Why does the left hate crypto so much?

sus

sus

Moderator
luka said:
its ok in these situations just to admit your out of your depth with the likes of hiedigger. better to be honest and straighfoward
Click to expand...
I've read Being & Time. The guy literally has a concept called "Being" that's all about how things "are," and how crazy and cool it is to "be"

The entire existentialist school is like Holden Caulfield formalized as philosophy. Heidegger is probably the most sophisticated, least adolescent version of it—but that's not especially high praise.
 
sus

sus

Moderator
catalog said:
you should all read a short essay by heidegger called "the question concerning technology" it's very good. it's better than benjamin.
Click to expand...
Benjamin blows, I've read the majority of what he's written and the only good bits are the childhood memoirs.
 
T

thirdform

pass the sick bucket
suspended said:
I've read Being & Time. The guy literally has a concept called "Being" that's all about how things "are," and how crazy and cool it is to "be"

The entire existentialist school is like Holden Caulfield formalized as philosophy. Heidegger is probably the most sophisticated, least adolescent version of it—but that's not especially high praise.
Click to expand...

He's right. Existentialism is nauseating.

See how we can have a conversation when he doesn't get involved in the culture war nonsense? Leave the experimentation and fate of humanity to bordroom meetings. Let's live, love, fuck and drink.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: sus
luka

luka

Well-known member
this is where your insecurity shows through. you want to pretend youve read and understood this stuff. you havent. of course you havent. no one here except poetix can read that shit. we're way too thick. lets be realistic.
 
C

catalog

Well-known member
suspended said:
I've read Being & Time. The guy literally has a concept called "Being" that's all about how things "are," and how crazy and cool it is to "be"

The entire existentialist school is like Holden Caulfield formalized as philosophy. Heidegger is probably the most sophisticated, least adolescent version of it—but that's not especially high praise.
Click to expand...
you've not read being and time. stop kidding yourself.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: sus
T

thirdform

pass the sick bucket
luka said:
this is where your insecurity shows through. you want to pretend youve read and understood this stuff. you havent. of course you havent. no one here except poetix can read that shit. we're way too thick. lets be realistic.
Click to expand...

It's very easy to understand if you have grounding in islamic tafsir. @other_life is Jewish so she understands it as well.
 
sus

sus

Moderator
You know who loves Heidegger actually, and is the one reason that I'm optimistic I'm wrong about ol Martin, and he's actually got a lot going for him

Terrence Malick. Reason I decided to pick Heidegger up in the first place.
 
luka

luka

Well-known member
i mean, gus is very young and grew up in a hothoused and highly competitive environment, very pushy parents, i dont think any less of him for pretending to have read it. but he doesnt have to keep that act up with us
 
sus

sus

Moderator
Ol Terry's a bit of a philosopher himself. Probably why you don't like the films Luke. Miles above ya
 
C

catalog

Well-known member
suspended said:
You know who loves Heidegger actually, and is the one reason that I'm optimistic I'm wrong about ol Martin, and he's actually got a lot going for him

Terrence Malick. Reason I decided to pick Heidegger up in the first place.
Click to expand...
you know what else motivates terrne malick? that he was asked to go and collect his brother from spain by his dad, cos his brother was training to be a bullfighter and got badly injured and then depressed. and terry never went. and his brother died.
 
sus

sus

Moderator
Going back to reading Gregory Bateson, this convo's running out of steam and I have cybernetics to learn. @Clinamenic you read "Substance, Form, Difference"?
 
Clinamenic

Clinamenic

Binary & Tweed
suspended said:
Proceeding in good faith means actively caring what the other person is saying, what they mean, actively steelmanning their position, and then pointing out problems.

Jumping in with bizarre insults and condescensions that completely miss the point of the post they respond to is not what it means to operate in good faith.
Click to expand...
What you're describing seems to me like being a good at dialogue, playing your dialectical part, being diplomatic and amiable, etc.

I think third can be harsh and disrespectful, but I wouldn't call that bad faith.

In my case, proceeding in bad faith usually involves pride derailing my involvement in the dialogue, getting hung up on defending arguments rather than allowing them to be informed and corrected. Sometimes I also just get confused about what I am even arguing, which makes good/bad faith a blurry distinction
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top