/lit/ - Literature

>>14502565
foucault had the benefit of seeing cannibalistic homosexuals pedophiles up close and in action. it might have soured him on universals. chomsky just had the tip of his dick snipped off an eaten, so he only felt a dormant resentment of goykind.

Verum esse ipsum factum.

>>14502580
>Was Foucault retarded?
All social constructionists are retarded, this includes marxists.

>>14502565
>Apart from basic shit like eating sleeping and fucking, human behavior can be largely conditioned.
Wow what a fucking travesty.

>>14502565
literal wikipedia andy. read "The Order of Things" you stupid faggot

>>14502603
Marx doesn't deny that there's a general human nature. He just says that it gets modified throughout history, which is rather uncontroversial.

Really with the wikipedia cap? Read one of his books actually you dork

>>14502695
Perhaps not but the most significant strains of Marxism through the 20th century and those that hold the most influence today still hold that material conditions form consciousness. That's pretty fucking exclusive of any sort of human nature.

>>14502695
>Marx doesn't deny that there's a general human nature.
Marx contradicts himself countless times.
He didn't even understand human nature. Even if he claims to accept it, he brushes it aside as not important.

>He just says that it gets modified throughout history
Oh, so you're admitting he's completely fucking wrong? Biological instincts don't magically change, they are hard wired. The culture can change yes, but that too is heavily influenced by instincts.

>>14502635
>>Apart from basic shit like eating sleeping and fucking, human behavior can be largely conditioned.
yeah foucault was pretty fucking dumb

>>14502673
>literal wikipedia andy. read "The Order of Things" you stupid faggot
Nothing in this book refutes the OP

>>14502722
Why? If it's already determined he's a social constructionist, then we already know his books are bullshit.

If you aren't AT LEAST here, you're never gonna make it.

>>14502565
>the virgin foucault vs the chad chomsky

>>14502763
what the fuck is that crap?

>>14502750
Unless you think you were born with all your fetishes, fucking is very much socially conditioned

>>14502565
Feral children prove him right.

>>14502783
Chomsky is retarded on economics but at least he's not as dumb as Foucault

>>14502792
Yikes, imagine not understanding how fetishes work. The template to create fetishes is obviously hard wired, when we see certain things when we are young that match these templates(or at least somewhat match them) then fetishes get cemented into our brains.
It's partially socially constructed, yes, but when people become adults, the fetishes become extremely hard wired.
I can't get rid of my fetishes no matter how hard I try.

>>14502789
One of those dumb political compass tests. Honestly if you're ignorant enough to need one of those you shouldn't have political views at all.

>people will take this bait and defend Foucault as was OPs plan

>>14502811
>It's partially socially constructed, yes
All you had to say senpai. Hard wired innate sexuality is a meme.

>>14502805
Nope.
The brains of feral children are much smaller and less developed than normal people.
The brain can adapt to certain situations but it's not infinitely malleable.
You people don't even believe in evolution, like wtf lmao

>>14502813
econ lib left should be econ lib right

>>14502822
>Hard wired innate sexuality is a meme.
No, it's literally basic fucking accepted science desu
Fetishes come from instinctual templates that get matched onto specific things in childhood.
If fetishes were completely random, large groups of people wouldn't have the same fetishes. I mean domination/submission is a general theme in almost all fetishes.

>>14502822
nope, most animals and humans breed normally only few genetic mistakes among them end up deviating from the natural norm

>>14502740
Stop talking out your anus bro and you won't be so constipated.

>>14502817
It's not bait, Foucault was actually a straight up dummy.

>>14502840
As a buckaroo I have to tell you that I don't think we can be buds because you deny that Love is Real.

>>14502845
This isn't an argument lol

>>14502839
>literally basic fucking accepted science desu
LOL no, read a book dumbass. You've been conditioned to find pic related unattractive for example. A little self awareness will reveal many other things

>>14502740
>Marx contradicts himself countless times.
Prove it.
>Even if he claims to accept it, he brushes it aside as not important.
The fact that humans are by their general nature communal animals is extremely important to his work.
>Oh, so you're admitting he's completely fucking wrong?
No.
>Biological instincts don't magically change, they are hard wired.
Don't change terms on me. We're talking about the entirety of human nature, i.e. all behaviour typical to our species, not just biological instincts. The fact that humans went from being a typically hunting-gathering animal to a typically agriculturist animal doesn't mean that some "biological instinct" got "magically" changed.

