this is almost certainly not true. various corvids and apes absolutely have a capacity to learn language while dolphins are incredibly sophisticated in this regard, communicating with each other in ways we are only just beginning to piece together. but this is I guess the point about the hubris of this sentiment: we do not understand the capacities of animals nearly so well to make statements like these.
our lack of understanding them is precisely why we have the responsibility to advocate for them is my point. that lack of understanding comes from their lack of linguistic capabilities that would allow them to prove they have subjectivity. because they can’t prove it, just like we can’t prove each other has it; we should take the benefit of the doubt and protect all potential subjectivity
I have linguistic capabilities. put me in a strange place where no one speaks a language I share and I might well struggle to prove my own subjectivity, especially were that subjectivity doubted by my captors and the burden of proof placed upon me. in fact, we know this because experiments like these were used to "prove" the lack of subjectivity of Africans.
but again, this is my point about hubris: we regularly assume we know things that we do not, including the lack of subjectivity, or the lack of linguistic capabilities of animals - or, indeed, of other people.
I think the most unsettling thing about your posts in this thread is the way you've taken white supremacist arguments, changed the subjects to humans and the objects to animals, but left the fundamentally bad reasoning that led to such bullshit wholly intact. humans do not need to be supreme in order for the continuation of our species to be worthwhile - we merely need to be. but we must also extend the same courtesy to the other living things with which we share the globe.
it is factual that humans have superior capacity than the rest of the animals on the planet, it is not factual that white people have superior capacity than brown people.
much more important than the factual weakness of a statement like that is why you're so attached to the notion of superiority (whatever that actually means) in the first place.
it superiority of our technology and capacities to make technology. the concept of superiority isn’t bad in itself. communism is superior to capitalism no?
do you see the difference between a comparison of two economic systems - technologies we choose to employ - and the inherent superiority of one kind of life over another?
i said we possess superior capabilities and as su it is our responsibility to protect the planet as it’s so to speak vanguard species. not that absurd given no one is expecting dolphins to solve climate change
material conditions wouldn’t be able to provide proper protein sources. ideally we would just be mass producing artificial or lab grown meat using renewable energy
But... you're vegetarian? What does protein have to do with it? Like you get all your protein from eggs or something? A cup of beans is 16g of protein vs the 7 grams in an egg. I don't follow.
you’re probably right that i could find a way to be completely vegan, i live with my parents however and large changes to my diet would have to ge accessible thru the pantry we keep regularly
Okay, but you gotta see how the bit about lab meat is a non sequitur there, in that case. "I can't do it because my parents buy the food" is fine, but framing it as being about protein intake is sort of odd.
imagine waking up in a socialist country benefiting from the sacrifices of all your comrades before you, only to hear some american on chapochat say humans were a mistake
yeah that’s my point, imagine and have hope. don’t just take the black pill. humans have been bad, but we have the capacity for good too. it is a struggle and when you condemn us all as fucked you’re not helping to win
hope doesn't excuseh uman history mother fucker. the idea that we have the capacity for good, is long overshadowed by what we as a species has done. maybe the next incarnation of us will do better, but humans as a whole ain't there.
if you truly think that your own self has no capacity for good because the history of other selfs then i don’t know what to tell you. it’s true that human history is one of class domination, it’s also true that we can see that clearly now and articulate it in a way never before done. there is a potential for morally just human societies, we just have to construct it
it doesn't matter if 'my own self' has a capacity for good. there aint' enough of me. we got 30 years left dude. fucking deal with it dude. the earth will last. conditions to sustain humans will not. accept that shit.
You truly think climate change will wipe out every last human life? That’s not what’s gonna happen bruh im sorry.
