Last bread
>>4504406 (You)
>First of all, can we now PLEASE drop the MONOLITHIC CABAL BORG RESISTANCE IS FUTILE mode of thinking about he enemy? It's beyond useless and childish. Everything, everyone is multifaceted. Until someone brings me a walking talking extraterestrial/Demon/spirit creature, I'm working with the apriori assumption that the human race is people, soylent green is people and the cabal is people.
>
>I also hold as apriori that there are factions to the ruling elite. They
>[italics]there are a multitude of problems with this….wtf is it…..an argument…..an essay…an opinion. doesnt matter. whiever way i choose to read it, i come to the conclusion that it is just fucking wrong…..[/italics]
>an opinion.
Like everything here. Like everything in life. Kinda a dovetail to my point.
>first, the greatest advancement in our cause (organizing to change whatever the fuck is fucking up our world) was learing to see it as an organized thing.
Perhaps you missed the statement in my "essay" where I wrote:
"most of the people outside of the emotionally/spiritually emaciated west are neither eager for, nor welcome to the bizzarre racist/totalitarian/nihilistic religion of crumbling Christiandom's universities/propaganda/entertainment."
Which subsumes your point quite nicely, and proceeds logically from the a-priori (1a : deductive. b : relating to or derived by reasoning from self-evident propositions — compare a posteriori. c : presupposed by experience. Sauce:https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/a%20priori) assumption that A CABAL does exist. My opinion, ne argument, is that it is not binary (or even nearly binary as black/gray/white hat implies), and further that their other (multiple power centers resisting-individuals WITHIN the cabal resisting). We get no where tossing everyone into one bucket or the other, and may miss subtle details (like powerful players behind the sceenes) by doing so.
Your understanding of a-priori is wanting. Firstly "relating to or derived by reasoning from self-evident propositions "-so, simple sylogism
Rain makes the ground wet.
It has rained.
THEREFORE-The ground is wet.
I don't need to put my foot in a puddle before I put on rain boots when going outside. I heard the rain, saw it from the windows, I KNEW. That's important as humans, as far as I know, are the only ones on the planet capable of this, i.e. knowing without DIRECT experience.
As well "formed or conceived beforehand" is useful here. I have thought much about ET and spirits, and have concluded that yes, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.
So having conceived beforehand that "the human race is people, soylent green is people and the cabal is people" I proceed. I am saying here that I don't want to and won't entertain any other argument that does not accept this a-priori without requested proof.
My other a-priori is that the "RULING ELITE" are not all the CABAL, or I would have used CABAL and not RULING ELITE. Thus:
"there are factions to the ruling elite. They are not all on the same side. Further, most of the people outside of the emotionally/spiritually emaciated west are neither eager for, nor welcome to the bizzarre racist/totalitarian/nihilistic religion of crumbling Christiandom's universities/propaganda/entertainment"
Perhaps I should have added after entertainment:
/leftist politics (the CABAL)–to clarify further.
Therefor, I present that I have not violated your argument against me on a-priori
>when you say a priori you are using a technical term of art. and that term means that you hold your opinion without basing it on experience (no particular experience; obviously some experience or another is required to hold opinions at all). the ground of a priori opinion/belief/truth is reason.
> calling it a priori doesnt make it a priori
Oh, but it does. It is my opinion/argument, and I have been very polite in providing my a-priori assumptions so that we don't argue past each other like two ships in the night (or mores likely, dismiss the post out of hand). You may also challenge them, as I have laid them out, but my point is to discuss binary binning of people, and suggest that it is very unhelpful. I really do9n't want to dig into my a-priori assumptions, because I doubt you have the sauce to meet my criteria, and again YES it is my mind and my criteria. I've been here a long time.
For what it's worth.
I didn't proof this, cuz I got shit ta do. Hope this is semi-readable.
P.S.
Σας ευχαριστώ τον αρτοποιό.
Sas efcharistó ton artopoió.