Frick this is actually sad, someone who influenced a good bit of my own personal philosophy and thinking is going to pass.
Pour one of out for a real homie.
Reported by:
- draculaqueen : dont read it bros it made me cry
- Chapose : !!!WARNING: Nerds in this thread!!!
- of_blood_and_salt : Vaccine misinformation
Uncle Ted has terminal cancer π
- 180
- 282
Top Poster of the Day:
911roofer
Current Registered Users: 28,684
BROWSE EFFORTPOSTS
SITE GUIDE
HOLES
PING GROUPS
Current software version: 4a17930
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
lol cry more cute twink
Your "personal philosophy" is based on a hackjob manifesto on par with an undergrad philosophy paper. Max Weber covered the issues far better a century earlier.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
not an anprim guy, just discontent with modern society for many of the same reasons Ted talks about.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Ted blaming current issues solely on current technology is nothing more than an expression of his philosophical ignorance. The shit Ted complains about are just the contemporary manifestations of the overriding impulse toward rationalism that drives modern society. Remember how he complains about scientists pursuing marginal studies (or something along those lines, it's been a while since I've looked at the manifesto)? He expounds on "surrogate activities" as if it's a novel idea, but these are nothing more than complaints about rationalism, i.e. he missed the forest for the trees. He laments the industrial revolution as if it is the source of society's woes, rather than a phenomenon produced by the continual encroachment of rationalism into more aspects of human society.
Ted was a smart man, no doubt, but he is a neophyte when it comes to philosophical thought. He is still convinced that he was offering some kind of novel philosophical insight when he really just mixed deep ecology with the trappings of Weber's work and an unhealthy dose of misanthropy.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Can you explain what rationalism means in this context? Genuinely curious
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
It's pretty late so here is the Wikipedia page that gives a decent introduction. Also, I am by no means an authority on this.
My understanding of the concept is that rationalization embodies the formation of logical, abstract models for the world predicated on a collection of consistent mechanisms/rules through which the world can be understood and predicted. For instance, mathematics is one of the oldest examples of rationalization. The study of business administration would be an application of rationality to business interactions.
Institutional bureaucracy is one of the primary focuses of Weber's exploration of rationality. In this sense, technocrats are practitioners of rationalism.
Edit: Long ago rationalism used to be contrasted with empiricism but I think modern philosophy considers that dialectic to be a bit outdated now. It stems from a time when spiritualism vs materialism played a much larger role in philosophical discourse.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
The division between rationalism as edicted here and empiricism is fundamental tho.
A complex civilisation with a complex legal system would be rationnal (as defined here). But it can be at the same times completely bunk.
A good exemple would be imperial china. They had a complex legal system, which was self consistent and dependent upon religious beliefs, which were obvs nonsense.
All in all, I do not believe ted to be assimilatable to weber thought, in that what he rejected was not the rationalism, but rather the empiricism. A complex society with a lot of legalised beliefs would have been fine for ted, he rejected the rapid progress and effectiveness of empiricism, rather than rationalism (yet again as defined by weber).
(I do believe both rationalism and empiricism to be good, so I am a complete opposite to everyone involved)
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I actually looked a little into the modern state of the "rational v empirical" debate after posting this last night and it does not seem to be as dialectic today as it used to be. However, it's clear that it's still an important distinction conceptually.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
DEBOOOONKED.
And now I leave for the next two months again.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Wow, I stirred you from a 2 month haitus with my seriouspost?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Can you expand upon this? Say, in a well written paper about 10-15 pages in length?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
It's not my job to educate you, sweaty.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
He doesn't cite prior work granted, but he also doesn't claim novelty, really. His primary innovation is the drive to actually do something about it, instead of just writing philosophy. In that respect he's unique.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
He sure acts like an arrogant frick when challenged in correspondence on what was essentially a long-form creative writing exercise. Iirc, he just falls back on "you didn't read it properly", which is on par with a tankie reaction to criticisms of Marxist-Leninism.
...what? His innovation was to take action on a strongly-held conviction?
I think you're trying to claim that he was the first to use violence to promote environmentalism. That is still not entirely correct. Radical environmentalism finds its roots in late 19th and early 20th century anarchism (a very different beast than anarchist movements post-WW2). There's nothing new about using violence to dismantle the state in the pursuit of a greater goal.
Ted is horrendously overrated.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
dilate
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
lol
Edit: wow, I even managed to snag a downmarsey from
@snallygaster.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Suicide fuel tbh.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
I mean if you're attacking Uncle Ted it's going to happen lol
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
You just substitute "rationalism" for "industrial society." To quote Wittgenstein, "words words words, cute twink."
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Yes, but he didnt make cool gifts
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
White elephant exchanges with Teddy must've been a blast.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Opiniom discarded lol
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Opinyumm
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context