>>14502851
nod_an_argumend.jpg

>>14502839
If the only alternative to hard-wired sexuality is supposed to be complete randomness then you're arguing for a trivial thesis that no one disagrees with.

>>14502880
>LOL no, read a book dumbass.
Coming from the retard that denies human instincts. They're obviously instinctual you brainlet. The imprinting comes from instinctual templates.
If what you were saying is true, everyone would have completely random fetishes, there wouldn't be common themes in fetishes, and there wouldn't be large groups of people with the SAME fetish.

>You've been conditioned to find pic related unattractive for example.
lool no, it's not purely society that made me have my fetishes, it's was instincts that developed in my brain which caused me to subconsciously look for specific things matching the instinctual template.
I never thought of hairy legs when I was younger and developing my fetishes.

Fuck you people are stupid, I can't believe brain denialists even exist.

>>14502823
>The brains of feral children are much smaller and less developed than normal people.
You just made that up. And either way that is contradicted in cases where proper socialization is achieved.

>>14502884
>The fact that humans are by their general nature communal animals is extremely important to his work.
That's literally one aspect of human nature, there are countless others. I mean it's not entirely his fault, we didn't know that much about evolutionary psychology back then.

>The fact that humans went from being a typically hunting-gathering animal to a typically agriculturist animal doesn't mean that some "biological instinct" got "magically" changed.
Those were just social/economic changes which our instinctual brains easily adapted to.
This doesn't mean "human nature" changed, it means economic and social forces changed. The innate human nature remains the same.
Also, actually our brains increased in size when this happened but that's a different story.

>>14502905
>I never thought of hairy legs when I was younger and developing my fetishes.
What if all you ever saw was hairy legs?

>>14502915
>You just made that up.
You brain denialists are literally brainlets.
https://raisedwild.wordpress.com/brain-biology/
https://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/gbabcock/SPRING%202012/101/101feral.htm

>proper socialization
lol you can repair some brain damage in feral children by socialization, but you can never fully repair the brain

>>14502928
Extreme neglect is beaten and malnourished, that's brain damage.

>>14502924
>What if all you ever saw was hairy legs?
If my genetics weren't prone to fetishes then I wouldn't develop a hairy leg fetish.

If I was prone to fetishes and all I saw were hairy legs, I would probably develop a fetish for shaved legs as humans have an innate desire for cuteness and femininity which includes hairless legs.

OR alternatively I could have developed a fetish for hairy legs as a punishment for myself, or as a "taboo" thing.
I dunno fetishes are complicated, all I know is there are many specific ones and they all follow a general theme of domination/submission or humiliation.

>>14502943
No, read the links.
Even having proper nutrition can lead to smaller brains if the child isn't socialized, loved and cared for etc

Good parenting results in better children with bigger brains.

I still don't understand how people could be social constructionists in 2020.

I mean, understanding how the brain actually works, how millions of years of evolution developed it and how our instincts interact with society is extremely interesting, but a lot of left wingers just ignore it.

It's quite sad.

>>14502884
>Prove it.
Random example of many.
https://oll.libertyfund.org/quotes/616

>>14502892
true

>>14502917
>That's literally one aspect of human nature, there are countless others.
That's correct.
>I mean it's not entirely his fault, we didn't know that much about evolutionary psychology back then.
What isn't his fault?
>Those were just social/economic changes which our instinctual brains easily adapted to.
Yep.
>This doesn't mean "human nature" changed, it means economic and social forces changed.
Yes it does. It caused our brains to adapt and it modified what humans typically do, i.e. the nature of humans. 10000 years ago it was true that typical humans were animals that constantly traveled and lived from hunting with tools and gathering. Today this is no longer true. Similarly, typical human sleeping patterns changed between that period and today.
>The innate human nature remains the same.
Yes, I already told you at the beginning that Marx never denied that some parts of human nature remained the same throughout history.

>>14502998
>Marx’s hypothesis assumes that the prices of the commodities I and II are determined exactly in proportion to the amounts of labor expended in their production
Wrong. Both in confusing prices with values and in supposing that values are determined by labour expended.
>And further, it follows from this that the laborer in commodity I should be satisfied
Wrong. Marx isn't providing any normativity for what anyone should be satisfied with.

