How does this make you feel?

File: 117 KB, 900x1200, scientificfacts.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Tue Oct 17 02:28:23 2017 No.9238281 [Reply] [Original]

How does this make you feel?

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 03:08:29 2017 No.9238311 ...like asking how they would prove it.

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 03:29:22 2017 No.9238338 >>9238311 Everything that makes them feel stupid, inferior, raped, oppressed, cramps their style = evil social construct that needs to go away.

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 03:35:10 2017 No.9238344 >>9238281 Like asking why you are not paying attention to whats happening at the front of the room like you're supposed to be you fucking waste of flesh.

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 03:41:31 2017 No.9238348 >>9238281 Maybe they mean theories? It's a reason why brainlets are a lower caste in science.

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 03:43:17 2017 No.9238352 File: 42 KB, 800x450, 1479235577455.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9238281 >first baby step in philosophy of science

Anonymous Tue Oct 17 03:44:43 2017 No.9238355

I'm a Mathematician, so fuck your gay boy shit. I'm gonna go jerk off to some combinatorics problems, what you gonna do now? Say Combinatorics is a social construct? It probably is, a social construct influenced by Hungarian Homosexuality and Depravity, but that's what makes it so special.

Anonymous Tue Oct 17 03:45:32 2017 No.9238356

I don't really care.
Either this is a slide taken out of context to purposefully instigate some, Or the lecturer is genuinely retarded and by no means a common problem.
I mean, there's a ton of shitty, stupid people out there who think their opinion is fact but that's a little different from this

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 04:32:08 2017 No.9238394 >>9238311 >>9238338 >>9238348 >>9238355 >>9238356 >i dont know what a social construct is

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 04:55:07 2017 No.9238418 >>9238355 mate... Gödel proved that maths is a social construct.

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 05:01:03 2017 No.9238423 >>9238281 Culturally enriched.

Anonymous Tue Oct 17 05:26:07 2017 No.9238445
File: 1.99 MB, 540x540, 1508228445151.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9238348
no this comes from continental philosophy. specifically postmodernism. continental philosophy is basically theocrats, nazis, communists, and feminists trying to destroy western civilization by undermining the enlightenment

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 05:27:51 2017 No.9238446 >>9238445 also, post modernists actually believe that emotions are just as good of a source of knowledge as science.

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 05:49:55 2017 No.9238471 >>9238394 >science is knowledge of society take a participation medal you fucking winner

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 05:54:02 2017 No.9238473 Aminuus

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 06:26:20 2017 No.9238519 >>9238418 Get your popsci brainlet virgin ass off my board!

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 06:29:01 2017 No.9238522 >>9238352 You mean Lysenkoism.

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 10:50:27 2017 No.9238857 >>9238281 Is that "fact" a social construct as well?

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 10:57:20 2017 No.9238865 >>9238281 >i'm going to use this to deny climate change and the fact that race doesn't exist! hurrr durrr

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 11:05:16 2017 No.9238876 >baby's first philosophy of science Our acceptance of observations as scientific facts has a lot more to do with our emotional investment in the idea than a rational assessment of the data. This has always been true of science.

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 11:07:51 2017 No.9238880 >>9238857 literally everything is a social construct if we're using the overly broad criteria that OP's photo is using

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 11:15:26 2017 No.9238886 File: 4 KB, 125x123, a future to believe in, dispassionate, lost hope, despair.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 11:16:27 2017 No.9238890 >>9238281 It makes me wanna burn all my math books and invite Tyrone over to do my wife so I can watch

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 11:16:56 2017 No.9238891 >>9238281 very good, more idiots out there which means less competition in the job market.

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 11:17:25 2017 No.9238893 >>9238522 lolololol I can't fucking wait to pretend to care about socializem in public, then kill and eat everyone i can in private

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 11:21:05 2017 No.9238897 >>9238890 Really? It makes me want to burn Tyrone and make my math books watch me do my wife desu

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 11:23:08 2017 No.9238903 >>9238519 >can't actually refute it maths has no basis in anything, it's a complete fabrication made by humans.

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 11:26:38 2017 No.9238909 >>9238903 But still applied everywhere

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 11:31:19 2017 No.9238915 >>9238446 >emotions are just as good of a source of knowledge as science. So Is Earth flat just because it makes some people feel emotionally better?

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 11:31:22 2017 No.9238916 >>9238909 And? We were discussing if it was a social construct or not, just because it's used everywhere doesn't mean it's not a social construct.

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 11:34:13 2017 No.9238919 >>9238915 Fuck no, and anon wasn't stating that as his belief, what the fuck are you getting at?

Anonymous Tue Oct 17 11:35:34 2017 No.9238921

>>9238281

But it's 100% valid.

Each "Hard Science" is made of theories and empirical data. There are no real Facts, only theories.

Of course this doesn't mean every theory is just as likely as the other. It also doesn't mean a theory is bullshit only because there are inconsistencies. But the world of science is a constant struggle of competing theories, and it's not unusual that scientists behind common models are doing mental gymnastics to make new contradicting data fit in their Modell. After all it's a very political wolrd we are living in, the guy with 100+ publication who is the best Buddy of some Harvard dudes will always get more cred than some random ass dude who can show something differnt. Science is full of examples here.

Stop being naive, Folks.
People chose a defend a certain Interpretation because they WANT to believe in it. Still an order of Magnitude better than religion or philosophy, but far from perfect.

>>9238355
>>9238418

You don't even Need the heavy gödel guns for math.
Math is literally 100% Fantasy, and there is nothing wrong with it. It all starts with assumtions:

Let's imagine we have objects called "numbers" and let's also assume we can have a relation < with the following properties (...) THEN we can conclude the following..

It's not like we can or should to prove anything in math. It only has to be consisten in itself and that's why it works so great.

The closer you get to humans, the messier and more contradictionions.

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 11:38:51 2017 No.9238922 >>9238921 Anon gets it

Anonymous Tue Oct 17 11:46:00 2017 No.9238934

>>9238921
>Each "Hard Science" is made of theories and empirical data. There are no real Facts, only theories.
no, there are laws in hard science.

"Laws differ from scientific theories in that they do not posit a mechanism or explanation of phenomena: they are merely distillations of the results of repeated observation."

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 11:46:38 2017 No.9238936 >>9238281 Maybe she means “science is a human endeavor and our explanations for natural phenomena are bounded by the society that created them”

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 11:52:17 2017 No.9238946 >>9238916 Are prime and Fibonacci numbers a social construct? If so, then perceived reality is a social construct too. And I don't think the definition of social construct streches that far.

Anonymous Tue Oct 17 12:09:24 2017 No.9238966

>>9238934

You just chose a differnt Name for the same Thing.

There are "laws" that proved to be wrong (if oyu Google you find "Baer's laws of embryology", "Ptolemy's law of refraction" or "Newton's sine-square law of air resistance".. for what it's worth).

And there many are other "laws" that are more rules of thumb.

>>9238946

I can define the fibonacci numbers as 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21..
And I can define 17 genders called "man", "woman", "xis", "xer"..

Definitions are exactly the same as constructs.

>perceived reality is a social construct too

That's some deep shit man, let's not go down that rabbit hole too deep.

Rather don't be so butthurt about the term "construct". It's all about finding the truth, but the truth likes to Play hide and seek and it's a great player.

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 12:15:49 2017 No.9238973 >>9238281 >only women in the picture really making me think

Anonymous Tue Oct 17 12:23:26 2017 No.9238981

>>9238966
You can call anything Fibonacci numbers and you many give 1,1,2,3,5,... any name you want, but this sequence is rooted in reality (as conscious creatures see it) and is not a social construct (as society or most people or whatever see it)

Again, unless you like to redefine already existing definitions like retards from certain colleges do, but in that case this thread is useless

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 12:31:23 2017 No.9238994 File: 12 KB, 400x300, 1500335732193.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9238281 so are women's right to vote, what's your point?

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 12:35:50 2017 No.9238998 >>9238281 They essentially are. A fact is only as good as the process that creates it. That's why scientific fact is not the sane thing as "truth" and can be overturned by further science.

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 12:36:33 2017 No.9238999 File: 116 KB, 625x482, KidsReached.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9238897 Really? It makes me want to burn my wife and make Tyrone watch me do my math books.

