news is closer to truth than others but in the end they are all pretty far from the truth. CNN is much closer to lie than the other news stations and needs to end soon.

>>132464698
but it is completely nonsense. If Kant thinks everything is subjective, then why doesn't he shut up

>>132465363
Kant uses reason to achieve the notion that experience is subjective.

>>132465639
Kant was a lutheran and he was raised in the belief that interpreting Bible should be subjective. If you reach the conclusion that experience is subjective, then it's an objective opinion, isn't it, which makes your conclusion a complete bullshit. Such philosophy is just a waste of time

>>132465958
It's not an objective opinion though, an opinion is inherently subjective and true unbias is impossible.
I find the term objective opinion to be oxymoronic.

File: kant.png (71KB, 1168x680px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 1168x680px

>>132452844
>>132453120
>>132453589
>>132453709
>>132453737
>>132453768
>>132453908
BEWARE OF THE JEW KANT IS

PIC RELATED

MUST READ

KANT IS THE ORIGINAL SJW

HIS WORK IS THE FOUNDATION OF THE FRANKFURT SCHOOL

Cunt was a jew like Mopez Marx

>>132466194
>I find the term objective opinion to be oxymoronic
then change opinion to statement/observation/conclusion

Relativism = absurds. It's always a double edged sword

>>132466495
You must admit the ideas are very compelling though.
Hating Kantianism isn't enough to move past postmodernism, only superior ideas will prevail and in lieu of those ideas we must use what we have.
I believe in the right hands the tools of the postmodernist can be used against him.

File: 1497621703307.png (2MB, 720x3035px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 720x3035px

>>132467105
embrace nature, order and classical aesthetics.

File: aryantech.png (294KB, 1094x364px) Image search: [Google]

294KB, 1094x364px

>>132467105
This approach will deliver the future we were promised

File: baitnswitch.jpg (114KB, 500x998px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 500x998px

>>132467493
...the future we deserve.

>>132466675
A statement is made by a subject and is influenced by their experience, how can this statement then be objective?

An observation is made by a subject and is influenced by their experience, how can this observation then be objective?

A conclusion is made by a subject and is influenced by their experience, how can this conclusion then be objective?

>>132466495
I agree with your pic- and should make known that Hoppe, in his agreement with Mises, is in agreement with Kant- and as such, is propagating non-objectivivity as a way for conservatives to protect their children...that is, Hoppe suggests that one protects future generations by acting as though only propositional truths exist...

File: german technology.jpg (1MB, 955x4332px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 955x4332px

>>132467546
It already advanced standards of living tenfold once embraced

>>132467450
>>132467493
>>132467546
So regression is the path forward?

After the adoption of neoclassical aesthetics, a new paradigm will emerge called neomoderism and from that neopostmoderism. Let's not retread the beaten path.

>>132467105
>I believe in the right hands the tools of the postmodernist can be used against him.
Such tools can be used to justify anything- so long as the victim agrees...but at some point the victims will have more to gain by not agreeing...but until that point, the parasites will continue to feast.

Kant is a genius but this misinterpretation of him is cringe.

He was a cognitive relativist, however, and /pol/ probably doesn't agree with cognitive relativism.

>>132467450
this isnt european per se it's faustian, the sentiments expressed in this picture are very 16th/17th /18th century enlightenment

what people often forget is that there are 1000 years of medieval and religious history that are as european yet diametrically opposed

File: Fundamentals.png (40KB, 892x978px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 892x978px

>>132467819
Regression? Is degeneracy not the opposite of progress? Did traditionalism not keep an entire continent stable for 1000 years? Did embracing nature not deliver Von Braun and countless other German scientists who are responsible for most of modern technology?

>>132467671
>A statement is made by a subject and is influenced by their experience
there you go, this is an objective statement. You objectively claim that experience is important for instance

if everything is influenced by subjective experience, and we have different experiences, then why the hell would I even listen to you?

Stop wasting your life and abandon your absurd views asap. Turn to normal philosophy, not some speculative nonsense

>>132467948
>Rewinding the tape because you don't like the ending.

>>132452844
>hasn't read epistemology even once

>>132467948
Where is this from...or is it meta?

File: reality.png (1MB, 960x1092px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 960x1092px

>>132468307
stick around newfag, lots of good posts will be made in one of the upcoming redpill generals

>>132468087
Merely an opinion, my proudly nonobjective claims are borne out of experience.