The systems of power will fall certainly if things get bad enough, but that doesn’t imply mass and total extinction and neither does the science.
if anything what you’re referring to as the end of the world could actually be the beginning of a new, more equitable world built in the absence of the old power structures. again it just takes us doing it.
and you aren’t alone, there’s enough of us on this forum alone to go and start a productive city state absent other concerns.
well, i'm sure that last few million people will hopefully look past the idea of currency, but seeing as the tax man has existed long before us, i'm skeptical. but i do hope for their continued evolution. that said, we're talking about billions of people being reduced to millions now. so...
my point isn’t that we have to reinvent socialism after the collapse, we already have the texts and the knowledge; we just need to ensure it’s survival and it’s being put into action. socialism is inherently more efficient economically than capitalism, if given equal footing after a great restart event, i have full faith that the productive forces of socialism will win out in the end
yeah, dude, obviously. if humans can sustain it. (insert marxist crab, two capitalists stuck on a fucking island meme) taht doesn't change the fact that as we are, humans are shit.
this has been extremely enlightening. even most of chapo believes that "humans are the shit dude, fuck everybody else, we rock." fucking pathetic. further confirmation for me that when the earth finally wipes us out, it will be the fucking best for the entire universe. if we're the best we have to offer, wow.
dude if you hate humans then why don’t you make your politics about trying to get ride of as many as possible rather than socialism which is inherently against what you’re talking about
what i'm talking about goes beyond "human kind." if you think socialism is a huamn concept that's fucking pathetic. you're a fucking lib and you don't realize it.
i'm day to day psyched to be alive man. that doesn't mean that i'm pathetic enough to think that my species is "the shit." just fucking heinous. you don't even realize what you're saying. this is a sad point for me in that i realize who the fucking i am dealing with that i thought were my peers.
How about this, can we agree that there is a certain historical group of humans that throughout time have consistently been horrible and evil human beings. ie the ruling class of landowners and capital owners.
I’ll agree with you if you restrain your condemnation down to the groups of humans who actually perpetrated the crimes your speaking off. Because i do agree with your view of our history as a whole, i just think it reflects the views of some humans not all humans. It makes no sense to condemn all the humans in history who were slaves to the same fate as those who enslaved them.
basically can we agree that it’s just a majority of humans ie those who hold power and support the powers that be that are horrible? i see you’re point now that it’s meaningless to try and say humanity as a whole is either good or bad, we need to say this humanity as part of the whole is bad and that humanity as a part of the whole is good.
you're asking me to onstrain my view to those at the top and ignore the fact that people ain't doing shit about it, when we're talking about species as a whole. if you're on this site, you realize what the fuck a lib and a fucking chud are, and you want me to pretend that neither exist in order to "restrain my condmenation down toe hte groups of humans actually perpetuating the crimes i'm speaking of."
think about what the fuck you're asking of me towards the thing i'm arguing.
no that’s not what i’m asking you, i’m asking you to condemn the individuals you see fit for condemnation by your own standards. just don’t condemn the species as a whole, just those member of the species who are bad. I don’t care if that number ends up being 99% of humans as evil. at least that means you’ve identified the 1% who aren’t that you can thus work with
lol now we're getting down to 1% of humans when the original claim was that "humans are the most amazing thing ever." and i'm the one getting downvoted.
Yeah bc i realized my initial position was as groundless as your initial position. both of us were trying to say the humans race as a whole is either good or bad, but it’s just not valid to abstract out like that i’ve realized. we would need to say some humans are good and some are bad. and also i was trying to be optimistic and speak on the potential of humans to be great and the shit, rather than them being so now already.
you’ve made me drop my original claim as false and so i was seeing if maybe you would do the same given the reasons for me dropping my claim seem to apply to your claim too.
tl,dr; i’ve realized we can’t make a universal evaluation and i’m wondering if you’ve realized that too in the course of this conversation
i didn't say all, i said as a whole to the planet, which means at least 50%, and yes we are definitely bad as a whole to the planet. we do not fucking fit the definition of " the most amazing thing ever."
the fact that i've been down voted for a simple fucking fact is gross.
alright well i suppose we agree then. the reason i’ve been arguing is because it seems as through you were being a nihilist and arguing against the value of human life and it potential to be ethical.
if all you’re saying is that some humans fucked the planet up and as a result humankind collectively had a negative input on the earth, then yeah that’s just fact i agree with you.
can’t be letting them nihilists infiltrate the movement, it’s literally a death-knell for effective praxis
i am against the value of human life. we have not been valuable to the thing that sustains us. i am against our 'potential to be ethical.' we have not proven taht to be our nature.