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 12:41:36 2017 No.9239006 >>9238999 It made me want to burn my books and make my wife watch Tyrone do me

Anonymous Tue Oct 17 12:43:10 2017 No.9239010

>>9238981

Sorry, I haven't got the time to have this conversation right now.

I'd like to say that there are Patterns and those Patterns are not random. But it's a little bit more complicated. There are many WTFs in science, so only because we can pinpoint some Things doesn't mean we have the big Picture at all.

Not even talking about a universe that explodes from nothing, where space and time are basically the same or some things are there because we noticed them.

But I was always baffled about the pythagorean comma. Why are twelve perfect fifths and seven octaves not the same tone? They should, because they are the two "purest" intervals, but they aren't.

And if you connect the highest point on each continent with each other you get..

We don't know jack shit about so many things. There is some serious fuckery with reality so we might as well call everything a construct.

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 12:43:50 2017 No.9239012 >>9238921 >There are no real Facts, only theories. fuck off Popper

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 12:47:30 2017 No.9239013 File: 76 KB, 720x720, mozart.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9239012

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 12:49:19 2017 No.9239017 >>9238281 finally, someone is brave enough to speak the truth

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 13:05:16 2017 No.9239037 File: 70 KB, 600x600, 1454771139728.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9238281 1+1=MUHFEEL

Anonymous Tue Oct 17 13:07:15 2017 No.9239040

>>9238471
It was a fact that flies had 4 legs in the 400s, that the moon was a perfect crystaline sphere in the 1400s, and that heavier than air flying machines were impossible in the 1800s, according to the best scientific knowledge available.

Those were facts and those were also social constructs. Human knowledge is messy and there's no answer key to find out what the Truth really is.

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 13:16:11 2017 No.9239056 >>9238921 >made of empirical data >there are no real facts

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 13:22:47 2017 No.9239064 >>9238281 semantic garbage. here is a fact: the person that proves that the speed of light is not constant, will not be a major in something that ends with "studies"

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 13:32:12 2017 No.9239075 >>9239040 >approximations and partial models are reason that YOU CANNOT KNOW NUTHIN KYS

Anonymous Tue Oct 17 13:56:52 2017 No.9239117

>>9239075
Its not that you can't know nothing you typingn ape its the fact that you can't ascertain with certainty that the knowledge you have isn't tainted by your world view or other subjective experience. Those are examples from history where people who unequivocally were intelligent, and knew all of the facts that were available in their experience, were completely fuckin wrong. We can go more in depth with medieval medicine, with prenewtonian mechanics and optics, all sorts of things. The fact that we (we being groups of scientists, as well as other social groups like nations or idiotic memers on 4chan) have these biases and can look through history and see how clearly people in the past have been effected by them should give us pause when we claim we have knowledge that is untainted. It doesn't mean we can't know anything and it doesn't mean we can't improve our methods, but do you really think that today there isn't something we don't know due to our own biases? Or that our own biases (both individual and broad based across society) push people to look down certain avenues of inquiry and not others?

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 14:03:40 2017 No.9239134 File: 72 KB, 854x859, 1400782857609.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9238921 >empirical data. >no real Facts

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 14:23:23 2017 No.9239157 >>9238897 >>9238999 >>9239006 >>>/reddit/

Anonymous Tue Oct 17 14:31:05 2017 No.9239168
File: 47 KB, 800x450, flat-earth.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9238919
But Earth shape is just a Social Construct.
If ancient people agreed that Earth was Flat so Earth was flat.
If modern people agree that Earth is Round so Earth is round.
But some people don't agree that Earth is Round.
So Earth is Flat or Round depending on people emotional feelings.

Earth shape is a Social Construct just as Gender or Race.

Earth & Universe aren't even real. It's just a Social Construct.

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 14:32:12 2017 No.9239170 >>9238281 It doesnt make me feel I havn't felt in a long time

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 14:34:09 2017 No.9239173 >>9238903 >maths has no basis in anything Take some farmers trying to divide their land and cattle. Add a tax hungry overlord and some basic logic and presto: geometry.

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 14:35:42 2017 No.9239175 >>9239056 >>9239134 Let's play spot the freshmen. I win

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 14:36:27 2017 No.9239178 >>9239168 Reality is indifferent to our fucking feelings.

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 14:39:14 2017 No.9239182 File: 162 KB, 944x944, Fat Feminist.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9239037 >>9238281 This is what a Feminist look like

Anonymous Tue Oct 17 14:40:54 2017 No.9239187

>>9238281
>A social construct
It depends on how you phrase it, in the way is written is like mathematics is just a theory without any logic behind it, and there is somehow better ways of solve it, or it could be incorrect based on what we know.

It is like saying gravity is just a theory or that 1+1 is not equals two, they are just doing analyzation and mental gymnastics.

If you are doing semantics, everything is a social construct, your perception is, therefore nothing matters nothing will ever matter and you should just kill yourself.

Literally there is a more useless "science" then modern sociology and modern philosophy?

>HUR DUR WE CAN´T ACCOMPLISH NOTHING THEREFORE NOTHING MATTERS AND WE ARE RIGHT, GIB MONEY PLEASE

Anonymous Tue Oct 17 14:44:20 2017 No.9239191
File: 45 KB, 1280x720, magnets.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9238281
strawman. no respectable scientist would every claim to be a dealer of "facts".

no such thing as scientific facts. only statistically relevant observations and theories that are waiting to be disproved

ghetto medieval theories of magnetism -> electromagnetism -> quantum electrodynamics -> fuckin magnets, how do they work??

Anonymous Tue Oct 17 14:47:12 2017 No.9239194

>>9239187
>everything is a social construct, your perception is
Maybe you should learn what words mean before you use them.

>therefore nothing matters nothing will ever matter and you should just kill yourself
Who said social constructs don't matter? Are you retarded?

>HUR DUR I READ A SENTENCE AND I KNOW I'M RIGHT AND THAT SENTENCE IS WRONG WITHOUT ANY CONTEXT

Anonymous Tue Oct 17 14:50:10 2017 No.9239198

>>9239187
>>9238903
>Math has no basis in nothing

This is by far the most stupid thing I ever read in my entire life, you should leave this board simply by saying stupid shit go to /pol/ and never come back, or even better leave 4chan.

Math is based on negatives, positives, and the possibility to count things that we humans can measure.

+ Plus: Addition or a a certain number of positives

- Negative: taking away or a a certain number of negatives

Saying math is just a "thing" is simply stupid, if you are pretend it is just based on something we simply agreed is basically saying human perception is equal to nothing and it is not even real, and if you believe that, well why should we believe in you?

Human perception kept us alive until here, and what your science has ever done to us?

>>9239194
Social construct is something created in a society which does not exist in the natural world.

So if you claim science is just a social construct, your mere observation of a natural world is a social construct by itself, I don´t think you know what you are talking about.

Anonymous Tue Oct 17 14:52:51 2017 No.9239201
File: 59 KB, 365x365, Denialism.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9239187 >>9239175 >>9238966 >>9238880 >>9238446 >>9238338

>Reality is a social construct that hurt muh feelings
Just a excuse for Denying Reality

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denialism

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 14:53:59 2017 No.9239204 >>9238281 read up on some descartes, everything is a human construct including logic

Anonymous Tue Oct 17 14:56:17 2017 No.9239209

>>9239198
>social
>relating to society or its organization.
A social construct is something made by a group of people.
How is my perception of the world in any way related to society or it's organization?
So, no, you're still wrong

>>9239204
human construct is not equivalent to social construct

>>9239201
Brainlet please. If you had an IQ over 75 you would realize that calling something a social construct is not equivalent to saying something is wrong

Anonymous Tue Oct 17 14:57:54 2017 No.9239212
File: 435 KB, 2048x1233, ug7f2biyfdt7s405361-4.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

statement presumes the validity of the sociological axiom of "the social construction of reality"

>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Social_Construction_of_Reality

science shows reality is objective, for instance: 1+1=2 is not subject to sociological axioms

Anonymous Tue Oct 17 14:58:29 2017 No.9239213

>>9239198
what about the peano axioms which can be seen as the basis of math (they basically describe counting and natural numbers)

these axioms are based on nothing, just commonly believed to be true, but there is no proof. math is based on "nothing", which is not to say that math is useless or false.

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 14:59:59 2017 No.9239216 >>9239209 Gravity, Electricity, Genetics & Evolution are just Social Constructs.