That's an interesting collection of quotes on that website. Are you libertarian retards so mentally deficient that you can't read books and instead have to be served short quotations on a plate that you can then mindlessly regurgitate?

>>14503097
>Are you libertarian retards so mentally deficient that you can't read books and instead have to be served short quotations on a plate that you can then mindlessly regurgitate?
Ah, I see you've never read karl marx and the close of his system, quite sad. It's a good read and refutes many of the central tenants of marxism.
I see you've also never read Mises's economic calculation problem. Marxists haven't solved this to this very day.

What in the world are you going to do in 50 years when the capitalist system still hasn't collapsed, global poverty has decreased a lot further and you'll just be sitting around like fools?
You poor souls.

>>14502924
Ask the french pipol

Behaviorism is among the scarce and sound parts of psychology. He's right.

>>14503097
>What isn't his fault?
The fact that he only knew of a small portion of human nature. This was before evolutionary psychology and neuroscience was discovered.
>It caused our brains to adapt and it modified what humans typically do
The human brain can only adapt to specific things, it's not infinitely malleable.
>10000 years ago it was true that typical humans were animals that constantly traveled and lived from hunting with tools and gathering
Yeah our brains were also much smaller and we were dumber.
>Yes, I already told you at the beginning that Marx never denied that some parts of human nature remained the same throughout history.
Then what of the base and superstructure? I thought he said that economic forces change the base which changes the superstructure(human desires, society in general etc etc)?

>>14503205
>Behaviorism is among the scarce and sound parts of psychology.
no, it's not
You people are going to keep getting btfo the more we discover about the brain and it's going to be hilarious.
Enjoy falling into the dustbin of history.

>>14503219
>He doesn't have a Lilly's dolphin or a Pavlov dog, or Skinner pigeon
Pets are proof brah

>>14503097
How do you cope with the fact the LTV has been refuted?

It's another episode of dismiss thinker x because of what I read on wikipedia.

There is no fixed human nature. I agree with Foucault. If you read beyond just the basics of History and Anthropology, you realize this to be true. Accounting for the breadth of human behavior through space and time simply cannot be done through biology alone.

>>14502983
>implying right wingers aren't as manipulated as left
>implying the left/right divide isn't a social construct
>implying you're not getting constanly fucked in the brain by deliberately researched and tested adverts and propaganda gradually decaying away your pure view of the world

>>14503243
>There is no fixed human nature.
Yes there is, it's literally right here.
Why the fuck do you people deny established science and human instincts?
Human behavior is a MIX of both nature and nurture.
You people are delusional and just denying reality at this point.

>>14503260
>>implying the left/right divide isn't a social construct
Now that I would say is an accurate statement. The left/right paradigme is bullshit and causes people to think dumb things.

>>14502580
>Foucault choose to accept the Beast within but but forsook control of it with the Living God(Truth, Morality, Dominion) within.
Man, Foucault was a fucking cuckold of his own behavior.

Any books on this? I don't really have a opinion on this as I've never read into it or even put thought into it. I've read a bit of Foucault and way older Philosophers.

>>14503188
>Ah, I see you've never read karl marx and the close of his system
Neither have you, apparently.
>I see you've also never read Mises's economic calculation problem
As far as I remember I did. I think this might have been the one that assumed regular exchange between producers in a society which is defined by lack of such exchange, which struck me as extra retarded.
>Marxists haven't solved this to this very day.
I don't remember there being anything to solve there.
>What in the world are you going to do in 50 years
I don't know. I don't have any special hopes that capitalism will collapse within my lifetime that I hinge my life on or even just strongly bet on, if that's what you mean.

>>14503212
>The fact that he only knew of a small portion of human nature.
I don't think that's true.
>This was before evolutionary psychology and neuroscience was discovered.
Many Redditors whose idols are Harris, Pinker, etc. seem to jerk off to those two disciplines, but I haven't seen anything worthwhile come out of them yet, except trivialities like "people capacities have evolved!" or "decision making happens in the brain!!!" that get employed by some morons to strike down some retarded strawmen like "sjws say that human need to pee and poo is socially constructed".
>I thought he said that economic forces change the base which changes the superstructure(human desires, society in general etc etc)?
They don't change the base but are in the base, but yes. Is this supposed to somehow conflict with the fact that some parts of human nature have remained constant throughout history?

