/lit/ - Literature

The Republic - Plato

No, an industrialized form of upbringing would eliminate any individuality in its victims and it would, by way of things, become corporatized.

>>7258178
>No, an industrialized form of upbringing would eliminate any individuality in its victims

why tho

>>7258169
Uh no

>>7258169
as long as nothing rises to replace it, no

lot of current problems are caused by the fact that there's barely anything for the individual to identify with

families don't stick together anymore as blood isn't as thick as it used to be. divorce rates ahoy

nobody wants to identify with their nation because that's so facist

except for a few retards, everyone knows better than to identify with their employer

how to solve this shit? IDK

Define family.

The industrial age destroyed the extended family. Only the nuclear family remains, and it's quite damaged.

As far as obsolete? That's an empirical question with an empirical answer. After correcting for all factors, stable two-parent families produce smarter, better educated, more mentally stable and physically healthier children than every other method.

>>7258178
>No, an industrialized form of upbringing would eliminate any individuality

The family's task of "socializing" the kids is pretty much gone anyway. Universal education, mass media and so on made it pretty much worthless, and now values that survive through family ties alone are more of an annoyance to society than anything else.

Every other possible value will be replaced with money. Churches and art shows are money laundering schemes now. The family was always a contract and there will be no fantasy to support it, not of love or any religious seal, not even the excuse of living together under the same roof. If it is a contract, that you can negotiate it, you can manage it like a corporation, add and exclude parts without remorse, raise children on videogames and nannies and invest on their career like a business.

>>7258265
>The family was always a contract

not really no

kids and mothers imprint each other via hormones and shit

you have programming in you compelling you to love your kids(doesn't work in everyone tho)

of course it can be rewritten if the social programming is strong enough

but you're fighting against inertia

>>7258274
pls leave

>>7258274
There's no link between mother and son aside from schizo-oedipa metempsychotic relation spheres. Ugh. You plebs need to stop spewing your banal trite on this board.

Of course not. Children do best with a mother and a father. This has been proven. Attempts to replace "mom and dad" with "mom and mom" or "dad and dad" or "dad and teacher" or "mom and government official" are objectively and measurably deleterious to a child's well being (With the absolute worst thing you can do being let two lesbians raise a child).

Now if you're getting into fantasy like Plato's Republic or AIs raising children, that's an entirely different thing. But back here in reality, the mother-father-children unit has arisen in every culture throughout history because it is the simplest and most effective way of raising children.

>inb4 look at this obscure Indian tribe that once had an uncle help!
That doesn't mean that the grandparents, or the aunts, or the rest of the tribe can't help. But the Family itself (The second smallest relation unit after the self) is mom-dad-kids by default with possible grandparents/aunts/uncles/whatever.

>>7258274
That's a contract.

Also, stay parroting what you are "programmed" to do, but look around and see how easily we can defy that given conditions. Back to the point that I was making that it's not that "society can rewrite" this, it HAS rewritten this, several times, in several forms, tribes that look after children as if all of the adults were equally their parents, societies that accept certain age gaps and not others, certain sexual practices and not others, multiple partners or just one, groups of people that have fraternal love but are not allowed to romantic encounters, celibacy, several means of birth control, adoption, human traffic and so on... These contract has taken many forms and the form that we are having right now is what I described.

>>7258338
"Does best" and "functions as labor" are two different things. If it's cheaper to raise the children in state-run boarding houses with their mental anguish curbed by advanced pharmaceuticals, and they function 'good enough' as Wal-Mart employees or accountants, why not raise them that way? It will be good for the economy, if you think about it.

>>7258338
/thread

>>7258334
>>7258297
>There's no link between mother and son aside from schizo-oedipa metempsychotic relation spheres

this is 100% wrong

read your fucking studies

what the fuck is oxytocin

go die

>>7258355

>>7258169
"The Family" has always been just a religious/traditionalistfag meme.