Anonymous Tue Oct 17 15:04:15 2017 No.9239223

>>9239198
>>9239201
Could not agree more, modern philosophers and sociologists think they somehow are being enlightened by so much rationalization and mental gymnastics.

While they don´t realize they are humans, and are probably experiencing some psychological shit, like denialism.

If you put one hundred people diagnosticated with narcissism, in their perspective all of them will be the best of there.

>>9239209
:HUR DUR LET ME CONTINUE MY MENTAL GYMNASTICS

>SOCIAL CONSTRUCT IS MADE BY A GROUP OF PEOPLE
>NOT SOCIETY OR IT IS ORGANIZATION

What is called a group of people? yes that is right society, a nation is formed of several medium societies(which are formed by micro societies) forming a single society, you are not even worth my time anymore, you basically don´t know what the fuck you are talking about.

You are defending sociology and yet don´t even know basic concepts of it.

>How is my perception of the world in any way related to society or organization?

DUN´T KNOW NIGGA MAYBE MARKETING? SLAVERY WAS SOMETHING REALLY COMMON A WHILE AGO, AND EVERYONE THOUGHT IT WAS COOL, BECAUSE AT LEAST THE DEFEATED MAY LIVE.

Leave this board please you don´t have the IQ to stay here

Anonymous Tue Oct 17 15:09:49 2017 No.9239232
File: 19 KB, 388x388, pepe-crying-smiling.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9238921
>sjw predicates something about scientific facts, implying their exists something such as a scientific fact
>you agree with sjw and then proceed to claim there is no such thing as a scientific fact

mfw chopping your contradicti-onions

Anonymous Tue Oct 17 15:13:06 2017 No.9239233

>>9238998
Sure, but that's not what those people are talking about
They are talking about knowingly speaking out against results of well known and understood measurement methods of natural phenomena
Those people aren't skeptical of groundbreaking proposals in quantum science, they are talking about the earth being fucking flat because of muh feels

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 15:15:56 2017 No.9239240 >>9239173 So math Was created, perhaps say, constructed By a social group? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Anonymous Tue Oct 17 15:16:52 2017 No.9239242

Having to write and study about topics in class - Makes you stupid.

Taking a philosophy class that asks you to question the nature of facts or science - Makes you a liberal retard.

Remember; when you're talking about, asking about, or having to study about stuff that involves society's influence on science, or how scientific fact can be altered and distorted by social pressure, well you're just being stupid.

The fact that these mongoloids would even dare put a sentence like that up on a fucking white-board is disgusting. -Science is law-. The fuck do these libtards think they're going to gain from discussing shit like this.

Anonymous Tue Oct 17 15:18:07 2017 No.9239244

>>9239223
>>9239213
This is an valid question...
This is an logically abstract form of proving math, but yet, one apple plus one apple is two apples, if you multiply a certain times you will have a certain number, divide same thing

an 1 is a positive of something, because it is something that it is, it exists, is affirmative

Then comes a philosopher and say, what it is "exist"?

If it is abstract? of course it is, but it does not make something less of it as to even be tough on schools, even more as some big revelation of sociology or philosophy.

In the way is showed on the picture indicates as something invalidating science, or to people regard exacts science as an opinion.

In psychology everything is abstract so the slide show started with a null statement, exactly like 0 equals nothing

Anonymous Tue Oct 17 15:21:56 2017 No.9239249

>>9238445
>nazis, communists, and feminists
Those are modernists though, not postmodernists (except for postmodern feminism). And theocrats are premodernists even. Postmodernism is only applicable to social problems, it doesn't study nature. Beware of burger wrong memes, they have little truth in them.

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 15:22:08 2017 No.9239250 >>9239223 Savage

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 15:22:38 2017 No.9239252 >>9238281 Depressed and suicidal

Anonymous Tue Oct 17 15:39:14 2017 No.9239282

>>9239216
No, the laws describing them are.

>>9239223
>>SOCIAL CONSTRUCT IS MADE BY A GROUP OF PEOPLE
>>NOT SOCIETY OR IT IS ORGANIZATION
So you take what I just explained to you and pretend I disagree with it? You really are retarded.

Just so you understand with your limited mental capacity:
The greentext was a definition of "social"
The next sentence was the same in simpler words for you (but apparently not simple enough)

>DUN´T KNOW NIGGA MAYBE MARKETING?
Yes, perception is used for marketing, which is a social concept. That does not mean all of perception is social. Even if there were no other people/living beings/society around me, I would still see and hear and feel things - therefore perception as a whole cannot be a social construct.

>SLAVERY WAS SOMETHING REALLY COMMON A WHILE AGO, AND EVERYONE THOUGHT IT WAS COOL, BECAUSE AT LEAST THE DEFEATED MAY LIVE.
Yes, morals is a social construct. But morals is not perception. Still wrong

Anonymous Tue Oct 17 15:48:35 2017 No.9239293

>>9239282
Are you retarded? I just explained why on sociological terms you are wrong, every group of people is a society, goddammit you are dumb as fuck.

>That does not mean all of perception is social. Even if there were no other people/living beings/society around me, I would still see and hear and feel things - therefore perception as a whole cannot be a social construct.

Prove it. a song that it is enjoyable for me, maybe it is not for you. My red maybe it is not your red.

How can we be sure of things without individual perspectives? ohh yeah science.

Bye this was my last reply

Anonymous Tue Oct 17 15:51:40 2017 No.9239298

>>9239282
>>9239293
BTW morals is objectively based on empathy, therefore it is not really only a social construct is it?

Morals can variate to people to people, so make up your mind, there where plenty of nazis who written how bad was what they were doing to the Jews

Anonymous Tue Oct 17 15:53:27 2017 No.9239300

>>9239293
>Are you retarded? I just explained why on sociological terms you are wrong, every group of people is a society, goddammit you are dumb as fuck.
Yeah, that's what I said from the beginning. Thanks for catching up

>Prove it. a song that it is enjoyable for me, maybe it is not for you. My red maybe it is not your red.
So perception is not a social construct, but something that everyone has for themselves? Guess what, that's what I said from the beginning (with some exceptions)

Anonymous Tue Oct 17 16:03:06 2017 No.9239327

>>9239298
>BTW morals is objectively based on empathy, therefore it is not really only a social construct is it?
If you existed, but you were the only living being to exist - no society or anything - morals would not exist for you. And empathy is 100% social, you cannot feel empathy without other beings to empathize with

>Morals can variate to people to people, so make up your mind, there where plenty of nazis who written how bad was what they were doing to the Jews
Just because something is a social construct that does not mean it's the same for everyone, just that it's (strongly) influenced by a society. And it's also not like there exists only one, absolute society - e.g. you are part of your family (a small group of people influencing you socially), but you are probably also part of other groups influencing you. And since it's very likely that nobody in your family is part of exactly the same social groups, nobody else in the world is part of the exact same social circles, which means nobody in the world exactly shares your social influences

Anonymous Tue Oct 17 16:04:31 2017 No.9239330

>>9239300
>Yeah, that's what I said from the beginning. Thanks for catching up
No you didn´t, or you don´t know how use the green text

>So perception is not a social construct, but something that everyone has for themselves?

No I open the question, and it lies on you to prove it.
In psychology, you are not born more found of a color, the color will fit better your personality, and your understanding of the color relies on society...

>But muh genetics

genetics kind correlates but are not actually "facts", because there are several studies that show nurture being way more important.

In neurology nurture makes more sense as well.

So meh, we reached a place where You and I can be correct, WHACHA YOU GONNA DO NOW?

So you can catch up, nurture equals society.
And even if there is a real "you" that lives outside of influence of society, it does not worth nothing in the academic world, because it is completely subjective(as I said with the narcissists)

I don´t think you understand what my problem is with what OP said.
In the picture Science is being showed as something subjective, almost like an opinion, which is not true, the statement is stupid, you get it now? You said and I quote: "Math has no basis on nothing"

And this is wrong, and that is why all societies accept as true, and only individuals like yourself say otherwise

Anonymous Tue Oct 17 16:08:48 2017 No.9239334

>>9239327
>If you existed, but you were the only living being to exist - no society or anything - morals would not exist for you. And empathy is 100% social, you cannot feel empathy without other beings to empathize with

Now you are just extrapolating, if you lived in a dark environment for the first year you would not be able to see light for the rest of your life. Does that mean sight is a social construct?

If only you existed, you won´t be alive, so your statement does not make sense.

