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

fanaskin · Sep 8, 2013

hodj_sl said:
Its not enough to feel bad, not enough to not be a bigot. If you don't check your privilege every single day, George Zimmerman will shoot Trayvon and Karl Marx again.

because to a Marxist little to no thought is given to accountability for your own actions and there is no free will, it's all exoterically/materialistically derived from your environment.

hodj · Sep 8, 2013

I didn't have lunch today. I want my cut of Dumar's lunch. He has lunch privilege, its not fair.

Araysar · Sep 8, 2013

Unable to derail Dumar's argument, hodj resorts to trying to associate Dumar with Zimmerman case.

hodj · Sep 8, 2013

Dumar derailed his own argument without any help from me whatsoever.

Tanoomba · Sep 8, 2013

Lithose_sl said:
And why Cypher's hesitation is most likely the fact that he doesn't want the guilt from killing all of his friends just to get back to a place that does not suck hard.

That's just what I said! *beams*

Dumar_sl · Sep 8, 2013

Araysar_sl said:
Unable to derail Dumar's argument, hodj resorts to trying to associate Dumar with Zimmerman case.

I've tried to get it back on track twice, but failed.

hodj_sl said:
I know its hilarious because

I know it's hilarious because you're talking about something you know nothing about. From the same wiki:

Max Horkheimer_sl said:
The Frankfurt School's work cannot be fully comprehended without equally understanding the aims and objectives of critical theory. Initially outlined by Max Horkheimer in his Traditional and Critical Theory (1937) [...] The original aim of critical theory was to analyze the true significance of "the ruling understandings" generated in bourgeois society, in order to show how they misrepresented actual human interaction in the real world [...]

Horkheimer opposed it to "traditional theory", which refers to theory in the positivistic, scientistic, or purely observational mode - that is, which derives generalizations or "laws" about different aspects of the world. Drawing upon Max Weber, Horkheimer argued that the social sciences are different from the natural sciences, inasmuch as generalizations cannot be easily made from so-called experiences, because the understanding of a "social" experience itself is always fashioned by ideas that are in the researchers themselves. What the researcher does not realize is that he is caught in a historical context in which ideologies shape the thinking; thus theory would be conforming to the ideas in the mind of the researcher rather than the experience itself [...]

For Horkheimer, approaches to understanding in the social sciences cannot simply imitate those in the natural sciences.Although various theoretical approaches would come close to breaking out of the ideological constraints which restricted them [...] Horkheimer would argue that they failed [...]

Critique, in this Marxian sense, meant taking the ideology of a society - e.g. the belief in individual freedom or free market under capitalism - and critiquing it by comparing it with the social reality of that very society - e.g. social inequality and exploitation.

This school's raison d'?tre is the critical analyses of ideology, of symbols, of idolatryoutsideof not just the society that produced them, but outside of the very thought processes that did. So in precise language, themodus operandiof the entire damn school is a lack of symbols that affect (Horkheimer would say prohibit) thought.

hodj_sl said:
Is what you do.

I quote Marx narrowly to defend existing communist regimes? Oh yeah, totally: nevermind the fact that I've quoted from his every work and have never defended any communist regime.

hodj_sl said:
Is a big part of the problem. You can't conduct science by entering the laboratory with your conclusions already reached [...] A researchers goal is to limit bias [...] you're the narrow minded ideologue [...] Our goal isn't to verify our biases, our goal is to come to understand the world through the eyes of others, see it as they see it, and then to find the common ground between all peoples through that process.

You want to limit bias and be open-minded? Then perhaps you should join us. But I'm sure the next post will be spent labeling Horkheimer or even Weber as radical socialist bigots, just as Harvey.

TrollfaceDeux · Sep 8, 2013

look at that bitch preaching for more money. instead of having the decency to kneel and beg for one, she makes it into a retarded cause cuz she is too proud of herself and her belief.

lol.

oh lol sounds like a typical feminist.

> RAPE CULTURE EXISTS
> WE NEED MONEY
> RAPE IS A FEMINIST ISSUE
> GIVE US MONEY.
????
> PROFIT.

lol.

khalid · Sep 8, 2013

Dumar_sl said:
I've tried to get it back on track twice, but failed.

No you haven't. You have done nothing but try and sidetrack the issue.

Here, let me try and get it back on track. Please attempt to make an argument with some scientific basis that commodities steal souls and therefore make suicide rational because everyone's souls are being stolen by modern society. Don't link your favorite essayist saying it is true.

hodj · Sep 8, 2013

Dumar_sl said:
blah blah blah

Dumar doesn't realize anyone can edit wikipedia.

I quote Marx narrowly to defend existing communist regimes?

No, you quote him narrowly to defend your worldview. Which has the same functional effect of causing you to ignore all evidence contrary to your extremely narrow cultural marxist worldview.

Oh look, you even quoted proof of that in your once again misguided diatribe

Horkheimer opposed it to "traditional theory", which refers to theory in the positivistic, scientistic, or purely observational mode - that is, which derives generalizations or "laws" about different aspects of the world.

Your entire school is opposed to any idea that quantification and validation of laws in science can exist. Derp.

I think we've already been over how Marxists always claim to be working for the betterment of all, yet somehow we keep getting stuck with terrible ideas like lysenkoism to validate their worldview in the face of contrarian evidence. What "your school" claims its reason for existence to be is as irrelevant as what David Miscavige has to say about what his church's reason for existence is.