>>7258169
John Milbank is right to argue that fascism is always close whenever there's talk of the end of the biological family.

https://youtu.be/CPIJZYh3LC0?t=5m11s

>>7258229
I wouldn't say that the socializing aspect that is important. For most people, their childhood experiences and the beliefs, behaviors, and ideals of their guardians influence them greatly. And if the process of raising children was industrialized, the differences between them would be reduced significantly.

>>7258183
Why? because he says so. it's just some random asspull. Fascist and Christian fucks preach the importance of family all the time and you can see for yourself how fond are they of individuality.

>>7258199
Not sure if you were implying it, but identifying with your employer isn't in any way less retarded than dientifying with your nation.

>>7258431
Subscribing to the same dogma as someone else does not mean you share all of their sentiments. You have no clue what you are talking about.

>>7258431
>Fascist and Christian fucks preach the importance

: |

>>7258338
>This has been proven
>Source: my ass.

>>7258355
You're ultimately right in that "what you want your child to be like" is the question at hand. If all you care about is spitting out mindless drones, then a Soviet style baby factory would work just fine. So I would amend my previous post to "The traditional mom-dad-kids nuclear family is the best way to produce children that are mentally healthy and capable of maximizing their potential according to their own desires". I'm having a brainfart and can't think of a better way to word this so I hope it's (sort of) clear what I mean by "maximizing their potential according to their own desires".

>>7258427
The Fascists never argued that the family should be destroyed, that would be Communists. Hell Marx himself said Communism can only come about when "The family" is destroyed. "Helping the family" was one of Mussolini's biggest points and to this day Fascists in Italy do huge amounts of charity and relief work for Italian families (Casa Pound gets shit on all the time for their food banks and centers for the needy for example).

>>7258446
Epic emoji, friend.

>>7258443
How does any of the stuff you said on your post invalidate what I said. And even better, how does it make this >>7258178 any less of an unfounded asspull?

Leftists legitimately frighten me.

>>7258459
It's fascist in the sense of biopolitical control. The state becoming the mediating factor for the creation of life.

Gay marriage is not unlike eugenics.

>>7258471
I know, right? They're spoopy as hell.

>>7258485
>Gay marriage is not unlike eugenics.

>>7258485
You should use a different word then, like "totalitarian" or "statist" as the actual Fascists did not and to this day do not advocate many of the things that are attributed to them by misuse of the word "Fascist". The "destroy the family" example is one thing that would have absolutely horrified Mussolini but is advocated by Communists and done by American Neocons. The Fascists likewise had little issue with firearms ownership, while both Communists and Neocons do yet population disarmament is a "fascist" thing to do.

>>7258471
It seems to me from this thread that they're trying to project their childhood abandonment issues upon the rest of society.

>>7258169
>Do you think the "Family" has outlived its usefulness as society's basic unit?
The family is biological. It will never disappear.

>>7258441
>identifying with your employer isn't in any way less retarded than dientifying with your nation.

correct

>>7258505
Meh. Fascism is like Communism, adherents will always say "It's never truly been tried."

>>7258496
Yes, precisely. Read some Foucault and realize you're dumber than your smug attitude can cover.

>>7258508
It appears to be the contrary.
>Dad abandoned us so it's all his fault I ended up being such a pathetic loser. FAMILY IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING!!!

>>7258535
Except that doesn't tend to happen. People from single mother homes are usually much more leftist than people from two parent homes.

>>7258534
>Read X author and you'll realize I'm right even if I'm too stupid to put it into words in a coherent argument by myself.

>>7258538
>[citation needed]

>>7258544
Citation needed for your claim too.

>>7258229
>now values that survive through family ties alone are more of an annoyance to society than anything else.
Examples?

>>7258338

>(With the absolute worst thing you can do being let two lesbians raise a child).

Eagerly awaiting the hard evidence.