You have an part of brain to empathy, whether you stimulate or not ir another deal

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 16:20:14 2017 No.9239357 >>9239293 >song that it is enjoyable for me, maybe it is not for you That's not perception: sound doesn't carry joy.

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 16:21:12 2017 No.9239360 >>9239334 >if you lived in a dark environment for the first year you would not be able to see light for the rest of your life. Does that mean sight is a social construct? >dark environment = society Ok, I give up, you win

Anonymous Tue Oct 17 16:26:44 2017 No.9239371

>>9238921
No, you only made the case, that science is building models of phenomena we observe and that scientific facts cannot be interpreted without that model.
You didn't make the point, that scientific facts are a social constructs. Or do you believe that the space time distortions caused by black hole mergers are social constructs too?
Also you can prove things in mathematics, that is the whole point right? That you need axioms doesn't change that.

Anonymous Tue Oct 17 16:40:37 2017 No.9239404

I don't think empathy is what should determine morals, I think pain is.
Regardless of certain isolated communities thinking that murder or rape is common and acceptable, we can still say that it is not because the victims of the actions are against it being done to them.
If we were dealing with some kind of isolated community that developed some kind of universal masochism then that'd be a different issue. The only real world application of this "morality is subjective" argument is whether the first world countries should intervene in morally destitute countries.

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 16:55:21 2017 No.9239447 In a way they are, they are made so we can interpret the universe in a way we can understand

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 16:55:52 2017 No.9239451 >>9238921 >But the world of science is a constant struggle of competing theories They all agree on facts though.

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 17:03:12 2017 No.9239469 >>9238281 I hate redheads too.

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 17:15:22 2017 No.9239488 >>9239451 So it's kind of a consensus of a group of scientists? A social agreement, or construct, upon things assumed to be facts if you will?

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 17:16:24 2017 No.9239490 >>9238921 >Gravity is a social construct lmao Our version of abstraction required for us to understand gravity is, but no its existence is not a social construct. You're convoluting abstractions and real world phenomena

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 17:16:27 2017 No.9239491 >>9238281 Dumber every day

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 17:23:03 2017 No.9239499 God is a social construct Prove me wrong

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 17:25:05 2017 No.9239504 >>9239499 Am I a social construct?

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 17:28:02 2017 No.9239507 >>9238281 Like I need context before I jump to any conclusions about the lecture.

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 17:28:05 2017 No.9239508 >>9239178 Your feelings don't matter on the internet either. I could tell you to kill yourself and I wouldn't care. Does that make me a psychopath or a social construct?

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 17:30:02 2017 No.9239511 >>9239504 You sent me a message that I can read. You are either real or I'm a schizo.

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 17:39:40 2017 No.9239536 >>9239511 I am the God of this world.

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 17 20:49:40 2017 No.9239872 >>9239508 Both. Neither. Either. Depends on who you ask. What the fuck is your point?

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 00:01:27 2017 No.9240121 Is benis a social construct :----DDD

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 00:02:31 2017 No.9240124 >>9239040 ok but we know how many legs flies tend to have now don't we? what a stupid argument

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 00:17:36 2017 No.9240140 >>9238281 >science board >asking about feelings Anon, I...

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 00:20:35 2017 No.9240143 >>9238281 This is why we can't have rightwingers in universities if we want real science.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 00:21:41 2017 No.9240144 >>9239233 Luckily you can determine all that from the picture.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 00:40:21 2017 No.9240161 >>9240143 Unfortunately now the left is also molesting science

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 00:46:57 2017 No.9240171 >>9240161 Hahaha what? Right wingers are the one denying the latest discoveries in biology and psychology.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 01:06:23 2017 No.9240195 >>9240171 that's not science though

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 01:07:51 2017 No.9240198 File: 82 KB, 300x250, jew.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Reminder that Global Warming is 100% a Social Construct

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 01:10:38 2017 No.9240206 All humanities and social "sciences" are taken out of colleges, how much higher is the national GDP per year?

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 01:13:00 2017 No.9240209 >>9238921 >Empirical data isn't a fact

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 02:32:53 2017 No.9240308 >>9239242 what does 'liberal' mean to you

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 02:37:11 2017 No.9240311 >>9240206 fewer student loans, less money in economy, gdp goes down. idiot. stupid fucking metric for cable news and blowhards

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 03:25:11 2017 No.9240339 File: 425 KB, 3264x2448, btfo brainlets.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9238355 >combinatorics cs-tier

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 03:25:26 2017 No.9240340 >>9238394 I thought it would be self defining. Please don't tell me it means anything other than the definitions of the two words put together.

Anonymous Wed Oct 18 05:15:11 2017 No.9240433

>>9240209

Of course it's not.
If ExxonMobil and Greenpeace research the same topic, you can be 100% sure of two things:
-you won't find a flaw in their data and methods
-they will show completely contradicting results

>>9239490

I don't know the reasoning of the picture in the OP, but there are many different answers that come to my mind immediately:

-"Gravity" is just a word to describe a theory. I believe every sane person would believe in this theory, but it's still a theoretical model to describe reality.

-Gravity is not easy at all. When you think about gravity, the light and black holes it should be clear that we probably do not fully understand everything about gravity yet.

-Like a different anon said before: Social construct doesn't mean it's not real.

>>9239451

So according to your argumentation "truth" is based on the majority of opinions? Thanks for validating my point.. :^)

>>9239371

>you can prove things in mathematics

You got it all backwards. You can't "prove" that math is real (some people think so, but it's really just a believe that you have or not).
Math is about logic:
"If we assume there are things with these properties, then they necessarily have other properties."

It's like saying "If I drank 10 beers last night, I would be drunk right now."

This is flawless logic, and we can prove this to be true (under some "common sense" assumptions, like that you are a human and so on).

But it doesn't say that you really drank ten beers last night. It's only about the logical consequences, not about the truth of your assumptions.

>You didn't make the point, that scientific facts are a social constructs.

Yes I did.
Because "scientific facts" change over the time. In 1000 years some of our scientific facts might be considered wrong. Society constructs facts.

>Or do you believe that the space time distortions caused by black holes..

It's not about what I believe.

>>9239232

Nice ad personam, dude.
Who cares about SJWs?

Anonymous Wed Oct 18 05:34:49 2017 No.9240451

>>9239232

Oh wait, now I see your point.

Welp, I figured they used an ellipsis (a figure of speech), so the sentence "scientific facts are social constructs" expands to "We hereby examine the assumption that the items which are called 'scientific facts' by most scientists eventually have the properties of being social constructs."

It's like those BB's first paradox "This sentence is wrong."
You must always make a difference between statements and the meta level of speech.
"This sentence [claims that the statement 'this sentence is wrong'] is wrong."

We just made it clear that this is actually a meta statement, disguised as normal sentence. But the trick is that the semantics of "this sentence" has no actual definition in the scope of the sentence, it's a recursive definition that loops into eternity. Bottom line: don't mix speech and meta speech:

"This sentence is funny."

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 09:35:18 2017 No.9240691 >>9238281 Makes me more certain that post modernism is a fucking mistake.

Anonymous Wed Oct 18 09:55:24 2017 No.9240708

>>9240171
>Psychology
Not replicate = Not a science.

>""Discoveries"" in Biology
That we have gorillions of Genders?
And let Bill Nie castrate White kids?
Letting kids engage in Gay sex to catch AIDS/HIV?
And white race just have to accept White genocide as punishment for Gassing the Jews in WW2?

Anonymous Wed Oct 18 11:37:40 2017 No.9240820
File: 1.46 MB, 3064x4670, 1504489939632.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

I will try to reduce the /pol/, but this is a social issue over a scientific one. Any real scientist (He who follows the scientific methods and believes in it) will immediately reject the notion shown in OP's picture.

A TL;DR on marxist theory is that things like Hierarchies, social norms, law and anything that goes against an individual's desires goes agains the freedom of said person, they also believe that these desires are all good and that it is the lack of total freedom what is the root of all human suffering. Meaning that, in order to achieve happiness complete liberation trough the abolition of all norms is necessary.

Which is a magnet for people who believe that they have no faults and everything is at fault for their fuck ups, these people then demand for the rules to change in order to be correct without doing any actual effort outside of bitching (Fat women demanding for people to see them as beautiful, pedophiles and transexuals wanting their mental issues to be normalized, pinkos wanting gibs). When they find a rule in the natural world that goes against their desires then they ignore the memo and instead demand for reality to change

Anonymous Wed Oct 18 11:53:20 2017 No.9240847

>>9240820
Radical Left in West is led by Disgusting people .

