Ummm, I've never read Marx, although from what I understand Groucho was the funny one. The name "Marx" has no special significance or authoritative power over me. Also, although Hodj may be a douchebag, it takes more than someone being opposed to his beliefs for me to side with them. Everything Hodj has ever posted (that I read, at least) in the atheism thread was indisputable, as far as I'm concerned. However, the fact that he can make a few strong points doesn't make him infallible. To be fair, I'm only reading the parts of what he's posting that are being quoted, so it's possible (albeit unlikely) that he's made a few great points I simply haven't seen. But from what I have seen Dumar is simply much better at presenting his points logically and clearly, and without resorting to childish attacks. Do I take pleasure from the fact that he's emasculating someone who refuses to admit he's wrong even when all the evidence shows that he is? Yeah, I suppose I am. I'm only human, after all. But that's hardly the deciding factor in why I'm siding with Dumar on this.
Obvious lie, you are an English major. How gullible do you think I am??
So you haven't been reading Hodj's posts but you are convinced that Dumar has been making the better arguments? Sigh, just sigh.
Here's the firstattempt andhere's the second. I very much hope you read the second, as an understanding of the phenomenon I'm showing through example and the analysis of hodj's natural language are needed as a foundation to understand the argument as a whole.
Don't waste your time providing a diatribe you've promised us three times now you'd deliver and have yet to. We want citations, not thesis statements on your world view.
I'm a "Teaching English as a second Language" major. Do you know how much Marx has to do with that? Fuck all. I studied language acquisition, planning and evaluation, pedagogy and the like.
This is a fair criticism. However, I have been seeing much of what Hodj has to say (since Dumar has quoted much of what's relevant), and what I've seen strongly suggests he's following his typical "misrepresent the opposition's point of view" strategy he's becoming increasingly well-known for. Including Hodj, nobody's been able to refute the simple and objectively non-controversial points Dumar has been making. That's why I think Dumar has a stronger case. He knows what he's saying, he's not allowing anyone to twist his words to suit their purposes, and in the end he's not really saying anything that can be argued against. He's also shown a maturity most posters (including myself) are unable to reach in terms of resisting the urge to descend to the level of petty childishness demonstrated by his detractors. I like that in a poster (it's one of the reasons I want to have Lithose's babies).
these are philosophical and political theories. Your methods of interpretingreality.
Awww... it's so cute when Trollface (*ahem*, TROLLFACE) tries to make a point.
He says it right there.
People perceive reality differently, so therefore something outside of that perception and sensation must exist that helps define those different existences? There's all sorts of things that are outside the realm of your personal capacity for perception and sensation right now because they aren't in your vicinity. That doesn't justify Dumar's continued assertion that some base matter in humans that makes them unique and special amongst all the creatures of the Earth, that it can be sucked out by the existence of a commoditized existence, exists. And that this loss of humanity is a justifiable cause for suicide. It simply doesn't.
Guess what, scientists around the globe are doing their best to determine if that's the case right now.