>>7258548
I didn't claim shit. We were talking about what kind of people appear to be the ones projecting in all likelihood:

>Family is important because I blame my defects on the fact of my family being dysfunctional.

or

>I've had a dysfunctional family and this has given me a lot of difficulties. This is why I think the traditional family isn't that important after all.

You are the only faggot claiming pointless shit.

>>7258535
single mother "families" are shit
almost every serial killer was raised by a single mother

>>7258564
>I didn't claim shit
Except for : "Dad abandoned us so it's all his fault I ended up being such a pathetic loser. FAMILY IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING!!!"

>You are the only faggot claiming pointless shit.
See above. Are you bereft of the standards of evidence you impose on others?

>>7258467
It's not an asspull; it's what happens when something is industrialized (I'm guessing you don't know what this means). Agriculture is a good example.

>>7258471

Makes sense. Conservative people have larger amygdalae than leftists. That's the part of the brain that causes fear-based responses. You know, like a dumb, scared animal.

Leftists on the other hand have more grey matter in the anterior cingulate cortex. Cortex of course being what separates us from lesser animals. This part of the brain deals with rational decision-making and handling difficult or conflicting information.

Science agrees, conservatives are literally subhumans governed by fear.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3092984/

>>7258169

Kinship relations are always in flux, but some vestiges of the nuclear family will likely always remain because most people have an innate preference their own biological children, and even if kinship extends to include more than the nuclear family in the future, it's likely that something like nuclear families will arise within these larger groups.

>>7258229
Yes, because the values that we learn from television and the Internet are exactly the way we need our children to be raised.

>>7258542
There's no doubt Foucault would abhor gay marriage and social justice activism.

He was not a humanist.

Do you even read?

>>7258586
white people have higher IQ than black people

>>7258621
Irrelevant to the study.

>>7258627
are black people subhumans?

>>7258621
>anon A writes about liberals vs. conservative brain-structure
>anon B tries to force his racism in

Oh /pol/, when will you learn

>>7258575
That wasn't a claim, I was exemplificating in a ridiculous way the kind of projection I was talking about. Not sure if you can't into context or taking shit out of context in purpose.

>>7258569
There's no direct corelation between one thing and the other. Most families where there are drugs, crime or abuse end up broken. This doesn't mean every single mother family is hell.
Poor reasoning skills.

>>7258581
Oh, no, stop using such difficult terms mr. "I've read Foucault, one obscure TOP TIER philosopher you probaly haven't even heard of", it's so difficult to follow your complexly structured argumentation.

Give me an example of a single argument you've used on this thread that didn't end up in a blatant asspull.

>>7258629
Ask /pol/.

>>7258629

Depends on whether or not their decision-making processes are based primarily in the limbic system, like an animal, or in the cortex, like a human.

>>7258618
Stop, I'm having trouble enough debating that undergrad specialized in ...what was his name, again? Focoult or something like that.

>>7258586
>liberals are poorfags
>conservatives are at the top of the pyramid and hold greater amounts of wealth

>the poorfags can soothe themselves with "a-at least we're smarter!"

>>7258621
It's actually hilarious that this is the only reply you could come up with

>>7258639
>>conservatives are at the top of the pyramid and hold greater amounts of wealth
You are talking about the 1%-2% of conservatives here (which are in fact intelligent). This would be impossible without the poor conservatives being gullible as fuck, though.

>>7258654
I could come up with a much smarter one if you want

>>7258338
blech tbh

>>7258621
wew

>>7258693
Of course, nobody's doubting it, m80.

>>7258732
I am.

>>7258586
>deals with rational decision-making and handling difficult or conflicting information.
>handling conflicting information
That would be an important one for leftists, alright, as their beliefs regularly contradict with reality, such as believing that there is no such thing as race and then hating white people. See pic related.

>>7258634
>Oh, no, stop using such difficult terms mr. "I've read Foucault, one obscure TOP TIER philosopher you probaly haven't even heard of", it's so difficult to follow your complexly structured argumentation.
Mad projecting, anon. And if arguments based upon previous events count as asspulls, I have none. I shouldn't have to explain every single detail of my argument when it's so very obvious.