As Pedophiles, Fat Feminists, Gays, Single Moms & Criminal Thugs.

They make no effort to correct their fucked up behavior.

Instead their want their AIDS infected kinkiness be accepted as normal by Force.

Pedophiles Brainwashing children to become Fags, Thugs, Fat Feminists & Single Mom's like them.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 12:01:30 2017 No.9240858 File: 124 KB, 1280x1232, 1498626757104.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9239191 >ghetto medieval theories of magnetism Yo, give sauce on that

Anonymous Wed Oct 18 12:09:03 2017 No.9240872
File: 103 KB, 624x434, aTVSO3s.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9239191 >>9240858
>Medieval Ghetto Magnetism

Actually Magnetism was discovered by the Ancient Greeks.

When they discovered that rubbing Amber (Elektra in Greek) generate static electricity.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 12:11:19 2017 No.9240878 File: 106 KB, 613x393, fPq9Z5qE.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9240872 >>9240708 >>9240847 And yes the Ancient Greeks were also Gay Pedophiles. They liked to rub their Ambers in their Holes to generate electricity

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 12:13:23 2017 No.9240881 File: 106 KB, 613x393, fPq9Z5qE.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9240872 >>9240708 >>9240847 Ancient Greeks were Gay Pedophiles. They liked to rub their Ambers in young boys holes to generate electricity

Anonymous Wed Oct 18 12:14:23 2017 No.9240882

>>9238281
Doesn't stop me from arguing some "social constructs" are more accurate than others. Doesn't change much. And everything is expressed in language or symbols, so to some extent the normativity necessarily for communication does determine science, however and like I said before, some theories(constructs) can be more accurate than others.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 12:28:52 2017 No.9240911 >>9240340 >don't tell me it means anything other than what I think it should mean Don't tell me what not to tell you.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 13:05:35 2017 No.9240966 >>9239511 Social construct does not mean "not real", if it meant "not real" then it would be "not real" and not "social construct"

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 13:12:17 2017 No.9240978 File: 403 KB, 460x696, download.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9240195 >>9240708 >psychology is not a science >IQ differences between races are a scientific fact What is it now, you can't have both, /pol/tards

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 13:14:18 2017 No.9240982 >>9240847 Radical anything is led by disgusting(ly stupid) people.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 14:16:25 2017 No.9241102 >>9240978 IQ is repeatedly testable and predictive. Most publications by psychologists are not

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 14:29:05 2017 No.9241119 >>9240982 >radical neutrality

Anonymous Wed Oct 18 14:53:42 2017 No.9241155

>>9240433
>gravity is a social construct
hhahaahahahahahahahahahahabaha
>not knowing what mathematics is
hahahahahahhahahahhhahahahhahahahahahahaha
>i don't understand how super massive objects and their impact
hahahahahhahahahabhahaaahahhahahababavahgahagahahagagaga

Back to your liberal arts major fgt.

Anonymous Wed Oct 18 15:42:30 2017 No.9241243
File: 105 KB, 600x600, pepethemagnetist.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9240858 >>9240872
https://archive.org/details/letterofpetrusp00pieriala

for an overview:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petrus_Peregrinus_de_Maricourt#The_content_of_the_Epistola_de_magnete

Can't deny homeboy's contributions yo

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 16:10:12 2017 No.9241284 >>9238281 >How does this make you feel? Makes me laugh. Even exams are now racist according to UC Berkeley. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCtgaDNgDaU&list=WL&index=1 PS: There is no more idiotic institution than UCBerkeley.

Anonymous Wed Oct 18 16:37:39 2017 No.9241343

>>9241155

I could sympathize with this statement if I knew it wasn't coming from a liberal arts major.

If we had two civilizations on two different planets that had no contact during its growth towards the space age, we would see similarities in mathematics; they would both need a complete understanding of physics to construct space vehicles but their representations would be different.

Our Pythagorean Theorem would be different on another planet, take a different form but have the same uses and meaning. In that way you can say scientific facts are a social construct because the meaning A^2+B^2=C^2 is dependent on the society in which it was created and relates to our definition of a squared value and numbering system.

Like I said though, she's obviously implying you can believe what you want, as "facts" vary from one viewpoint to another.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 16:44:46 2017 No.9241348 >>9241284 i didn't realize walkin memes like the people in that video exist irl. fuck. mandatory flashback https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ShNJSSiUE-k&t=1027s

Anonymous Wed Oct 18 16:46:12 2017 No.9241352
File: 74 KB, 720x511, Pepe-frog-Hillary-Clinton-alt-right-Trump-race-Nazis-Martin-Luther-King-Jews-Germans.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9241343
>you can believe what you want, as "facts" vary from one viewpoint to another.
So Your are saying that all view points are valid & correct.
So Creationism is right just as Evolution.
Flat Earth is right just as Newton Gravitation.
The Bible is just as tight as Modern Physics.
Because they are just Relative Social Constructs.
There are no absolute truth in universe.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 16:47:16 2017 No.9241355 >>9241352 >tight *right.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 16:51:39 2017 No.9241361 >>9241343 Whoa, buddy; I'm not suggesting that horseshit. I'm assuming either a) this is gender studies class or b) a philosophy class covering relativism.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 17:05:44 2017 No.9241382 >>9241348 UCT students say that science is racist: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUPsGDFZzVM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1i80qaETtw8

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 17:08:20 2017 No.9241387 >>9241284 lolz the american left is just as insane as the american right these days

Anonymous Wed Oct 18 17:09:41 2017 No.9241389

>>9239490
This, exactly.

>>9240433
>Social construct doesn't mean it's not real.

But real doesn't necessarily mean it's a social construct either. This is everyone's contention. To argue otherwise is to argue that without sapient life, the universe couldn't exist.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 17:10:29 2017 No.9241391 >>9238921 >there are no real facts >some theories are more likely than others Likely to be... real fact right? Fucking pick one u brainlet

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 17:14:36 2017 No.9241403 >>9238356 provide a context in which this slide is reasonable.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 17:28:03 2017 No.9241423 >>9238281 Seems accurate to me. Why would be rely on "facts" when we can gather evidence ourselves? Seems like a weird way to approach science but whatever gets you there.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 17:29:34 2017 No.9241427 >>9241348 fuck i'd rather be locked in a cell with 15 angry neo-nazi romper stomper gang members than have to endure a "safe space" with these delusional twats

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 17:30:37 2017 No.9241430 >>9241382 fuck i'd rather be locked in a cell with 15 angry neo-nazi romper stomper gang members than have to endure a "safe space" with these delusional twats

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 17:37:47 2017 No.9241439 >>9238281 Just read Thomas Kuhn

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 17:45:53 2017 No.9241460 File: 16 KB, 387x259, 1320084240377.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9238281

Anonymous Wed Oct 18 17:56:04 2017 No.9241475

>>9238281
The purpose of science is to study precisely what is both real (which is what challenge one's will) and NOT made by a human being.
This excludes everything politics based of course.
The ratio between the average su/earth distance and average moon earth distance is about 432. What political decision made this? Who is the author? answer: no one. This is a science fact.

It is impossible to put 1997 in several bags, each one having the same numbers of objects and at least two objects. Why? Because 1997 is a prime number. Who caused this? the arbitrary decision of the republican party? No, this is a real fact, and has nothing to do with politics.

Take your 3x3 rubiks cube, remove an edge square and flip it, put in back. shuffle the toy and try to solve it without cheating. Can yo do that? No, never. Group theory will explain why. How is this made by politics? Is it a social fact?

Fuck that cultural marxism crap. There is a need to clean up academia from that horseshit.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 18:45:23 2017 No.9241542 >>9241382 Lel. Kek

Anonymous Wed Oct 18 18:57:30 2017 No.9241562 [DELETED]

File: 112 KB, 1920x1080, pluto.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9241475
>There are science facts that has nothing to do with political arbitrary decisions.

In 1930 Pluto was originally considered to be the 9th planet from the Sun.

After 1992, NASA excluded Pluto from the list of planets and reclassified it as a dwarf planet.

A controversial, political & arbitrary decision.