>>14503234
I've seen one of those in a thread a week ago and it had multiple errors in a single paragraph. Not getting tricked this time.

>>14503268
Can you give a scientific citation on this?

>>14502565
Terrible excerpt to strip from but this is a perfectly accepable view, the question comes when we strip all societal conditions to the bare bones of a human, what would we have then? How would our behavior be?

>DUDE HUMAN NATURE LMAO UNIVERSAL MORALITY WITHOUT GOD

every rendition of this line of thought results in CIA niggers shipping off swathes of populations to biological recycling factories and genociding half the planet for the sake of economic efficiency backed by REASON! and LOGIC!

foucault was a transgressive of the highest order while chumpsky was (is) a fucking hack who literally worked for the US military

>>14503386
Uncle ted

Your life is already controlled by advertisers and unless you live in the woods and never venture to society again it will remain that way. You have no agency. You have no nature. It's all a controlling spook.

>>14503219
dumb fucking sam harris tier niggerbrained retard stop posting and stay on whatever bugman STEM oriented subreddit you slithered from you domesticated cuck

>>14503370
>Neither have you, apparently.
I've read parts of it, it's a pretty long and extremely complex book with refutes countless marxist fallacies.
>I think this might have been the one that assumed regular exchange between producers in a society which is defined by lack of such exchange,
That's not the economic calculation problem at all. Marxists tried to refute the ecp with lange, but failed miserably.
https://mises.org/wire/lange-mises-and-praxeology-retreat-marxism

>I don't remember there being anything to solve there.
Are you utterly clueless as to why there was a massive amount of shortages and wasteful surpluses in socialist countries?
>I don't have any special hopes that capitalism will collapse within my lifetime
It's not going to collapse ever, unless we get hit by an asteroid or something.
Bohm Bawerk debunked the whole rate of profit thing as well and marxists still can't refute bawerk on this.

>>14503370
>Many Redditors whose idols are Harris, Pinker, etc. seem to jerk off to those two disciplines
Reddit is filled with marxist teens such as yourself.
>but I haven't seen anything worthwhile come out of them yet
Are you retarded?
Read the blank slate dude, you have no idea what you're talking about.
Why do you social constructionists still exist?

>except trivialities like "people capacities have evolved!" or "decision making happens in the brain!!!" that get employed by some morons to strike down some retarded strawmen like "sjws say that human need to pee and poo is socially constructed".
This entire thing is a strawman and you don't understand evolutionary psychology whatsoever.

>>14503391
This poster has actual schizophrenia.
>>14503416
>STEM oriented subreddit
Are you projecting or something? Reddit is filled with sociology people.
STEM people have higher IQs than you people

>>14503403
>Your life is already controlled by advertisers
lmao holy fuck people actually believe this shit
if what you're saying is true, people would be buying every single product that gets advertised to them

>>14503403
>It's all a controlling spook
Unless you're the controller - here's your univerlsal morality and innate human faculty, OP

>>14503370
>I've seen one of those in a thread a week ago and it had multiple errors in a single paragraph.
They were from different authors.
Come on, if you're such an intelligent marxist you should be able to refute the image.
Also why can't you refute Bohm Bawerk's critique of the falling rate of profit?

>>14503391
>genociding half the planet for the sake of economic efficiency
What? Who's genociding half the planet, what are you talking about?
The countries where all the mass deaths occur are the ones with the lowest amount of economic freedom.

>>14503494
Communist depopulation and industrialisation were tandem. Progress isn't about freedom.

>this leftists unironically think you can socially engineer a human to believe and feel absolutely anything and their innateness won't ever come back to the surface

>>14503391
>REASON! and LOGIC!
What's wrong with reason and logic?