i am saying that most humans fuck up the planet, ans the reuslt of humankind collectively has had a negative impact on the earth.
the idea that you 'can't let nihilists infiltrate the movement' is slurring me. i'm not a nihilist in that i believe only negativity prevails, what i believe is that humans, not life, as a whole, has definitely had a negative impact.
you on the otherhand have had nothing and will have nothign to present as far as evidence hat we as a species have had a positive impact on this planet. because you can't. because we don't. accept that shit mother fucker.
no it’s just i don’t have the patience to explain the critique of pure reason to you. however, if you read it you would understand that you’re answer to the question asked isn’t wrong, the question itself is nonsensical. and thus any answer yielded will be nonsense. you’re trying to evaluate human life from a perspective outside human perspective. that is literally impossible.
well i was operating on the sense of nihilism as Nietzsche defines it when he literally creates the term. the denial of life, specifically human life sense it is the only life of whose meaning it makes sense for humans to speak of (see wittgenstein russel and kant). you’re effectively saying all human efforts to create a better life are worthless because you see us as a whole as negatively contributing. what value do you ascribe to human life if not negative?
the entire concept. humans don't make concept, logic exists despite human beings. if you think a human made one log and one log make two logs you're part of the problem.
this just in, “humans don’t make concepts.”
so i guess the concepts are just out there floating in space waiting to be found, not created, by humans. you neo-platonist nerd
ideology =/= philosophic standpoint or even political standpoint
ideology is the lease through which you unconsciously view the world. it’s literally like integral to your experience that you experience things ideologically. read zizek when you’re done with kant
i did you just don’t agree with me and so i don’t want to have to give you a proof which would require much more length than me just giving you my idea as i’ve already done
if you already did, they didn't seem to provide any knowledge that contradicts the points i've voiced. so if you can't back them up then all you've got is some guys name.
no i said what i thought ideology to be and you disagreed, in order for me to convince you we would have to have a long dialogue that i don’t desire having with you because you don’t have the background knowledge to make it worthwhile. it would literally just be me explains the sublime object of ideology to you, and that’s not something i care to do
it’s not really a theoretically significant term to be honest. i’d imagine zizek is using it to convey the sense that ideology isn’t literally a direct object of our senses but is instead the way in which objects are configured within our senses. again it’s not really a technical term though.
wow. i'm not even a vegetarian, but this is a great argument for becoming one. fuck off.
dude i’m a fucking vegetarian haha bc it’s our responsibility as the only linguistically capable beings to advocate for those not
this is almost certainly not true. various corvids and apes absolutely have a capacity to learn language while dolphins are incredibly sophisticated in this regard, communicating with each other in ways we are only just beginning to piece together. but this is I guess the point about the hubris of this sentiment: we do not understand the capacities of animals nearly so well to make statements like these.
our lack of understanding them is precisely why we have the responsibility to advocate for them is my point. that lack of understanding comes from their lack of linguistic capabilities that would allow them to prove they have subjectivity. because they can’t prove it, just like we can’t prove each other has it; we should take the benefit of the doubt and protect all potential subjectivity
I have linguistic capabilities. put me in a strange place where no one speaks a language I share and I might well struggle to prove my own subjectivity, especially were that subjectivity doubted by my captors and the burden of proof placed upon me. in fact, we know this because experiments like these were used to "prove" the lack of subjectivity of Africans.
but again, this is my point about hubris: we regularly assume we know things that we do not, including the lack of subjectivity, or the lack of linguistic capabilities of animals - or, indeed, of other people.
I think the most unsettling thing about your posts in this thread is the way you've taken white supremacist arguments, changed the subjects to humans and the objects to animals, but left the fundamentally bad reasoning that led to such bullshit wholly intact. humans do not need to be supreme in order for the continuation of our species to be worthwhile - we merely need to be. but we must also extend the same courtesy to the other living things with which we share the globe.
it is factual that humans have superior capacity than the rest of the animals on the planet, it is not factual that white people have superior capacity than brown people.
much more important than the factual weakness of a statement like that is why you're so attached to the notion of superiority (whatever that actually means) in the first place.
