No Compromise when you're Right!

“If you are hater, and by that, I mean, for those who can’t actually tell me why you disagree, you just call people names like a child throwing a tantrum, then you can leave your hate email at”

That’s what you say on your “hate mail” page, and it’s exactly what you’re doing on this page, calling people names like a child. Why don’t you send yourself an email?

YOUREAHATER@gmail.com

And I’m an atheist, yet I’m a constitutionalist libertarian, not an, as you put it “postmodernist progressive sophist.” I don’t appreciate you bashing my beliefs, but then again, you seem to bash the beliefs of anyone who doesn’t agree with you, so I understand.

I do not believe someone is wrong for believing in God, your highness. Can you read my mind? Because you’re so quick to tell me what my own political beliefs are.

Morgan, it appears that nocomprromise is making that judgment based upon the visible effects and consequences of radical secular humanism, and it is not necessary to be a mind reader to make such a judgment of the visible fruit resulting from the widespread practice of secular humanism upon American culture, or any culture for that matter. Secular Humanism belief or unbelief does have tangible consequences when it is acted upon en masse by an entire culture, and the results are always evil, because they deny fundamental realities and human nature. This is not a subjective judgment as you suppose it is.

One of the properties possesed by postmodern secularists is that in their eyes, particular subjective feelings and attitudes assume a much greater importance and significance than the objective actions and results that logically follow from demonstrable objective causes.

Another thing to point out, is that a person may not have any FEELINGS of hatred for God or their fellow humans, but their actions would indicate hatred nonetheless. But since the postmodernist attaches more importance to subjective feelings than they do to objective actions, they therefore conclude and they truly believe that they indeed do not hate God nor their fellow man. To be told otherwise based upon their actions is very uncomfortable for them. I know, because I used to think that subjective intent was more important than objective actions. It is a very slippery slope that leads one away from Truth and Reality. In order to escape such thinking, you must make the decision to love objective Truth more than what happens to be subjectively pleasing to our feelings or lusts at any given moment.

“In order to escape such thinking, you must make the decision to love objective Truth more than what happens to be subjectively pleasing to our feelings or lusts at any given moment.”

That’s what I do. Problem is what some deluded few define as “truth,” when it is clearly not when you look at cute little things called facts.

I am a Post, Post, Modernist I believe the Internet is God, Google the Virgin Mary that spawned Jesus, oops I meant Facebook as our savior.

I am glad to see that Morgan is reinforcing my opinion that the minority in this country dictates to and “holds hostage” the majority. Morgan is an example of the minority. He calls us “some deluded few”, when in reality HE is the minority. Please read and reread what Ontologist wrote, because you really need to open your eyes and start thinking for yourself.

Another example of the minority dictating to the majority are gays/lesbians. They are currently pushing themselves into our lives by using the liberal media / Hollyweird. Something like every 2 out of 10 shows on network TV now has a character that is gay (this estimate is a guess…not a fact liberals!!). Why do they think we wish to see two men kissing, or two women kissing? The vast majority of us believe that marriage should be between one man and one woman. Please stop pushing your agendas on us!

Thank you for hijacking philosophy.

Your ontologist probably fancies himself a heuristic oncologist as well.

Here’s to adapting names we don’t undestand.

Yea I’m really not a fan of any practice that denies emotions. Yes, they can be dangerous when not tempered by the mind but the mind without the emotions is just as hideous and dangerous. The problem with thinking in terms of Objective Reality is not that it doesn’t exist, the problem epistemological: our minds are incapable of completely understanding Objective Reality. This can be put in philosophical terms but it can also be viewed as a computational problem: to fully represent reality and then make a fully rational decision would require an amount of processing that is orders of magnitude larger than the operating capacity of our mind. In order to cope and make decisions that are approximately rational, the mind must abstract details of the universe. Many important details can be hidden by the process of abstraction. The most persistent and fundamental is using a simplified model to represent other human beings. It was this model that allowed slavery, hate crimes, and — here’s a bone nocompromise — religious persecution to occur. Once something is modelled in that way, our minds will become blind to it. Thankfully there is a mechanism is place that is able to counteract it: the emotions.

