Sports writer kills himself, leaves behind website describing how and why

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
Short memories much? Take a look at any of his posts regarding biological sciences and medicine and realize he's constantly commenting on these topics, and he's always wrong.

There's a reason for that and it involves at least partially never being curious enough about the subjects to invest any time to figure out why he's wrong.

It's especially ironic coming from the guy who was saying "I shouldn't have to read Marx to comment on it"
Tanoomba is uniquely stupid, and you're rushing headlong to join him.

Strawman. I never said you shouldn't read Marx to comment on him. I said the argument that unless you've read ALL of Marx's writings in depth to the point that you can cite them chapter and verse like Dumar does, you can't criticize his ideas is fallacious.

Proof

Let me just add that your repeated insistence that everyone must read every inch of Das Kapital before they can criticize it is, again, bad logic. Let's simply apply it to another book by another ideological extremist to illustrate that viewpoint:

If you haven't readthe entirety of The Fountainhead and Atlus Shrugged, you can't criticize libertarians.
If you haven't readthe entirety of the Quran, you can't criticize Islam.
If you haven't readthe entirety of Dianetics, you can't criticize Scientology.
If you haven't read Mein Kampf you can't criticize the National Socialist race based world views.

I've read the Manifesto, I've read large tracts of Das Kapital.

If no one who wasn't a devotee and avid consumer of Marx could have an opinion on his philosophy, that would of course make people like you very happy, because most people don't give a fuck enough to read it. For lots of reasons. One being its a boring as shit political treatise from a century and a half ago that is quoted religiously like the Bible by dogmaticists like yourself.

But we do have opinions, on him, on people who espouse his treatise as truth without any willingness whatsoever to explore the possibility that he might be incorrect in some form or fasion, and we're going to keep on pointing out the hypocrisy, logical fallacies and flaws in your world view as long as necessary to expose it for what it is: An incredibly thin veneer used to obfuscate what amounts to a very mediocre thinker.
Tanoomba has demonstrated repeated inability to grasp simple biological concepts, like if you beat someone's head into concrete, it might just kill them. He's invalidated his capacity to comment on topics related to biology and medicine as a result.
 

TrollfaceDeux

Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
<Bronze Donator>
19,577
3,743
he needs to fuck a book. i mean that literally.

LITERALLY.

only then he can has perspectivez on science.

1.png
 

Tuco

I got Tuco'd!
<Gold Donor>
45,485
73,570
Short memories much? Take a look at any of his posts regarding biological sciences and medicine and realize he's constantly commenting on these topics, and he's always wrong.
Nobody is disputing that. You don't need to make it personal to refute his terrible, terrible opinions.
 

TrollfaceDeux

Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
<Bronze Donator>
19,577
3,743
i dunno how you can treat a nasty person with dignity and respect. i suppose ignore is the best way.
 

Burnesto

Molten Core Raider
2,142
126
Hodj isn't allowed to post in here since he's never committedsuicide. Until he does he should get infractions.
 

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
Nobody is disputing that. You don't need to make it personal to refute his terrible, terrible opinions.
I realize you, like most people, don't read his posts, but in case you hadn't noticed he made this personal on every post he makes long ago. So yeah.

Hodj isn't allowed to post in here since he's never committedsuicide. Until he does he should get infractions.
Tanoomba has to go first.
 

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
Yeah he's still pretty sore about getting his ass handed to him in that debate.

Its pretty funny.
 

Tanoomba

ジョーディーすれいやー
<Banned>
10,170
1,439
Tan. Have you ever stopped to think about this possibility: That Capitalism is a system which increases production based upon exploiting negative human qualities, such as greed and self interest. And it'sbecauseCapitalism exploits these qualities rather than suppress them, which previous systems used violence to do (For the lower classes), that we have greater production. And because we have greater production, there is less scarcity, and we are less prone to barbarity. Think about it, for a moment, in previous systems--every time greed/self interest wasnotsuppressedthrough the threat of violence, say, among the aristocracy, it ended up spiraling out of control. Capitalism doesn't attempt to suppress it, it attempts toharnessit, for all social classes (And no, it doesn't always work, but it works BETTER than anything previously--I could also write about how it works "better" for X class and how the elite exploit it, but this is a short, rough overview).

In other words, it's just as possible to say people are as shitty as ever, but the systems we have in place are better at spinning that shit into gold, as it is to say that people have gotten progressively more moral and ethical. If you look at any society that attempted to take these systems out, systems that direct greed and self interest into production, then you'll see it almost always devolves into another form of power collection that is overall far more reliant on violence for it's control and far less effective at spurring production (Even if innovation remains nominal).