>>14502565
>>14502635
>1969 ARPANET goes online
>BF Skinner publishes Beyond Freedom and Dignity
>1975 Foucault publishes Discipline and Punish

Who is BF Skinner? I actually think is the ''classical liberals'' and the rationalists who are the real spooked humanists, holding on to an untenable conception of the cartesian cogito, the kind of people who confuse science as an institution with the abstract machines and their actualisation in material strata. They are either naive or disingenuous. I am beginging to think the only strategically tenable epistemological stance in the age of mass operant conditioning, where neural states and responses are increasingly being weaponised by geopolitical players(there are many Cambridge analytica type outfits operating right now in tandem with airspace command )looks like a a syntheists of spinozist materialism and cybernetic nietszchean virtualism. Like McLuhan already knew nearly 5 decades ago, WWIII is a guerrilla information war with no distinction between civilian and military participation.

Both SJWs and right leaning 'rationalists' appeal to an obsolete liberal humanist other Other incarnated in twenty century institutions such as the university, corporate america, and the federal government, at a time as technological change is eroding the basis for humanism and individual identity. There is a difference between being morally against the boundless manipulation of the human species, and denying such manipulation isn't becoming increasingly viable. Anything that has to do with the human form crosses over into taboo territority and the drawing of friend enemy distinctions: political theology and the ''vulgarity of biopolitics''.

Leftists defend the sexual revolution, lgbt, identity politics the elimination of racial and gender differences, from what is an essentially naive quasi Christian perspective- muh human rights and autonomy- all the while these movements erode the basis for humanism and the increasing subjection of deviants and risk cases to intrusive power knowledge technologies. Skinner's legacy resurfaces in both neoliberal behavioural economics and leftist attempts to quantify racial prejudice and root out ''implicit'' or ''subconscious'' bias. Big data and feedback are a pandora's box, few are willing to deal with the consequences of this openly.
The intellectual darkweb is probably run from a server on Epstein's Orgy Island, you know deep state pedo blackmail, Sillicon Valley transhumanist nerds like Luckley and Thiel (see palantir and girardian scapegoat theories) along with hardline Zionists oligarchs, probably the MEGA group. They talk about reason the western ''judeochristian'' culture, and the individual while also promoting the undermining all those through the promotion of atheistic materialism, transhumanism, racial science, pseudo buddhist consumer nihilism, mkultraing yourself with psychedelics. basically we are pretty much fucked.

>>14503514
based. Empiricists eternally retarded.

>>14503494
>le economic freedom maymay
i wonder what goes on inside the empty skulls of heritage foundation entrained bugpeople beyond recitations of corporate slogans and human resources related mantras. you are a fucking insect of the highest order. explain, insect, how being cucked by the IMF is tantamount to being "free?"

and i never said it's happening now, it's merely a reductio ad absurdum extrapolation of economic and social dynamics under the heel of MUH REASON. "efficiency" beats the life and soul out of man. just wire yourself up to the matrix already, bugbrain. you were never human in the first place.

>>14503438
>That's not the economic calculation problem at all.
What is it then?
>Are you utterly clueless as to why there was a massive amount of shortages and wasteful surpluses in socialist countries?
Shortages and wasteful surpluses happen constantly in capitalism, and the countries you're calling socialist were capitalist too.
>Bohm Bawerk debunked the whole rate of profit thing as well and marxists still can't refute bawerk on this.
Capitalism won't collapse because of some "rate of profit thing" but because of a proletarian revolution.

>>14503454
>Reddit is filled with marxist teens such as yourself.
There are some teens who pretend to be Marxists there, but their understanding of Marx is as extensive as yours, so no one in their right mind would grant that they're indeed Marxists.
>Are you retarded?
Name one worthwhile thing each coming out of neuroscience and evolutionary biology. With citations.

>>14503483
I'm not going to waste that much time unless I see that I'm interacting with someone who understands both the material being criticized and the critique, rather than some loser who can only repost shit he doesn't himself understand that he took from some other loser who did the exact same thing.

>>14503542
Not him but its unironically unnatural.

>>14503461
>ACKCHYUAL schizophrenia
post your credentials proving you have the professional knowledge to pass a medical analysis on a patient you've never even come into contact with, freud style.

this poster has actual autism. i know this because logic and reason led me to this conclusion.

>>14503610
>how being cucked by the IMF is tantamount to being "free?"
It's not, libertarians like myself want a violent end to the IMF and world bank.
They're just statist central bank debt creators that destroy economic freedom.
Actual economic freedom means no central bank or at the very least limited inflation.