“All models are wrong but some are useful”

What postmodernists like the fantastic Lucy Suchman — a postmodern feminist and very influential information technology designer — have noticed is this epistemological problem: we can only represent and hence refer to a constrained or abstracted view of reality. This is demonstrably true. However, we don’t need a fully complete model in order to act in a useful or ethical way. The way an individual uniquely represents that world can be inferred by studying their dialogue and seeing the way objects and individuals are distinguished, this is the idea behind the practice of ethnography. One leason that post modern thoughts teaches is to realize framing problems among individuals. Many problems can occur when individuals with very different views of reality try to reach an agreement. Oftentimes, the problems can be readily understood by seeing how the two individuals use a different model or frame for reality.

These ideas have also been discussed by non “post modern” philosphers like the analytical philosopher Bertrand Russell. So it is not unique to post modernism, but post modernism does express it in a succicint and in my opinion poignant way.

First of all…not a liberal.
I am a postmodern cynic…which is different from the definition of post modernity you lay out in that, to me, nothing is sacred and everything is fair game in terms of scrutiny and criticism. It’s kind of like the inverse of pluralist acceptance. I think that irreverence is healthy. I don’t believe in buying other people’s sales pitches…whether the case made is for accepting Jesus or making money in real estate with no money down.

I try to do the right thing…I treat people the way I would expect to be treated. I have no particular religious affiliation. It’s not very important to me.

ZOMG eevul marxists and postmodernists want to take your kids away and put them on communes!!!!

Not too too big a fan of PoMo, but how is it a “threat” to our society? When you talk about the “meaning of life” you talk as if there’s a pre-prescribed one-size-fits-all meaning. Not true. People’s epistemological frames, values, etc. are mainly shaped by the conditions they’ve lived in. I’d prefer to do the existentialist thing: experience life and create my own meaning and values.

As well, I can make a prediction from your far-right libertarian rantings that you fear people’s lack of wisdom and knowledge (as you define those terms) will lead to their de-valuing of life, which will then in turn result in loss of liberty due to people’s alleged obliviousness towards the importance of autonomy in our lives. I think you have it backwards. Like many anarchist writers have said, if you create a free society in the here and now, people’s values will change radically. Give people freedom and they will value it. This means getting off your butt and working to create an alternative system to the one we have now.

Aie. Yes, if raised on a farm where babies are tortured, one will have this “value” but they are still wrong, because there is meaning to life, because there’s a book on how to give life meaning. Anarchists? There is no freedom in anarchy, and I invite you to take to the woods or jungle and come home when you miss being free. Occupy America was given all the freedom they pleased to trash the city and ignore its laws and they trashed the city and ignored its laws. They may or may not have valued their time while they were doing it, but the free folk following the rules lost many valuables. The bible contains the laws of freedom, and without following them, you are a slave. Rob freely, enjoy your service to fear, kill freely, enjoy your service to shame, lie freely, enjoy your service to guilt, be a free gay, and I hope to g-d you realize what you serve before its too late.

Your next sentence is foolish. You go make an alernative system in a hippie druggie commune. I like the part of the country where there’s buildings, and people. We built this system, its ours. Libbies corrupted it. If we have to run from a libbie, we conservatives are no longer hard-core. If everyone that could make the system better moved out, they would kill us and keep the dummies that protest and support as they’re “informed” is correct. I’m staying to fight for this current system firstly over… the rest of the planet, and when its confirmed that there’s a day we’re safe, I go be a good and useful person in my life.

People like her find information so I don’t have to spend my life looking, and it helps me make informed descisions in situations where I would not have known better. Every second she stays on her butt keeps mine and other reader’s butts in better places than they would have been.

What the —- do you do for society? What was that thing about whimpering about the beam in her eye before you deal with the moat in your own? And what’s your perfect alternative system anyways? Every dummy has to go around telling everyone they’re wrong, like its all they study, and couldn’t tell you the first thing about right except for spouting off fancy words like free, peace and love, and have no idea on how any of these are acheived, maintained, or firstly what they’re supposed to mean other than “very tender and pretty”.

Is that what you’re here to do, promote anarchism? Who’s your candidate anyways? lol.

@Julia

Just stumbled upon this website. Very impressed! You nail it!