The fact is, YOU are not smart enough to know whether your truth, or the above truth is correct. Neither am I. No one is. Some people have made some very educated guesses at it and that's why you see a lot of divergence in political-economic thought. But the fact remains, one system has proven to actually work, and increase most of the quality of life assessments we can measure--and that's Capitalism. You say there is a "next step", and I really hope there is, I really do, but there is very little evidence of it. The only thing we can point to, right now, is the success of more social elements in some Capitalist societies. Which leads me to believe there might be a next step, that maybe Marx was right, but his time scale was off by about 300 years.

I, personally, don't think humanity will make it to the next step until we achieve true post scarcity. And that's going to require fully mechanized labor, far more advanced resource synthesis techniques or some kind of singularity so we can have robot bodies. Until then? I do not, absolutely in no way, see a future built on the precepts that Marx thought existed below the greed/desire that Capitalism supposedly instills--I think that greed/desire is just there, and Capitalism simply utilizes it for production. And yeah, Capitalism might amplify them--but again, when we tried to suppress them? It didn't work out well (Historically or in modernity).
Lith, do you not believe we can feed the world's hungry? Do you not believe we can dramatically reduce our dependence on oil? Do you not believe war (especially war for profit) should be eliminated? Do you not believe that crime can be reduced by addressing the root causes of crime? Do you not believe that the world's resources should be used more responsibly? Do you not believe that the "war on drugs" is doing more harm than good and should be abandoned? I could go on, but you get the idea. These aren't pipe dreams. These are all things that can and should be happening right now. In every case, there is one thing preventing these things from happening: compromise of someone's profit. Is that greed part of human nature?It doesn't even matter. It's completely irrelevant. We are rational beings capable of analyzing our own nature and its effect on us, and we can dismiss it if we so choose.

And another thing: Something Dumar didn't mention is how manufactured experiences might have apositiveeffect on society. Let's say greed and the need to compete are inherent human traits. Guess what? We've found ways to tap into those drives that are completely harmless to society! Heck, isn't that what makes sports and video games so popular? Lithose, if you don't believe we can be doing better I don't know what else to tell you. If you believe we can, then the question is "why aren't we?" Clearly, I think the answer is pretty obvious.

Finally, as silly as most of you will think this sounds, there is no reason for me to believe a post-scarcity society is not well within our grasp. The pieces are all here already, waiting to be put together. We're not so much waiting to figure out solutions to problems as we are waiting to be allowed to implement these solutions. Well, that and we're waiting for people to stop drinking the "Capitalism is the best we can do" Kool-Ade. Our only obstacles are our mental preconceptions.
 

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
Tanoomba explain to us again how fitness as a selection mechanism for evolution isn't necessary anymore because Marx said so.

And a post scarcity society isn't within grasp because we are land locked on a fucking planet with a finite amount of resources, as long as that is the case post scarcity won't happen until we bomb ourselves back into the stone age.
 

Tuco

I got Tuco'd!
<Gold Donor>
45,485
73,570
Tanoomba, nothing you said at all addressed the points he made and how they don't destroy your world view. It's pretty disingenuous to respond to that with a bunch of shitty loaded questions and you should be embarrassed.
 

Tanoomba

ジョーディーすれいやー
<Banned>
10,170
1,439
Tanoomba, nothing you said at all addressed the points he made and how they don't destroy your world view. It's pretty disingenuous to respond to that with a bunch of shitty loaded questions and you should be embarrassed.
I addressed both his suggestion that greed is part of human nature and the possibility of a post-scarcity society, which he brought up, all in a package explaining why capitalism has outlived its usefulness and is now holding us back. What's your problem?
 

TrollfaceDeux

Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
<Bronze Donator>
19,577
3,743
damn tano is still hoisting that sig?
i swear man. every day i feel like i am justified in my hate and I am type of guy who doesn't like hate people personally since it bothers my conscience to hell... First time for everything

When did this forum become so srs.
 

Tanoomba

ジョーディーすれいやー
<Banned>
10,170
1,439
As an aside, here's a little "nature vs. nurture" for you:
Just watch the section where he talks about communicating with his son of a few months and then tell me we're not capable of so much more.
 

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
Here watch this youtube video to disprove the research of hundreds of thousands if not millions of researchers over the past century and a half!

Tanoomba gonna Tanoomba.

Anyway, altruism is postively correlated with genetic relatedness, so are choice of sexual partners and friends. You can't nurture away nature.