>>14503461
>psychiatry
Yea, no. Seems like you've already been conditioned mate.

>>14503591
what can anyone do? pray for a flare?

>>14502565
it was god's will that such a disgusting human being as foucault should die of AIDS, that through him we may see his punishment for sin made manifest, the just deserts of transgressing divine law

>>14503622
>What is it then?
You don't actually no? Man, marxists are sad.
https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Economic_calculation_problem

>Shortages and wasteful surpluses happen constantly in capitalism, and the countries you're calling socialist were capitalist too.
lol you people are pathetic.
Your image is retarded.
First off, this food is produced in countries with extreme economic freedom and can't simply be shipped to the third world.
Second, the countries that have famines happen in places where market activity is extremely restricted.
You can call it capitalism or socialism all you want but these terms are completely irrelevant to what is actually happening here.
When free markets(or at least close to free markets) are actually tried it results in a massive creation of wealth and reduction in poverty.
>Capitalism won't collapse because of some "rate of profit thing" but because of a proletarian revolution.
All the marxists I talk to talk about the rate of profit destroying capitalism.
ALSO a prole revolution will NEVER happen if living standards for the working class keep increasing and communism is regarded as some dumb fringe ideology.

>>14503622
>I'm not going to waste that much time
So you admit you lost and cannot refute it.
Okay then.

So in Foucault’s analysis “society” is just a given that has no biological or even material origin? Shouldn’t he try to explore why society has prejudices rather than show that it has them? Seems like he got filtered hard and isn’t even close to the bottom of things

>>14503628
just listen to yourself schizo, stop reading so much commie fanfiction
>>14503644
I'm against psychiatry, but okay bro.

stemtards are insufferable. Science is bunk. All lies serving a herd will-to-power

>>14503706
Imagine not realizing you are a leftist tool and useful idiot.

>>14503673
>https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Economic_calculation_problem
I'm just seeing the assertion that socialism can't "rationally" allocate resources, but the argument is nowhere in sight.
>First off ... Second ...
I didn't meant to imply that food shortages in capitalism can't be explained, if that's what you wanted suggest by providing explanations.
>When free markets(or at least close to free markets) are actually tried it results in a massive creation of wealth and reduction in poverty.
Ok, but capitalism is much more than "free markets".
>All the marxists I talk to
Which ones would that be?
>ALSO a prole revolution will NEVER happen if living standards for the working class keep increasing
Not really. People get pissed off when their living standards don't raise as quickly as they would like too. And it's pretty naive to think that the living standards will keep increasing without interruption. The general trend can persist, but a deeper crisis / series of crises like the one from WW I to WW II can render the general trend meaningless, because an abrupt enough interruption can always trigger a snowball effect.

>>14503652
idk beat off to the yellowed pages of the whole earth catalog, obscure situationist and italian autonomist tracts, Gibson's Neuromancer and 90s issues of wired magazine, read all the CCRU lore and maybe convince other mentally ill people to LARP with you?

>>14503732


Foucault understood society as an amoral forcefield of competing power relations, via Nietszche and Spinoza. STEM rational atheist libertarians persist n the liberal denial of the political as a distinct sphere based on the friend-enemy distinction. they Instead, appeal to a reified idea of ''science'' and ''reason'' that basically amounts to degenerated 18th century deism incarnated in a supposed ''scientific community'', while demanding the enemy play by their ''objective'' rules. Deleuze and Foucault are the real neoreactionary thinkers. The true radical right are is not bugmen STEM nerds beging the managerial gynocrats to please consider their bell curves, but a savage madmaxian horde of BDSM gay bikers riding in from the Evrasiyan steppe and decimating every anglo-zionist outpost.

>>14503652
Given a sufficient amount of time and enough computing power, one could use the videogame minecraft to build a computer capable of running minecraft. idk why that seems relevant go figure it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1X21HQphy6I

>>14503914
Imagine believing the equivalent to L Ron Hubbard's Dianetics and believing you have found truth.
Why are you a social constructionist when there is a massive amount of empirical evidence against it?

>>14503858
>People get pissed off when their living standards don't raise as quickly as they would like too.
SO?
Does that mean marxism will be the solution?
Countless other radical ideologies could take over.
Socialism/marxism isn't inevitable.