Pluto still a Planet for me.
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluto

The definition of Planet is a relative Social Construct.
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definition_of_planet

Anonymous Wed Oct 18 19:00:13 2017 No.9241569
File: 101 KB, 600x600, pluto.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9241475
>There are science facts that has nothing to do with political arbitrary decisions.

In 1930 Pluto was originally considered to be the 9th planet from the Sun.

In 2006 NASA excluded Pluto from the list of planets and reclassified it as a dwarf planet.

A controversial, political & arbitrary decision.

Pluto still a Planet for me.
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluto

The definition of Planet is a relative Social Construct.
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definition_of_planet

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 19:01:43 2017 No.9241571 >>9241562 You're talking about vocabulary, not the underlying phenomenon it relates to. People made he rules of chess, the pieces names, chose their colors, but they clearly haven't chosen which position is a forced mate for either player or a draw.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 19:02:58 2017 No.9241572 >>9241569 >>9241571

Anonymous Wed Oct 18 19:07:23 2017 No.9241580

>>9241569
HAHAHAHAHA holy shit, you retarded ignoramus think that classifying planets is in some way related to astrophysics?
>bu...but muh classification of data.
If "planet" had anything to with the data gathering of celestial motion then the definition is relevant, but no one fucking cares about some arbitrary cualitative aspects. If the classification of an hominid changed because it fits the creationist narrative better that would be an example of science being changed for political reasons.

Anonymous Wed Oct 18 19:12:00 2017 No.9241590
File: 47 KB, 320x198, 320px-Eukaryote_DNA-en.svg.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9241571 >>9241572 >>9241580
Certain concepts in Science are also quite vague.

Take the concept of Life for example.
Fundamental in Biology.

But What is Life?

Animals & Plants have life but Do Virus & Príons have life?

If something grows, move & reproduce Do that thing has life?

A DNA molecule floating around is Living? or is it just a Mineral?

If a Artificial Intelligence become self-aware is it life?

How do we can define Life?

That's more Philosophical than Scientific.

More a Relative Social Construct that a Absolute Fact set in stone.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 19:29:33 2017 No.9241619 >>9241590 This is the same fallacy as above: you'e not talking about scientifical facts,, but about the vocabulary used to talk about them. Like in >>9241569

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 21:20:38 2017 No.9241873 >>9241569 kys

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 21:32:13 2017 No.9241897 >>9241403 It's an example of how to incorrectly format a power point presentation. You should probably shy away from single page headlines in favor of compact slides with a fair amount of information

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 21:53:28 2017 No.9241931 >>9238445 bloody postmodernists!

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 22:06:49 2017 No.9241955 Language is a social construct, but that doesn't make it any less useful. Same goes for science, math, etc.

Anonymous Wed Oct 18 22:24:26 2017 No.9241993
File: 106 KB, 800x800, 15-puzzle-loyd.svg.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9241955
This 15 puzzle is unsolvable because 14 and 15 tiles has been swapped.
Please explain how the fuck this FACT is a "social construct".

(it is all about signatures of a permutation)

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 22:27:17 2017 No.9241996 >>9241993 The order numbers go in is socially constructed. Nothing about the universe says the symbol we read as "14" has to go before the one we read as "15".

Anonymous Wed Oct 18 22:33:32 2017 No.9242010

>>9241996
how many times will you try to evade the very problem pointed in the examples by saying the NAMES used are social constructs? This is a low energy strawman. The symbols 14 can be replaced by dots or anything and you know it. Or we replace the whole thing by a picture of obama, switch two squares and have the same thing (you cannot rebuild the pictures back without cheating)

>>9241475
>>9241571

Other examples are above and where skipped.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 22:41:41 2017 No.9242030 >>9240124 get a load of this SCIENCE BITCH

Anonymous Wed Oct 18 22:42:15 2017 No.9242031

>>9240451
this was fixed by recursion theory btw, you can have quines.

The claim built by writing the following text once, followed by two points, followed by the same sentence between quotation marks, followed by a period, is wrong: "The claim built by writing the following text once, followed by two points, followed by the same sentence between quotation marks, followed by a period, is wrong".

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 22:43:43 2017 No.9242033 >>9238281 I don't even disagree with this. That doesn't mean science isn't useful.

Anonymous Wed Oct 18 22:44:08 2017 No.9242037
File: 60 KB, 300x231, black woman scientist.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9241993
Numbers & all Math facts are Social Construct

Therefore Math isn't absolute. Math is relative.

Mathematical Logic can be dismissed when it's against our emotions.

Math is too cold & doesn't care about our feelings as should be.

Our universe & our mind is ruled more by emotions than by cold math formulas.

Emotions > Logic.
Love > Reason
Poetry > Science
Music > Math
Diversity > Racism
Humility > Arrogance
Social Justice > Bigotry

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 22:46:24 2017 No.9242046 >>9241897 lol if only

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 22:49:36 2017 No.9242053 I swear this shit is cherry picked. >le liberal jew brainwashing institutions I have never encountered any sort of liberalism in any of my college courses. In fact, most of the professors seem to be conservative leaning.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 23:32:03 2017 No.9242136 >>9242037 preach it sista https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9SiRNibD14 absolute gold at 0:50

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 23:34:02 2017 No.9242140 >>9238281 >He doesn't understand the problem of induction

Anonymous Wed Oct 18 23:38:46 2017 No.9242154

>>9238281
Well I guess you could try to argue everything else but physics is an arbitrary human distinction between various facets of reality.

But at the end of the day, physics is still real. If you think that's a social construct, go jump off a building while wishing away gravity.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 23:55:00 2017 No.9242205 >>9238446 t. someone who has a hopelessly misunderstood view of postmodernism

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 18 23:56:27 2017 No.9242210 >>9238281 Well I have absolutely zero context about this pic and I can't rule out that the text was edited in so I don't really have any feelings on it given the total lack of information surrounding it.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 19 00:19:53 2017 No.9242238 I bet you faggots believe free will doesn't exist

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 19 00:26:30 2017 No.9242241 >>9242238 Where do you get free will?? Shit's expensive.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 19 00:37:40 2017 No.9242250 >>9242238 >muh santa claus >muh lack of insight into reality >muh free will

Anonymous Thu Oct 19 01:44:11 2017 No.9242323

>>9239168
>But Earth shape is just a Social Construct.

I know you're joking but this is true. You could just as easily say the Earth is as it seems from your own vantage point - flat. Nothing makes its appearance from the vantage point of space any more "objective". You could just as easily say the Earth cannot support any known lifeforms based on observation from the vantage point of its core, provided it is as presumed to be.

Anonymous Thu Oct 19 01:49:00 2017 No.9242332
File: 87 KB, 539x807, 1506787991155.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9239040
>Those were facts and those were also social constructs.

Those were not facts you fucking retard.

"facts" =/= facts

One is based in theory the other is empirical proven.

Anonymous Thu Oct 19 01:49:44 2017 No.9242333

>>9242010
What he is trying to tell you is that at the end of the day, the only reason we can show it's truw is because we can define what are valid rules and what is truth. Even in math, we still need axiomatic systems and arbitrary definitions. That's a perfectly reasonable position and comes down to is math invented or discovered. Now, to say that this mean math has deep political roots is another thing which has no clear basis, and I haven't heard of many arguments for this.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 19 01:50:55 2017 No.9242335 >>9239201 All the things you think of as unimpeachable did not become so by any kind of Empistemological trial but by chance, and are not maintained as such by any vital utility of your alleged insight into their being but by figures of authority.

Anonymous Thu Oct 19 02:07:02 2017 No.9242354

>>9242333
>Now, to say that this mean math has deep political roots is another thing which has no clear basis, and I haven't heard of many arguments for this.

Mathematics is an aspect of Phenomena, which are treated as true by various qualitative and quantitative measures, all of which maintain themselves by tautology.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 19 02:12:18 2017 No.9242361 >>9242354 That's a pretty ambiguous definition to sustain such a claim.

Anonymous Thu Oct 19 06:51:53 2017 No.9242594

>>9242333
The axioms are arbirtary, their consequences aren't and BTW you're doing the same thing as him: telling that there are subjectivity in science because the words used are made and picked by people. This is not what my posts were about. They were about something that happens systematically and forcefully.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 19 07:28:35 2017 No.9242619 >>9242332 read op again

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 19 07:31:47 2017 No.9242621 >>9239488 BTFO

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 19 08:09:47 2017 No.9242663 >>9241993 you are taking social agreements (that the puzzle is considered solved if x) and then putting your "fact" as a cherry on top your fact is based on logic based on the social agreements

Anonymous Thu Oct 19 08:52:06 2017 No.9242723

>>9239488

The consensus of scientists doesn't make something a fact you absolute dipshit.The agreement of all observations of something is a result of something being factual, being factual isn't a result of the observations.