it superiority of our technology and capacities to make technology. the concept of superiority isn’t bad in itself. communism is superior to capitalism no?
do you see the difference between a comparison of two economic systems - technologies we choose to employ - and the inherent superiority of one kind of life over another?
i said we possess superior capabilities and as su it is our responsibility to protect the planet as it’s so to speak vanguard species. not that absurd given no one is expecting dolphins to solve climate change
deleted by creator
Why aren't you vegan?
material conditions wouldn’t be able to provide proper protein sources. ideally we would just be mass producing artificial or lab grown meat using renewable energy
I didn't ask "why isn't everyone vegan?", I asked "why aren't you vegan?"
that was my personal reason, i meant my material conditions
But... you're vegetarian? What does protein have to do with it? Like you get all your protein from eggs or something? A cup of beans is 16g of protein vs the 7 grams in an egg. I don't follow.
you’re probably right that i could find a way to be completely vegan, i live with my parents however and large changes to my diet would have to ge accessible thru the pantry we keep regularly
Okay, but you gotta see how the bit about lab meat is a non sequitur there, in that case. "I can't do it because my parents buy the food" is fine, but framing it as being about protein intake is sort of odd.
lab meat stuff was like utopian solution to problem
deleted by creator
i meant my local personal conditions
Why? It takes way fewer resources to grow plant proteins than animals.
i mean my own conditions personally
Lentils and beans are cheaper than meat. Check out Indian recipes they're delicious
well then you should research the word perspective.
you should read kant
fuck you.
lollllll you’re mad bc you hate humans, just leave then you don’t have to be around us other humans
i'm mad because you defend them.
“them” you mean us right?
yes.
so you’re mad because i defend you and your species
so do soldiers for americans. if you can't see the nuance you're a lost cause.
nah those defend the interests of us capitalist elite, im simply saying humanity itself isn’t a mistake
no, you're missing a lot of nuanced positions and speaking out of your fucking ass
imagine waking up in a socialist country benefiting from the sacrifices of all your comrades before you, only to hear some american on chapochat say humans were a mistake
socialism wouldn't be murdering our planet and trying to literally 'globalize' the fucking universe. this is capitalist propaganda asshole
yeah it wouldn’t be! that’s the fucking point. and imagine living in that system built by human sacrifice only to condemn the species as a whole
yeah, 'imagine' is all we can do right now bro.
yeah that’s my point, imagine and have hope. don’t just take the black pill. humans have been bad, but we have the capacity for good too. it is a struggle and when you condemn us all as fucked you’re not helping to win
hope doesn't excuseh uman history mother fucker. the idea that we have the capacity for good, is long overshadowed by what we as a species has done. maybe the next incarnation of us will do better, but humans as a whole ain't there.
if you truly think that your own self has no capacity for good because the history of other selfs then i don’t know what to tell you. it’s true that human history is one of class domination, it’s also true that we can see that clearly now and articulate it in a way never before done. there is a potential for morally just human societies, we just have to construct it
it doesn't matter if 'my own self' has a capacity for good. there aint' enough of me. we got 30 years left dude. fucking deal with it dude. the earth will last. conditions to sustain humans will not. accept that shit.
You truly think climate change will wipe out every last human life? That’s not what’s gonna happen bruh im sorry.
The systems of power will fall certainly if things get bad enough, but that doesn’t imply mass and total extinction and neither does the science.
if anything what you’re referring to as the end of the world could actually be the beginning of a new, more equitable world built in the absence of the old power structures. again it just takes us doing it.
and you aren’t alone, there’s enough of us on this forum alone to go and start a productive city state absent other concerns.
well, i'm sure that last few million people will hopefully look past the idea of currency, but seeing as the tax man has existed long before us, i'm skeptical. but i do hope for their continued evolution. that said, we're talking about billions of people being reduced to millions now. so...
my point isn’t that we have to reinvent socialism after the collapse, we already have the texts and the knowledge; we just need to ensure it’s survival and it’s being put into action. socialism is inherently more efficient economically than capitalism, if given equal footing after a great restart event, i have full faith that the productive forces of socialism will win out in the end
yeah, dude, obviously. if humans can sustain it. (insert marxist crab, two capitalists stuck on a fucking island meme) taht doesn't change the fact that as we are, humans are shit.
this has been extremely enlightening. even most of chapo believes that "humans are the shit dude, fuck everybody else, we rock." fucking pathetic. further confirmation for me that when the earth finally wipes us out, it will be the fucking best for the entire universe. if we're the best we have to offer, wow.
dude if you hate humans then why don’t you make your politics about trying to get ride of as many as possible rather than socialism which is inherently against what you’re talking about
what i'm talking about goes beyond "human kind." if you think socialism is a huamn concept that's fucking pathetic. you're a fucking lib and you don't realize it.