>>14504457
>Does that mean marxism will be the solution?
No, it means that you can't simply assume that rising living standards will prevent a proletarian revolution.

>>14502973
The links are poor. It's widely thought that Genie already had congenital developmental cognitive disabilities, she wasn't feral.

>>14504448
empiricism is a meme

>>14502738
>>14502740
Guys I ain’t a Marxist, pretty conservative desu, but it feels real dishonest when you confuse a specific theorist with the fuckoff large amount of separate groups proclaiming geneology from the guy. Marx says stuff that is pretty much regarded as likely across the board, not everything, but the idea that nature is augmented by society is one. It’s not even explicitly Marxist, the idea existed long before him.

>>14504448
Because empirical evidence supports constructionism

>>14503858
>the revolution
Hahahahahahahahahah your commies are a broken record

>>14504722
Uhh yea there have never been revolutions throughout history and economic systems have never changed ok.

>>14504746
Wow stellar analysis, I'm sure the limp wristed depressive leftists at my school are going to rise up any day now

>>14503914
When you back on Twitter borzoi?

>>14504799
no, the great men will rise up as they always have and as they always will. look a the upper echelon of american society, where do you see the great men? nothing but bugbrained weaklings and faggots, cowards, spiritual cuckolds and genetic refuse. great men do not number among them, and they will inevitably rise up to take their rightful place.

or perhaps there are no more great men? perhaps capitalism has thoroughly eradicated greatness? all the more reason to reject the system

>>14502740
You seem pretty assmad about dead people. Do you walk around cemetaries yelling about "lairs" and "thieves," too?

>>14502839
Retard logic predicated on assumptions written by sex positive pseudo researchers who didn't conduct experimental studies in the first place but instead surveys, which brainlets always respond to without any attribution of causes and effect. Its been proven in experimental studies that fetishes are classically conditioned perversions and that response to a penny jar has even been proven to be induced through behavioral input and reward. You're an idiot.

>>14502565
>Was Foucault retarded?
no, just a homosexual

>>14503386
Impossible. Conditions would be invented, even in a lonesome child as they must develop a way to parse information and make sense of it. That may be imitating animals. Though without social input they will basically be retarded and incapable of grammar (language). Probably also forced into existence by the brain. The brain has form, it is not a disembodied immaterial formless thing, so things follow from it. More so, limitations and tendencies in conditioning follow from it. It's like painting a sculpture differently, the sculpture cannot be changed except by taking away from it (damaging it).

That said, socialisation may be important alongside biology. Biology may depend on it. So even a group of feral children (from birth) may not form a functional society though they would likely form a language (as babies already start to do despite having the input of another pre-established language).

>>14502905
>why do lots of people like the same things that happen to be popular genres of porn

>>14502880
>You've been conditioned to find pic related unattractive for example.
that's not what's going on with hairlessness on women. It's mostly that they've clearly been selected for it sexually, and also partly to signal youth

>>14502738
The Marxist concept of alienation kind of contradicts that. You can’t have alienation of human nature in a capitalist environment if human nature is determined by environment. That would mean that man living under capitalism would have a capitalist nature and be perfectly at home under capitalism and not at all alienated. Clearly Marx does believe in human nature as evidenced by his concept of alienation.

>>14504919
There are plenty of great scientists, you just aren't smart enough to understand their work. As time goes on, more and more knowledge is needed to make further progress in science.

>>14502565
This whole thread made me remember why i left /lit/.
Thanks for the reminder

>>14506215
nobody cares faggot

>>14504919
Why do people causally associate capitalism with the "bugman" as it's called today? It seems to have a lot more to do with egalitarian ideologies, desu.

I mean, 150 years or so ago we had Engels writing about how the family was a bourgeois construct that existed for the purpose of securing property and other Marxist-feminist theorists e.g. Kollontai advocating something approximating free love and "society" taking on the role of raising children. Now that we have realized this state of affairs (families gone to shit, children de facto raised by the State, homosexuality) the same things are being denounced as bourgeois individualism. If we're living in hypercapitalism, why doesn't the US just colonize countries outright ("You're on our oil") instead of invade them to try to build gender-neutral ice cream factories? If capitalist material conditions are causing a collapsing birth rate, why don't the bourgeoisie engineer a baby boom? Why did fertility collapse among the wealthiest groups first, and why are there so many poor Mexican families living with their 6 kids in a shack in California? Most aspects of Bourgeois Capitalist Modernity seem to be traceable to egalitarian, left-wing ideologies rather than private property ownership.