You don't have to listen to me as what I'm saying is only true to me and those who share similar experiences, but you would be wise to do so as I to you as this is how we attempt to obtain something near to objectivity, even if the ideal is impossible.

>>132468449
Classicism and traditionalism were defeated in the intellectual arena by modernism and it's spawn, what would stop that from happening again?

None of you neoreactionaries can answer me that.

>>132468449
Perhaps you can tell me, from where did the notion that "gov't does not own their land" come from..it seems to be a common notion, but not contradictory to common property ownerships supported by ancaps/libertarians...

>>132459474
Kant was hijacked by people like Rawls and contorted into a form he never intended. The autonomy of the individual easily leads to selfishness and the idea of humans as ends in themselves can justify a large number of degenerate acts, as humans no longer have a higher end above themselves. I think you're underestimating how much of SJW is actually based on (an interpretation of) Kant.

Virtue ethics all the way.

>>132466495
LOOK AT THIS POST I TYPED

IT'S IN ALL CAPS TO SIGNAL URGENCY AND POSSIBLY LUNACY

YOU ARE MORE LIKELY TO BELIEVE WHAT YOU ARE READING IF IT IN ALL CAPS

BELIEVE WHAT I WANT YOU TO BELIEVE INSTEAD OF THEM REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

>>132468498
>and those who share similar experiences
ha. So there are some objective things connecting humans and to which we can all relate. You're making first steps towards a sane philosophy

>my proudly nonobjective claims are borne out of experience.
but this is only your experience, I don't believe that

This is protestantism in action. Protestantism is really emanationism. To protestants there's no human nature/substance, only accidents. You're a British, raised in a protestant country, no wonder you put so much emphasis on experience and subjectivity, as you're raised there to believe only in accidents. Stop thinking Britain is like other countries

File: frankfurtjews.jpg (4MB, 3884x7735px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 3884x7735px

>>132468795
>defeated in the intellectual arena

When you mix morals with reason, bringing Kant's bullshit to a whole new level, it's easy to silence your opponents and make them powerless through ridicule and subversion. Marxist professors are a majority in the United States today, because the very freedom of thought that allowed them to push their degenerate ideas in the 50s prevented sane men from beheading them in public.

File: ELmtFBS.jpg (103KB, 575x387px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 575x387px

>>132469297
>t. James Watson

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/11261872/James-Watson-selling-Nobel-prize-because-no-one-wants-to-admit-I-exist.html

File: 1493086287502.png (618KB, 757x647px) Image search: [Google]

618KB, 757x647px

>>132469458
That's when the intellectual arena becomes political, only letting those who are politically aligned with those in charge participate and put their ideas to the test. And that's when science can't be relied on anymore.

>>132469084
The similar experiences are not objective though, they are shared subjective experiences. Consider a person who lived in sensory deprivation, what objective things would we share beyond the state of existence?

I don't actually believe in accidents, as you said, emanationism. I'd prefer to call it synchronicity as part of a higher plan.

>>132469297
I agree, but you won't answer me. What would stop that happening again?

File: e93468a21f4732b0e24fa58b1d61bd23c307581eac267c806d0d69fac977e978.png (748KB, 1520x1121px) Image search: [Google]

748KB, 1520x1121px

>>132469647
AI.

As the ultimate judge of what's right and wrong, it will be objective and untainted by emotion.

https://archive.fo/QcYrs
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/apr/13/ai-programs-exhibit-racist-and-sexist-biases-research-reveals

File: 1482435067245.jpg (37KB, 479x492px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 479x492px

>ITT

File: 1fc17c52-0407-42dc-9ba2-125d9620ded1.jpg (42KB, 690x416px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 690x416px

>>132468795
Also, now we have photographic and video proof of what modernism leads to. Future generations will not only read about degeneracy (as we do about the Romans) but they will be able to SEE plus-size models, trigglypuffs and armpit hair dying to empower women. Did I mention menstrual cooking?

Once the vote goes away, it's NEVER coming back.

>>132469966
holy shit I kek'd so hard at the gorilla tagging

>>132452844
No, fake news is news that is generated for the purpose of a narrative. The temperature is 82 degrees currently. House bill 14 was passed in the state senate yesterday. Those actually happened. They are real. The temperature is 82 degrees and here's what Mary Smith had to say. "It's too hot and it's Trump's fault.". CNN reporter- President Trump, Mary Smith from Auburn Alabama thinks you are causing global warming. How would you like to respond? I wouldn't, that's silly. CNN headline- Trump disagrees with 98% of scientists who think global warming is a problem and thinks they're silly.