God subjectivists are fucking retarded. It's like arguing with an actual child.

Anonymous Thu Oct 19 11:37:33 2017 No.9242889

>>9242723
>The agreement of all observations of something is a result of something being factual
This is unknowable if not false, insofar as you're being reliant on the observer, whom is flawed, to assess whether observations are truly in alignment with one another.

Anonymous Thu Oct 19 13:37:09 2017 No.9243073

I have one question for the people who study this postmodern critical feminist whatever curriculum, or anything that resembles it...

What does this imply? What insights do you gain from this that are unavailable to the people who study the hard sciences?

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 19 13:58:25 2017 No.9243120 >>9242889 >current year >being a solipsist also... >whom is

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 19 13:58:43 2017 No.9243122 File: 28 KB, 789x310, 971add6fd2ecece2aa592fcadb57adf12061481b96d2e1e73b2de070e7f5a901.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Didn't think I'd live to see the day liberals are more unscientific than conservatives.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 19 14:05:37 2017 No.9243145 >>9238915 It makes them feel more intelligent, which makes them feel emotionally better.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 19 14:10:04 2017 No.9243156 >>9243122 Me neither, and I doubt I will

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 19 14:14:36 2017 No.9243165 >>9243156 They fucking admit it. Stop being delusional.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 19 14:28:34 2017 No.9243183 >>9238281 Just defund them already. Jeez.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 19 14:28:34 2017 No.9243184 >>9243122 Jesus, just as Peterson predicted.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 19 14:41:36 2017 No.9243239 >>9238281 I'm guessing they mean that what we call fact depends on the context, which I don't have a problem with (I mean observations are observations, sure, but what we postulate is decided by consensus)

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 19 17:23:12 2017 No.9243644 >>9243120 >current year >not being a solipsist

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 19 18:33:00 2017 No.9243815 File: 19 KB, 490x192, C3iS5d5VUAAMbYr.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9243183 Blocks your path

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 19 20:12:11 2017 No.9243967 nothing cause its correct

Anonymous Thu Oct 19 21:30:56 2017 No.9244081

>>9242663
The aforementioned "social agreement" is just a sentence to make people understand what Im' talking about: a specific configuration of the puzzle you cannot possibly reach from the position above using only the allowed moves for this kind of puzzle.
As the other answers that people gave me you claim the whole thing is arbitrary whereas ONLY the axioms (aka the rules of the game and the names of the tiles) actually are, as you want to desesperately hide there is a concrete fact being manifested.

Anonymous Thu Oct 19 21:50:35 2017 No.9244117
File: 63 KB, 1337x1289, disgruntled pepe.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Whew, the amount of brainlets and autistic /pol/tards on here.

Most of you people don't know jack shit about what you are talking, while >>9238352, >>9239191 and others are kind of right. A course on Philosophy of Science should be enough to realize that all scientific knowledge and methods are based on inductive series, and that an inductive reasoning cannot be applied with certainty to empiric facts (facts are influenced by an infinity of factors and there is no conceivable way to track them all). Thus, the idea that we "know", if we are to understand it as the idea that we can prove our hypotheses, is an impossibility. The scientific method is no more than a means to give validity to our hypotheses and thus, the idea that we can attain "scientific knowledge" is a social construct.

t. an actual scientist.

Anonymous Thu Oct 19 22:16:21 2017 No.9244153

>>9244117
We know what we can do.
>A course on Philosophy of Science should be enough to realize that all scientific knowledge and methods are based on inductive series

You're discarding math entirely. Philosophy is technically crippled when it comes to sciences and reasoning. The amount of bullshit you'd find about reasoning, logic and math is overwhelming.

>if we are to understand it as the idea that we can prove our hypotheses, is an impossibility
Hypotheses aren't meant to be proven in the first place. Classically, A-> B is equivalent to (not A) or B ("or" inclusive). For instance, if A is found to be false, A->B is confirmed instead of debunked.

Ed Witten Phenotype Thu Oct 19 22:17:30 2017 No.9244156
File: 21 KB, 360x235, Brain_weight Male x Female.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9243122 >>9243815
Charles Darwin in his book The Descent of Men:
> The average of mental power in man must be above that of woman (page 361)
> Man has ultimately become superior to woman. (page 362)

>Source: http://charles-darwin.classic-literature.co.uk/the-descent-of-man/ebook-page-361.asp

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misogyny#Charles_Darwin
>Darwin believed that males were more evolutionarily advanced than females.
>Darwin believed all savages, children and women had smaller brains and therefore led more by instinct and less by reason

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 19 22:24:24 2017 No.9244169 >>9244156 Elephants brain and whales brains are heavier than human brains. Just sayin

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 19 22:32:25 2017 No.9244188 >>9244117 >Philosophy of Science Philosophy of science is philosophy, not science.

Ed Witten Phenotype Thu Oct 19 22:38:51 2017 No.9244204
File: 94 KB, 609x434, Ancient Grece Pepe.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9244169
> man is smarter woman
DARWIN SAID. Not me.

SJWs ignore the fact that Darwin saw Women as Inferior.

Just as most Scientists and Philosophers through History.

Aristotle, in his work Politics said:
>as regards the sexes, the male is by nature superior and the female inferior, the male ruler and the female subject.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 19 23:04:17 2017 No.9244254 >>9244169 Hey buddy, did you also know that elephants and whales don't have human brains. epic lol!

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 19 23:12:45 2017 No.9244269 File: 899 KB, 2560x1702, 99per.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9238281 Like myself and my descendants will be God Emperors over a mass (99% of the population) of oxygen absorbers.

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 20 01:01:21 2017 No.9244534 File: 8 KB, 224x224, 1474091673023.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] THE IDEA SOCIAL CONSTRUCTS IS A SOCIAL CONSTRUCT!!!!!! HOLY SHIT FEMINISTS BTFO!!!!!!!!!!!

Anonymous Fri Oct 20 01:11:35 2017 No.9244549

>>9238281

In STEM fields outlandish claims get you shit on and ridiculed if you're in the field, regardless of whether your right or not. So I feel pretty good knowing these retards couldn't grasp the field or even voice their opinions in it, because science isn't about opinions in regard to statements.

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 20 01:14:28 2017 No.9244556 >>9242723 Gathering, interpreting, organizing, correlating, and presenting data is at the mercy of Human will.

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 20 01:16:09 2017 No.9244559 >>9244534 >stemlords accidentally meme themselves into dialectics Keep going.

Anonymous Fri Oct 20 01:45:32 2017 No.9244592
File: 24 KB, 600x600, 1486758546153.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9244117
Isn't it kinda understandable that people on this board have such a negative opinion on the term "Social construct"?
Seems like the most widespread use of the term is to imply that if something is a social construct, it should be disregarded and emotions should be given a priority.

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 20 02:21:48 2017 No.9244634 >>9240978 The confederate monuments aren't participation trophies, they are monuments that represent the events that occurred during the war. By removing them or censoring them, you are essentially attempting to rewrite or erase history.

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 20 03:19:34 2017 No.9244703 >>9244081 >1+1=3 so 3/2=1 You base your claim on a false hyphotesis. How am I supposed to disprove it without touching what's below? How could a concrete fact appear from socially constructed facts? That's why it's called a "construct", isn't it?

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 20 03:27:19 2017 No.9244711 >>9244559 wtf i love marx now

Anonymous Fri Oct 20 04:00:03 2017 No.9244759

>>9244634
>we will forget about the civil war unless there is a confederate monument erected at every square mile

Also lol at attempting to paint yourself as a warrior for truth and history yet claim the monuments are completely innocent memorialization of the civil war.

Anonymous Fri Oct 20 04:08:46 2017 No.9244763

>>9238281
Like shit. It makes me feel like shit, OP. Is that what you wanted to hear? Do you feel better now that you know that? Has it helped you move on and form your own perspective?

Doesn't even matter if it's true or the way science was always meant to be.