>>7258635
>>7258629
From /pol/, blacks are only subhuman if they act subhuman. Anyone from /pol/ that disagrees is a stormfag.

>>7258586
You can interpret in that way if you want. Or you can also say that conservatives are more emotionally developed and that leftists have a tendency to be psycopathic, since their empathic responses are underdeveloped.

Biology is something interesting to be brought to the discussion, but it can be used as rhetoric by both side. You can twist the facts the way you want always.

>>7258800
that's not projecting tbh

>>7258797
kek tbh fam

>>7258807
tfw blatant racism used to make you angry now it just makes you feel sympathy for the shitposter:)

>>7258797
>pol_strawman_image_macro_12.jpg

That shit won't work here.

>>7258169
>SPARTA

>>7258797
>UGH, LIBRULS
>A MENTAL DISEASE I TELLS YA

>>7258832
except leftists tend to have stronger empathetic responses to poor people, or people suffering, whereas conservatives tend to ignore the plight of individuals in favor of their own designs

or you know, realize all this is one side flinging shit, pseudo-science and "biotruths" at the other, and vice-versa

>>7258797
I love how /pol/tards always link some shitty image or retarded youtbe vid. Just like they can't actually read/write any coherent argument.

>>7258800
There's no argument, idiot. Namedroping "Foucault", "industralization" and "eugenics" and saying "I'm smurter than u lol" isn't making any kind of argument.

>>7258867
>>7258960
>>7258970
As a former liberal I can attest that everything written in that image macro is true and on point when it comes to liberal ideology. Being this buttmad about it won't change that.

>>7258974
>>7258841
I only mentioned industrialization. It's another anon who is doing the other things.

The negro howls at the moon, hungry, craving a bucket of kentucky fried chicken.

>>7258832
>Similarly, it is striking that conservatives are more sensitive to disgust [13, 14], and the insula is involved in the feeling of disgust [15]. On the other hand, our finding of an association between anterior cingulate cortex volume and political attitudes may be linked with tolerance to uncertainty. One of the functions of the anterior cingulate cortex is to monitor uncertainty [16, 17] and conflicts [18]. Thus, it is conceivable that individuals with a larger ACC have a higher capacity to tolerate uncertainty and conflicts, allowing them to accept more liberal views.

It only says conservatives are prudes, doesn't says leftists are emotionally detached

>>7259021
I'm not refering to that article specifically. I already have seen in some place this data about differences in the brains of liberals and conservatives, but then it was skewed in favor os conservatives.

The problem lies in what functions you assign to each of those mentioned parts and the importance of them to social life and general goodness. And these parts of the problems are not facts, but interpretations that can be easily skewed to any of the sides.

Analagous to this "biotruth", there is the research of Jonathan Haidt that says that conservatives have more moral sensibilities than liberals. But then a liberal can say that the sensibilities that he has are the ones that are really important and the ones that conservatives have which liberal don't are actually opressive. You can see the data is the same, but both sides are able to use it in the defense of their position.

In the end, everything is rhetoric.

>>7259021

Hence, why conservafriends cling desperately to spooks such as nationality and religion.

>>7258586
>>7259021
>Political Orientations Are Correlated with Brain Structure in Young Adults

Well shit Nigga. There's your problem right there.
There is virtually no such thing as a legitimately liberal or conservative young person, because most young people accept the political views of their parents and have not yet attempted a conscientious or critical analysis of the pro and cons or either stance. tldr; their views are worthless.

Also as liberals get older they become more conservative, and in general the more liberal you were to begin with the more right wing you will wind up. This further disproves the value of this research, because obviously a person's political affiliation can shift based on life experience, new information, and circumstance without a correlating shift in brain structure. This would naturally skew the findings for older people and make the findings statistically insignificant.

