Mr. Tea

Shub-Niggurath, Please
One guy expressed the dominant philosophical argument, yes. You're welcome to try to defeat his argument and get published
I think what this guy has expressed is his opinion. And who gives a fuck? A clear majority of Americans support legal abortion.
 

version

Well-known member
Are there any left-wing conspiracy theories?

There must be, but the ones I'm aware of all seem to end up back at "the Jews are pulling our strings".

Just thinking maybe we should start creating some and spreading them through the internet

I have a feeling they'd be too boring and true to life tho

I find the left wing stuff more grounded, convincing and better sourced, but some on the left can run away with it, e.g. they're right about the CIA being behind certain things but then they go mad with it and see the CIA behind absolutely everything.
 

mixed_biscuits

_________________________
I think what this guy has expressed is his opinion. And who gives a fuck? A clear majority of Americans support legal abortion.
Do you know how academia works? It's not just a bunch of people expressing opinions at cross-purposes; the point is that they build on previous work and Marcuse is currently at the top of the building.

A majority of Americans probably put their y-fronts on back to front.
 

Mr. Tea

Shub-Niggurath, Please
Do you know how academia works? It's not just a bunch of people expressing opinions at cross-purposes; the point is that they build on previous work and Marcuse is currently at the top of the building.

A majority of Americans probably put their y-fronts on back to front.
And academia should rule politics, or what? Ditch democracy altogether and install some philosopher-kings?
 

Mr. Tea

Shub-Niggurath, Please
Because I can tell you for a fact that academia, on the whole, certainly does not support many of the positions you hold dear (anti-vaxx, eugenics, etc.)
 

mixed_biscuits

_________________________
And academia should rule politics, or what? Ditch democracy altogether and install some philosopher-kings?
Yes, better to defer to the peer-reviewed, objectively undefeated argument rather than whatever happens to be the point of view some factotum politician (which obv would lose to the preeminent academic argument if exposed to it)
 

sufi

lala
I've just had a quick scan of the Agenda 2030 document on the uk gov site - adopting a conspiracy mindset I can see that this is obviously an occult plot - if we take the zeros out we get 23, whilst the document outlines 17 goals. Anyone who has read the Illuminatus trilogy will recognise the significance of these numbers...

as for the 17 goals, on the surface they seem reasonable, end poverty, end hunger, etc., but "goal 14" has me really worried

View attachment 12320

Has the global elite entered into an alliance with the Deep Ones? Are we destined to be sacrificial offerings to Dagon and Mother Hydra?

The graphic for the "climate change" goal raised the hairs on the back of my neck:

View attachment 12321

pretty blatant use of "The Eye of Providence", which traditionally has the world hidden within the pupil of the all seeing eye - and of course the most famous example of its use is on the dollar bill, where it sits above the phrase, Novus Ordo Seclorum ( 'new order of the ages' ) - in the snappy graphic we can see that the 13 steps of the pyramid have been replaced by the numerical representation...

View attachment 12323

pretty ominous stuff...
1658332785697.png
embrace the SDGs
before they embrace you
?
 

version

Well-known member
goal number 7 - is that an off switch on the sun?

index.php

Old Nick will be pleased.
 

droid

Well-known member
lol wtf are you talking about? Firstly its Don Marquis. Secondly its far from the 'dominant philosophical argument', to give just one example, Marquis is cited bout 800 times, Thomson (1971) is cited over 3000 times. Thirdly, there are a shit ton of holes in the 'potentiality' case for abortion control.

If you're going to go for the authority fallacy, at least put in the bare modicum of effort.
 

mixed_biscuits

_________________________
lol wtf are you talking about? Firstly its Don Marquis. Secondly its far from the 'dominant philosophical argument', to give just one example, Marquis is cited bout 800 times, Thomson (1971) is cited over 3000 times. Thirdly, there are a shit ton of holes in the 'potentiality' case for abortion control.

If you're going to go for the authority fallacy, at least put in the bare modicum of effort.
Argumentum ad populum, just like Tea: check your y-fronts
 

Clinamenic

θερμοδυναμικός καπιταλιστής
He could go forever, but really he just needs to go until his interlocutor ragequits, has an aneurysm, or is otherwise dialogically debilitated.
 

mixed_biscuits

_________________________
If you're going to go for the authority fallacy, at least put in the bare modicum of effort.

In philosophy, the best argument is determined not by rank but by logic; the humblest beggar would be published if he were to outreason the most convincing argument
 
Top