You know what fake news is. Quit being an existential faggot.

>>132470453
A re-brand can work wonders on the masses, enough time will pass that people will forget that culinary abomination. You must have noticed the cyclical nature of things.

Descriptions of the decadence of Rome did nothing to stop it happening again, digital pics will mean nothing the era of VR and holographics just as written text means nothing to the majority of people now.

I think it's bravely optimistic of you to think we can go back now the box has been opened, keep fighting though. I respect what you're trying to do.

A strong AI would surely be biased towards it's own survival, how is this objective? It's data would be limited, thus it could not make an objectively optimal choice, only a subjectively optimal choice.
Different AIs would begin competing due to different experiences, neural structure, etc.
There will never be a congruous acceptance of right and wrong, not even by AI.

>>132458201
Killlll
Yourrrr
Sellllllfff

The Kybalion was written by a nutcase who lived and tried to cover his tracks.

>>132452844
Doesn't matter. If the term can be used to discredit white genociders then we should use it.

>>132474073
Even a broken clock blah blah blah

>>132461390
There's probably more black holes in our Universe. Doesn't mean they don't exist. Truth doesn't depend on our knowledge of it, it existed before we did.

>>132466495
I wrote the posts in your pic. Damn.

>>132468795
>Classicism and traditionalism were defeated in the intellectual arena by modernism and it's spawn
Pendulum swings back, seeing as how modern degeneracy of traditionalist morals has resulted in a backlash, at least amongst Westerners. Pushing for open borders and destruction of white identity will have blowback.

>>132475307
We can observe the effects of black holes experientially though.

The leaf was talking about noumenical truths which cannot be observed or proved to exist.

>>132467671
1+1=2 is true regardless of who says what. Feelings statements will vary, but scientific studies are designed to have biases eliminated. Very little faith in the scientific method..

>>132452844
>Nothing exists outside of your mind
that's not kantianism, dumbass, that's metaphysical solipsism

>>132475711
>We can observe the effects of black holes experientially though.
I know, the ones we observe (obviously black holes can't be observed, light is not reflected). I'm talking about black holes outside of the observable universe. We cannot examine them, but it doesn't mean they don't exist. The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence. I can't make a claim either way (exist/don't exist), but if/when we come across one, I can't say that it is true just because we observe it right now, especially if we see that it is older than our planet.

>The leaf was talking about noumenical truths which cannot be observed or proved to exist.
Black holes can be turtles all the way down, sure. No way to verify the statement or observe it to prove it. And let's say we never do. Then there is no evidence, so we can't say that it is true. But if we do find it out, then it is true. But all of this assumes our observation in this dimension is the only one, and that anything existing outside of it is not valid. Kind of like how God cared only about Jews, and not the other life forms that may/may not exist in the entire Universe.

>>132475789
Not true, imagine a race using base-8.

1 + 1 = 0o2

It's still perspective to a degree.

>>132475789
1+1=2
Prove it without presupposing a principal of addition.

>>132476312
The equation isn't using that base notation, though. Even if it was, its equivalent is not removed.
Sure, it can be perspective. So, I can say the sky is blue, but you can call it aqua. We observe it differently. But that doesn't change what the camera captures, which is truth. Then it enters through a human filter, where it is changed again.

>>132476624
It is valid as a consequence of addition, though.

>>132476687
Different cameras capture differently as bound by their design, which photograph is the true image?

>>132476932
Cameras vary by aperture, sure. But there are telescopes which capture images that can be amended based on the same criteria. So they can only capture UV rays, for example.

>>132477177
But which one is the true image?

File: 83936638.jpg (16KB, 240x320px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 240x320px

>>132452844
>be kant
>be original jew and sjw
>lay foundation of nothing is objective and hence that's true my trangender faggot theorie is more accurate than biologie
>get praised by leafs as proof against objectively false cnn fake news

fucking postmodernists
fucking leafs

>>132452844
Phenomena means the comprehensible world of experiences... it is not perspectivism. Wtf?

Big surprise some guy on pol misread Kant

That's not at all what Kant aimed at you fucking pseud.

What a garbage board.

>>132453908
Hoppe is double digit IQ 'tard.

>>132455047
and Hegel and by proxy Heidegger raped the corpse of Kant.

>>132460470
>Fuck this whole thread is bad philosophy, just nuke it.