Anonymous Fri Oct 20 04:13:04 2017 No.9244764

>>9244703
Here's a 8.4 Coq proof of that

Section four_chan_sci.
Variable whatever_map: nat -> nat -> nat.
Notation "x ./ y":= (whatever_map x y) (at level 31).
Hypothesis CULTURAL_MARXISM: 1+1=3.
Theorem not_a_social_construct: 3 ./ 2= 1.
Proof.
assert (1+1 <> 3).
discriminate.
contradiction.
Qed.
End four_chan_sci.

here is the lambda term assocated to it:
not_a_social_construct =
fun (whatever_map : nat -> nat -> nat) (CULTURAL_MARXISM : 1 + 1 = 3) =>
(fun H : 1 + 1 <> 3 => False_ind (whatever_map 3 2 = 1) (H CULTURAL_MARXISM))
(fun H : 1 + 1 = 3 =>
(fun H0 : False => (fun H1 : False => False_ind False H1) H0)
(eq_ind (1 + 1)
(fun e : nat =>
match e with
| 0 => False
| 1 => False
| 2 => True
| S (S (S _)) => False
end) I 3 H))
: forall whatever_map : nat -> nat -> nat,
1 + 1 = 3 -> whatever_map 3 2 = 1

Oh btw: is the moment when a source code compiles a "social construct too" ?

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 20 04:25:04 2017 No.9244768 >>9244764 salty?

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 20 05:05:30 2017 No.9244803 >>9239233 You aren't even making a mountain out of a molehill here, you are just making a damn ocean from a statement.

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 20 05:16:21 2017 No.9244814 >>9242238 >I bet There is no wagering at 4chan, Grandpa.

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 20 05:34:14 2017 No.9244830 >>9241580 >HAHAHAHAHA mom let her hyaena use the computer again

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 20 05:36:10 2017 No.9244838 >>9241155 >hhahaahahahahahahahahahahabaha >hahahahahahhahahahhhahahahhahahahahahahaha >hahahahahhahahahabhahaaahahhahahababavahgahagahahagagaga the hyaena is loose

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 20 05:46:51 2017 No.9244856 >>9238876 Observation alone is not sufficient for something to be considered fact, it must be consistently reliable, repeatable and independently verifiable. Basically fuck all to do with emotions.

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 20 05:50:14 2017 No.9244861 >>9238903 Sets

Anonymous Fri Oct 20 06:08:26 2017 No.9244886

>>9244117
Deductions can be used to justify casual inference, thus broadening and strengthening scientific understanding. Not to mention that most science is justified with math, which is proved axiomatically. Scientists aren't the ones claiming all swans are white here.

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 20 07:12:02 2017 No.9244971 >>9243122 >weinstein It's pretty much a scientific fact at this point on (((who))) writes these articles.

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 20 11:49:01 2017 No.9245421 >>9244768 > u-u mad?! T. Brainlet

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 20 21:36:28 2017 No.9246429 >>9240820 >I have no idea what marx actually claimed, but you should consider me an authority on marxist theory!

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 20 23:44:40 2017 No.9246553 >>9238281 >maths has no basis in anything Math is based on Logics & Physical Notions of Space & Time.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 21 00:54:25 2017 No.9246641 >>9242594 >The axioms are arbitrary do brainlets really believe this?

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 21 08:19:45 2017 No.9247040 >>9244634 We need a statue of UBL in New York to remember the perpetrators of 9/11. It needs to have him riding a horse looking stoic and well dressed. Also with a quote about how he fought for his conviction. Otherwise we will forget.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 21 08:31:51 2017 No.9247057 >>9247040 Terrorists are unlawful combatants, and are not recognised within the laws of war. Not comparable.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 21 08:50:35 2017 No.9247070 File: 21 KB, 237x341, history.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9244634

Anonymous Sat Oct 21 08:53:31 2017 No.9247074

>>9247040
UBL didn't 09/11 goyim Israel and the Illuminati did it, and don't worry brianlet those of us charged with knowing the truth won't forget
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AIuFzo4elBI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4Rmt5n1E5c
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzVz7re8y-Q
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PaxBoZMXvo

Anonymous Sat Oct 21 08:57:55 2017 No.9247080

>>9247057
This is about on par with how absurd the "remembering" argument is.

Can't really tell if anon is legitimate retard or just trolling. It's always painful to actually respond seriously.

But you just know someone is going to read that comment and say "you know he really has a point."

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 21 09:00:51 2017 No.9247086 >>9247080 most of human history is lies created and shaped for a reason to create allegiances and divisions between groups for a reason. Those that don't know history are bound to repeat it

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 21 09:09:44 2017 No.9247101 >>9247086 Except terrorist, you can forget about them because they are not recognized within the laws of war.

Anonymous Sat Oct 21 09:19:19 2017 No.9247117
File: 282 KB, 960x639, hegelian.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9247101
not when the terrorists are your own government, a history of false flags is pretty important information wouldn't you agree brainlet? Prob not to you, you will be more than happy to send your kids to kill Arabs and die for the Illuminati I suppose

Anonymous Sat Oct 21 09:20:35 2017 No.9247121

>>9244634
Ah so surely you are also against the removal of statues of Stalin and Saddam Hussein.

What a retarded argument. Monuments are not simply records of history. They are a statement of honor and solidarity with the subject. Removing them doesn't change history, it tells people that you No longer have the same attitude towards a person or idea.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 21 10:09:36 2017 No.9247182 File: 65 KB, 640x466, 00402f_6392968.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9247117 >Hegelian dialectic is a tool to achieve consciously chosen policy goals WEW

Anonymous Sat Oct 21 10:15:13 2017 No.9247189

>>9244117
Retard. The scientific method is a combination of inductive and deductive reasoning. Inductive to extrapolate and create theories, deductive in as much as you verify what follows from the assumptions and results of your theory in order to verify if they actually happen or don't. Kys

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 21 10:22:58 2017 No.9247205 >>9239212 No, it's subject to mathematical axioms. How is that better?

Anonymous Sat Oct 21 10:29:46 2017 No.9247215

>>9239504
Depends on what you mean by "I."

Imagine yourself as you are now, and contrast that with what you would be had you never come into contact with another human being, ever. Parts of your identity and your abilities are clearly socially constructed. Would you still be the same person, would "you" still exist without society? In some nominal sense yes, but in a meaningful sense no.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 21 10:37:36 2017 No.9247226 >>9239117 How's that intro to epistemology class going bud

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 21 10:40:29 2017 No.9247233 >>9238281 It's just a bunch of philosophy fags trying to pretend that they're opinions on philosophy mater

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 21 10:44:59 2017 No.9247239 >>9247121 Commies like will defend statues of genocidal dictators as Stalin or Saddam Hussein who massacred them own people.

Anonymous Sat Oct 21 10:50:36 2017 No.9247249
File: 82 KB, 1280x720, Lenin falls.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9247121
Commies like will defend statues of genocidal lunatics as Stalin, Saddam Hussein, Mao Ze Dong or Lenin who massacred their own people in Civil Wars.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Jll9qtIbe0

Anonymous Sat Oct 21 10:54:19 2017 No.9247263

>>9238281
It's true in a sense, but they're obviously going to take it beyond the meaningful implications.
Sure, there's a good chance (almost certain) that "reality" is different to how we percieve it, and no amount of rationalising can ever really escape that (how can you think or percieve without using the human brain).
But the question then is "so what?", what are we gonna do, just stop doing science because there's a chance it doesn't represent reality outside of our understanding of it? Somehow start thinking with totally alien brains? This is obviously absurd, firstly on a utilitarian level, but also on a metaphysical level.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 21 13:08:11 2017 No.9247543 >>9239447 yes please exactly this. This is the role of science, and I think anything else is fantasy to some extent.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 21 13:21:33 2017 No.9247561 >>9247249 But will you defend it? After all according to you this is erasing history

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 21 14:12:42 2017 No.9247651 >>9239504 Actually, kinda.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 21 14:32:46 2017 No.9247688 >>9247249 >2014 >Lenin fall >Bila Tserkva They are such retards. Lenin bestow to Ukraine a Donbass area and a Kharkiv area, and that fools after that crashing Lenin down.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 21 15:13:57 2017 No.9247776 >>9247688 Yeah, Stalin's the guy they should have a problem with.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 21 18:31:14 2017 No.9248126 >>9246429 I said marxist theory (post-marx) not what Marx actually said

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/sci/ - Science & Math