“if you think socialism is a human concept your a lib”
bruh read Wittgenstein, literally every concept is a human concept you fool
no. you're just pathetic.
projection from the person who spends his live depressed
i'm day to day psyched to be alive man. that doesn't mean that i'm pathetic enough to think that my species is "the shit." just fucking heinous. you don't even realize what you're saying. this is a sad point for me in that i realize who the fucking i am dealing with that i thought were my peers.
How about this, can we agree that there is a certain historical group of humans that throughout time have consistently been horrible and evil human beings. ie the ruling class of landowners and capital owners.
I’ll agree with you if you restrain your condemnation down to the groups of humans who actually perpetrated the crimes your speaking off. Because i do agree with your view of our history as a whole, i just think it reflects the views of some humans not all humans. It makes no sense to condemn all the humans in history who were slaves to the same fate as those who enslaved them.
basically can we agree that it’s just a majority of humans ie those who hold power and support the powers that be that are horrible? i see you’re point now that it’s meaningless to try and say humanity as a whole is either good or bad, we need to say this humanity as part of the whole is bad and that humanity as a part of the whole is good.
you're asking me to onstrain my view to those at the top and ignore the fact that people ain't doing shit about it, when we're talking about species as a whole. if you're on this site, you realize what the fuck a lib and a fucking chud are, and you want me to pretend that neither exist in order to "restrain my condmenation down toe hte groups of humans actually perpetuating the crimes i'm speaking of."
think about what the fuck you're asking of me towards the thing i'm arguing.
no that’s not what i’m asking you, i’m asking you to condemn the individuals you see fit for condemnation by your own standards. just don’t condemn the species as a whole, just those member of the species who are bad. I don’t care if that number ends up being 99% of humans as evil. at least that means you’ve identified the 1% who aren’t that you can thus work with
lol now we're getting down to 1% of humans when the original claim was that "humans are the most amazing thing ever." and i'm the one getting downvoted.
Yeah bc i realized my initial position was as groundless as your initial position. both of us were trying to say the humans race as a whole is either good or bad, but it’s just not valid to abstract out like that i’ve realized. we would need to say some humans are good and some are bad. and also i was trying to be optimistic and speak on the potential of humans to be great and the shit, rather than them being so now already.
you’ve made me drop my original claim as false and so i was seeing if maybe you would do the same given the reasons for me dropping my claim seem to apply to your claim too.
tl,dr; i’ve realized we can’t make a universal evaluation and i’m wondering if you’ve realized that too in the course of this conversation
my position has lots of information to back it up dude.
so you think you can say all humans are bad? that’s what you’re saying when you say humankind is bad right?
i didn't say all, i said as a whole to the planet, which means at least 50%, and yes we are definitely bad as a whole to the planet. we do not fucking fit the definition of " the most amazing thing ever."
the fact that i've been down voted for a simple fucking fact is gross.
alright well i suppose we agree then. the reason i’ve been arguing is because it seems as through you were being a nihilist and arguing against the value of human life and it potential to be ethical. if all you’re saying is that some humans fucked the planet up and as a result humankind collectively had a negative input on the earth, then yeah that’s just fact i agree with you. can’t be letting them nihilists infiltrate the movement, it’s literally a death-knell for effective praxis
i am against the value of human life. we have not been valuable to the thing that sustains us. i am against our 'potential to be ethical.' we have not proven taht to be our nature.
i am saying that most humans fuck up the planet, ans the reuslt of humankind collectively has had a negative impact on the earth.