Dumar_sl · Sep 8, 2013

hodj_sl said:
Dumar doesn't realize anyone can edit wikipedia.

Yeah buddy, continue the nonsense of labeling it a religion once I had to level another definition on you, as expected. Feel free to accuse Wikipedia now also.

Gonna go consume some commodites, back later.

Tanoomba · Sep 8, 2013

khalid_sl said:
No you haven't. You have done nothing but try and sidetrack the issue.

Here, let me try and get it back on track. Please attempt to make an argument with some scientific basis that commodities steal souls and therefore make suicide rational because everyone's souls are being stolen by modern society. Don't link your favorite essayist saying it is true.

"Steal souls"? Dude, are you trying to be another Hodj here? For fuck's sake, one is enough. Why don't you just read what he's saying instead of projecting irrelevant and unrelated bullshit onto it?

hodj · Sep 8, 2013

Dumar_sl said:
Yeah buddy, continue the nonsense of labeling it a religion once I had to level another definition on you, as expected. Feel free to accuse Wikipedia now also.

Gonna go consume some commodites, back later.

I PROMISE GUYS ITS NOT A RELIGION ITS JUST A BOOK WRITTEN BY A DEAD GUY THAT I QUOTE CHAPTER AND VERSE AS MY WAY OF GETTING THROUGH THE PHILOSOPHICAL DILEMMAS OF LIFE

PIKNKY SWEAR

khalid · Sep 8, 2013

Tanoomba_sl said:
For fuck's sake, one is enough. Why don't you just read what he's saying instead of projecting irrelevant and unrelated bullshit onto it?

Why don't YOU read what he is saying, because that is what he is fucking saying. Sorry I am not framing it in his (and maybe yours?) technobabble bullshit.

What this thread doesn't need is another Dumar. For fuck's sake one is enough.

hodj · Sep 8, 2013

Quoting because Tanoomba is too stupid to read

Dumar_sl said:
I don't know what you're talking about with magic. They respond emotionally to the commodity.

It strips them because they're no longer human: their life, the sum of their emotional, psychological responses - in short, their feelings and sensuous experience - is more and more experienced by a sum of commodity generations, not through their direct activity as a human being related to the world and other human beings.

Astral Projection_sl · Sep 8, 2013

fanaskin_sl said:
because to a Marxist little to no thought is given to accountability for your own actions and there is no free will, it's all exoterically/materialistically derived from your environment.

I never read a word of anything by Marx, or really care to, but I have a hard time believing that an influential philosopher has a chapter that reads something like "under my philosophy, you can just rape and kill anyone and it totally isn't your fault!". Care to point out what book/chapter that is? I'm guessing its the one grandma told us about during the Red Scare when Elvis was investigated for being a potential communist?

Tanoomba · Sep 8, 2013

khalid_sl said:
Why don't YOU read what he is saying, because that is what he is fucking saying. Sorry I am not framing it in his (and maybe yours?) technobabble bullshit.

What this thread doesn't need is another Dumar. For fuck's sake one is enough.

I've been reading, dude, and I don't know where you're getting this ridiculous interpretation from. "Technobabble bullshit" has nothing to do with it. Maybe you're like much of the rest and just looking for an outlet for your tart sarcasm because it makes you feel superior to the people you don't understand? I guess that shouldn't surprise me, really. That's pretty much what the internet is, after all. I guess I just expect too much from seemingly intelligent people.

hodj · Sep 8, 2013

No, Tanoomba, the answer really is you're just an imbecile who can't read basic English even though your job is to teach basic English.

TrollfaceDeux · Sep 8, 2013

lol english.

Han-gul is superior. I mean, from get go, it was a language built to completely adopt our phonemes. Way better than retarded Chinese gibberish.

khalid · Sep 8, 2013

Tanoomba_sl said:
"Technobabble bullshit" has nothing to do with it. Maybe you're like much of the rest and just looking for an outlet for your tart sarcasm because it makes you feel superior to the people you don't understand? I guess that shouldn't surprise me, really. That's pretty much what the internet is, after all. I guess I just expect too much from seemingly intelligent people.

Technobabble has everything to do with it. He tries to cover his ridiculous theory by quoting Marx and claiming it is science. When you distill it down and take out all his bullshit, you end up with him claiming that commodities are stealing people's humanity (their soul) and so they should kill themselves.

I am not being sarcastic because I don't understand what he is saying. I am simply restating his premise in a simpler fashion. If anything you are the one that doesn't understand the implications of what he is saying. I expect more from you than simply agreeing with Dumar because he quoted Marx and disagrees with Hodj.

hodj · Sep 8, 2013

Trollface_sl said:
lol english.

Han-gul is superior. I mean, from get go, it was a language built to completely adopt our phonemes. Way better than retarded Chinese gibberish.

Ni bu xihuan Hanyu?

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

Well known agitator

Vox Populi Jihadi

Loser Araysar

Chief Russia Correspondent / Stock Pals CEO

Vox Populi Jihadi

ジョーディーすれいやー

shitlord

Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer

Unelected Mod

Vox Populi Jihadi

shitlord

ジョーディーすれいやー

Vox Populi Jihadi

Unelected Mod

Vox Populi Jihadi

shitlord

ジョーディーすれいやー

Vox Populi Jihadi

Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer

Unelected Mod

Vox Populi Jihadi