>>14506190
Yeah that's not what alienation means in Marxism. People are alienated from the products and benefits of their labor

>>14502565

The mark of a pseud is complaining about "society". Exactly what is the society comprised of?

>>14506227
I do

post-modernist literally think pharaohs is ancient Egypt could not have died to tuberculosis because the concept of tuberculosis was not established yet. that's the big brain stuff all these leftist retard base their muh critique

>>14506267
the original small-souled bugman was a deracinated consumer. no connection with tradition, his identity based on products he buys, he lives in a sterile podlike environment(apartment building, condo), he is a replica of all the other bugmen, basically a commodity himself, he had ceased to really be human

it was coined by MPC who also spent a lot of time calling bugmen faggots who in fact literally looked like bugs with their glassy eyes, spectacles, and bald heads

>>14506267
Why lose your time arguing with brainlets?
'Capitalism' (non-centralized property) has always received strange attacks like this. People have blamed it for approximately everything they didn't like.
Which is natural, if only we had collectivized control under my ideas, things would be so much better.

>>14502565
i feel the same way as old mickey fuck. i am completely amoral. it makes me very paranoia because i assume everyone else is as well. i can't trust anybody and i know i am ultimately a liar and an egoist when i do anything 'right'

>>14507199
Yes.

>>14502738
>hold the most influence today still hold that material conditions form consciousness. That's pretty fucking exclusive of any sort of human nature.
It isn't exclusive at all.

>>14504722
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_revolutions_and_rebellions

>>14507393
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_revolutions_and_rebellions
It doesn't mean a marxist revolution will ever occur again.
You people are old news and everyone hates you.

>>14504967
lmao you people are flat earthers, seriously.
We have done brain scans and studied the regions of the brains regarding fetishes, they're a strong byproduct of instincts.
Why do you evolution denialists even exist?

>>14504580
>It's widely thought that Genie already had congenital developmental cognitive disabilities, she wasn't feral.
She was similar to a feral child.
Children who don't grow up in a loving environment end up dumber and have a smaller brain.

>>14504550
>No, it means that you can't simply assume that rising living standards will prevent a proletarian revolution.
So basically you're admitting that a marxist revolution is NOT inevitable and that communism is not the next stage of history, right?
Communism is an outdated depreciated theory that nobody gives a shit about.

>>14504690
>Because empirical evidence supports constructionism
No it doesn't.
Why are you unironically denying human instincts and neuroscience?
Human behavior is a result of a mix of instincts and social forces.
If you think it's 100% nurture you are a fucking retard.
I can't believe how dumb people on /lit/ are.

>>14504664
Why do you think if you deny reality enough your delusions will come true?
Do you unironically think the human brain is endlessly plastic and can be made to act and feel in any way?
You people deny reality. This is why you are mocked and your theories are worthless.

Cults exist because they convince people to ignore their instincts and humanity.

>>14507363
enjoy being a slave then

>>14507857
>It doesn't mean a marxist revolution will ever occur again.
But it does mean that the idea that there will be revolutions in the future can be dismissed by a retard laugh.

>>14507864
I'd like to read about this. Care to give a citation?

>>14507873
>So basically you're admitting that a marxist revolution is NOT inevitable
Yes, we could get hit by an asteroid tomorrow, for example.
>Communism is an outdated depreciated theory that nobody gives a shit about.
It isn't a theory. It's a movement that will exist for as long as capitalism exists, regardless of how weak or strong it is at any given moment.

>>14507896
>empiricism is reality. This specific form of knowledge created by liberal anglos is the universal form of Truth. It is pure, given, we have immediate access to sense data. How can you deny SCIENCE!
seethe harder, npc

>ahh yes, another btfo on the list

>>14507896
>Why are you unironically denying human instincts and neuroscience?
I don't, but your view is simplistic and reductive. It is a 101 kiddie view. All of history and cultural practices and relations throughout it support constructionism.

>>14507864
fetishes can be de-programmed