the idea that you 'can't let nihilists infiltrate the movement' is slurring me. i'm not a nihilist in that i believe only negativity prevails, what i believe is that humans, not life, as a whole, has definitely had a negative impact.
you on the otherhand have had nothing and will have nothign to present as far as evidence hat we as a species have had a positive impact on this planet. because you can't. because we don't. accept that shit mother fucker.
okay nevermind i guess you still need to just go read kant. it would fix your brainworms
'kant absolves humanity. everything is okay now.'
no it’s just i don’t have the patience to explain the critique of pure reason to you. however, if you read it you would understand that you’re answer to the question asked isn’t wrong, the question itself is nonsensical. and thus any answer yielded will be nonsense. you’re trying to evaluate human life from a perspective outside human perspective. that is literally impossible.
i know philosphy, i just don't accept some dude's thoughts as a frame work for my own. maybe you should question why you do.
have you read kant?
yeah i've taken a philosophy class or two. it doesn't effect my view on morality.
well you’d know then that your saying that the value of human life is negative is literally nihilism
no, nihilism is the belief that all life is meaningless. i didn't say anything like that. in fact what i said was in contradiction to that.
well i was operating on the sense of nihilism as Nietzsche defines it when he literally creates the term. the denial of life, specifically human life sense it is the only life of whose meaning it makes sense for humans to speak of (see wittgenstein russel and kant). you’re effectively saying all human efforts to create a better life are worthless because you see us as a whole as negatively contributing. what value do you ascribe to human life if not negative?
human life is negative. this is mathematically provable. human life is a negative value on everything isn't a human.
before you attack this with words, do you have any mathematics to back up what your claim is? because i do.
LOLLLLLLLLL im wasting my time conversing with such an inferior being
Well this was still a sort of interesting exchange until you literally called them an "inferior being", christ.
i’ve been around my dad too much jesus christ
and you claim that you're a fucking vegetarian. i eat chicken wings all day mother fucker, but i don't pretend that it's morally cohesive.
you are a fucking pathetic human being.
everyone in this thread who you called pathetic said that you’re projecting. maybe you’re right, this might not be the place for you
maybe, fuck you
you really just need to read more man, haha book makes intelligence go brrrr
i don't think you understand the concept of the 'go brrr' meme
the human concept of go brrr or the non-human concept go brrr?
the entire concept. humans don't make concept, logic exists despite human beings. if you think a human made one log and one log make two logs you're part of the problem.
this just in, “humans don’t make concepts.” so i guess the concepts are just out there floating in space waiting to be found, not created, by humans. you neo-platonist nerd
yes... they are. i'm sorry you can't understand that and have to resort to throwing out insults over it.
how are you a marxist if you’re not a materialist lmfao. are you literally an idealist
i don't resort to others making up an ideology for me. i just think things through.
deleted by creator
ideology =/= philosophic standpoint or even political standpoint
ideology is the lease through which you unconsciously view the world. it’s literally like integral to your experience that you experience things ideologically. read zizek when you’re done with kant
you first statement is entirely wrong. an ideology is a philosophic standpoint that should not contradict a political standpoint that you hold.
nah just read zizek then you’ll understand what i mean
nah, i'll just inform you of real world concepts and not have to resort to saying "read ____"
it would take too long an too much effort to understand. if you want to know the work i’m referencing it’s “the sublime object of ideology”
jesus christ, learn to put your fucking ideas into words or you obviously don't understand them mother fucker.
i did you just don’t agree with me and so i don’t want to have to give you a proof which would require much more length than me just giving you my idea as i’ve already done
if you already did, they didn't seem to provide any knowledge that contradicts the points i've voiced. so if you can't back them up then all you've got is some guys name.
no i said what i thought ideology to be and you disagreed, in order for me to convince you we would have to have a long dialogue that i don’t desire having with you because you don’t have the background knowledge to make it worthwhile. it would literally just be me explains the sublime object of ideology to you, and that’s not something i care to do
lol define the word sublime.
it’s not really a theoretically significant term to be honest. i’d imagine zizek is using it to convey the sense that ideology isn’t literally a direct object of our senses but is instead the way in which objects are configured within our senses. again it’s not really a technical term though.