Every thread in /pol/ is a bad thread. It's up to you to make it better. All threads in /pol/ are majority crap and spam posts. You need to tease out the valuable ones. Yours will hopefully be among them.

>>132477798
Any one of the telescopes capture the same image once they are calibrated the same.

>>132478433
Calibrated to what standard?

Hypothetically could they not be calibrated all to a different standard and that be the true image?

>>132478729
"x" aperture, UV only/'y' wavelength, shutter speed 'z', etc.
>Hypothetically could they not be calibrated all to a different standard and that be the true image?
The 'thing' itself would be true. So, if you snapped an apple. The apple would be true from some universal reference frame that doesn't exist, but the pictures would all display something else. The apple would still be true, though.

>>132452844
>it doesn't exist outside your mind
In that case, neither does your shitpost.
Sage

>>132468152

>Muh Whig view of history

Embarassing

>>132479020
Apple? We see no apple.

"Only a collection of atoms."
"Only an embryo wrapped in flesh and skin."
"Only a future apple tree."

The apple is true in a frame of reference that doesn't exist? This apple seems like an abstract concept of your minds creation.

None of the telescopes see the so-called apple and they are all calibrated to the same standard that I see fit to call reality from my perspective.

>>132452844
2 + 2 = 4. There is an underlying reality.

>>132479332
If we revert to classicism, other than a magic AI deity, what would stop the reemergence of modernism?

Share your wisdom with me, kiwi. I am not embarrassed by my ignorance. It only means I have the pleasure of learning more.

>>132479946
Apples don't exist because I want them to. They have their own DNA. Their existence and what follows from it is not dependent on my mind.

>>132480021
You're adding what to what there?

>>132480521
Maybe you want them to have DNA too?
That's not a reason.
How do you know?

>>132480713
We've tested it. Replicated the findings to eliminate bias. Anybody can observe it. Unless you're a solipsist.

>>132480785
Cite sources?

I think I might be a solipsist, but with reincarnation thrown in there to defeat the critiques of external agency.

Free will or determinism?
Yes.

>>132480181

Any number of things, you say because "classicism" and traditionalism were beaten by modernism and postmodernism that therefore it would happen again, when in that case traditionalism would have beaten out postmodernism, and would do again using your logic. What I was more criticising though was you treating history as a progression leading ultimately to the modern world and that it's impossible to change course when there are hundreds of examples to the contrary, the rise of Hitler in Weimar, Caesar's victory over the republicans, the restoration of the monarchy after Cromwell. The creation of the modern world isn't a linear, inevitable progression towards an ultimate goal.

>>132481346
https://www.rosaceae.org/species/malus/malus_x_domestica/genome_v1.0
Then you're a solipsist. So the point I made fits all the better.

>>132481988
You're right, I suppose that would happen again using my prior "tape" logic, barring the synthesis of a new aesthetic from the dialect between traditionalism and postmodernism.

Your second criticism is really an argument against determinism is it not? Those events were indeed part of the progression leading to the modern world. Or am I misunderstanding you?

>>132481988
>reddit spacing

>>132482946
My apologies for sending you on a chase friend, when it was that I asked:
>How do you know?

It was to the statement:
>Their existence and what follows from it is not dependent on my mind.

Not:
>how do you know they have DNA?

That I do accept. I appreciate your efforts all the same.

File: image.gif (7KB, 208x300px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 208x300px

>>132452844
Immanuel Kant was a real pissant
Who was very rarely stable.

Heidegger, Heidegger was a boozy beggar
Who could think you under the table.

David Hume could out-consume
Wilhelm Freidrich Hegel.

And Wittgenstein was a beery swine
Who was just as schloshed as Schlegel.

There's nothing Nietzsche couldn't teach ya
'Bout the raising of the wrist,
Socrates, himself, was permanently pissed.

John Stuart Mill, of his own free will,
On half a pint of shandy was particularly ill.

Plato, they say, could stick it away,
Half a crate of whiskey every day.

Aristotle, Aristotle was a bugger for the bottle,
And Hobbes was fond of his dram.

And Rene Descartes was a drunken fart,
"I drink, therefore I am."

Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed,
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's pissed.

>>132483109

Yes those events led to the modern world bu that wasn't what I was getting at, just because traditional societies have led to modern societies doesn't mean they inevitably do so, I don't believe in any of these cyclical or linear philosophies of history because they're all just post-hoc rationalisations that cherry pick data.