Bottomline, this research was carried out by liberals and is therefore biased and untrustworthy.

>>7258169
If you look at the Black prison population in America and the amount of them that never had a father in their home when they grew up, it becomes pretty clear that the destruction of the family was a huge mistake both for them, and society in general.

The fact that Marx and Engels did not anticipate the fact that anything that happens to the bourgeois class, happens to everyone else, culturally and socially speaking, is quite astounding to me, so when they argued that the bourgeois family is basically a capitalist invention and needed to be destroyed, he was tacitly arguing that everyone else's family should be destroyed as well.

>>7258991
>I was kicked out of/left liberalism because I was too stupid to figure out the difference between simple concepts

Real vote of confidence for /pol/ there

>>7259043
Protip : nationality is not a "spook", it's a biological reality.

>>7259042
You're right, these interpretations tend to be very linear because they're based upon set of rules you choose, and that you have define their meaning and value. How these transcribe to the real world is the real question.

>>7258459
What is a Soviet-style baby factory exactly?

>>7258508
>>7258535

Maybe we're all defective losers, regardless of our political affiliations

THE BLOOD OF THE COVENANT IS THICKER THAN THE WATER OF THE WOMB

FAMILY A SHIT

ETC

>>7259118
Remember that one thing from BNW?

>>7259089
No?

>>7259089

>mfw you were actually serious

>>7259318
Yes.

>>7259320
Nice pic, did you get it from /leftypol/?

>>7259427
kek

>>7259318

You are misunderstanding

Nationality is a "fact" you were actually born somewhere. Adherence to nationality, belief in it, fealty to it or pride/patriotism is a spook.

The basis of nationality is not a spook, its just an assertion. there is a difference.

>>7258169
>Do you think the "Family" has outlived its usefulness as society's basic unit?

No, inheritance is the building block of civilization. Without sons to leave your property to, the incentive to save, produce and invest becomes an incentive to consume and gamble.

>>7258338
>Attempts to replace "mom and dad" with "mom and mom" or "dad and dad" or "dad and teacher" or "mom and government official" are objectively and measurably deleterious

Would like some hard evidence on those chief. Anecdotes not accepted.

>All these edgy faggots who don't read

OP if you want to be an edgy faggot who reads, you're looking for The Mass Psychology of Fascism, by Wilhelm Reich.

>>7258991
>I'm a former librul guys!
>T-t-trust me! I know what I'm talking about!

are you serious right now nigger? I can't even with all those retarded implications

>>7259042
>In the end, everything is rhetoric.

and scientism fails once again

why do people still insist on this stuff again? right, illusion of objectivity

>>7259489
>an incentive to consume and gamble

so basically 21st century united states with its very easily circumvented inheritance laws?

>>7258169
A wife with many husbands that pay all of her and her child's needs

>>7259513
Fuck of you empiricist cunt. Read some Frankfurt School and you'll see the laughing stock that le ebin facts are.

>>7259613
ebin

>>7259513
You can Google it as well as the anon can. Research says that kids from gay "families" are less stable, less likely to finish school, more likely to commit suicide and do drugs. Same with single parent families. Use Google.

>>7258611

And yet, any family that shelters their kids from these influences is more likely to raise misfits than those who don't.

And you might also say that two dumb people who fucked by chance is also not exactly the way we need our children to be raised.

>>7259763
>google it

Nice research chief. I can also google 1+1=3 and the first result is a proof that it is true.

>>7259613
I think the whole point of post-modernism dear anon was not taking the whole "narrative" thing too seriously, especially in the face of mounting evidence of the contrary

>>7259529
>very easily circumvented inheritance laws

Say again?

>>7259919
just look at a tax attorney glossary

it's a wonder anyone pays inheritance tax, i guess the only people who do are the ones who feel like the owe the government something, because there are literally thousands of exploitable loopholes

>>7259891
And if I googled it and posted it here as proof you would consider it truer than if you did it yourself?