Fred Cole Posted July 31, 2011 Share Posted July 31, 2011 Once again, with my marxist friendI claim that reality exists as an objective absolute.She tells me there's no objective proof of the existance of reality.(And no, to answer the question that I know is forthcoming, I AM NOT, HAVE NOT, WILL NOT, NOR DO I HAVE ANY INTEREST in fucking her!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted July 31, 2011 Share Posted July 31, 2011 Once again, with my marxist friendI claim that reality exists as an objective absolute.She tells me there's no objective proof of the existance of reality.(And no, to answer the question that I know is forthcoming, I AM NOT, HAVE NOT, WILL NOT, NOR DO I HAVE ANY INTEREST in fucking her!)Fred:I only asked the question once. As to how to handle this piece of red herring, you can use what I employed with the existential marxists in the 60's anarchist conferences. Out of frustration, at about 5 AM of an all night argument/discussion about this issue, I decided to tell the other party that since there was no such proof, that they should imagine that my fist, I began to draw it back, is a warn spring breeze as I drive it through your nose.Then I began the forward motion...you would be amazed at how quickly the person became completely convinced that their indeed was some quite objective proof. for them, of reality.Adam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted July 31, 2011 Share Posted July 31, 2011 (edited) Once again, with my marxist friendI claim that reality exists as an objective absolute.She tells me there's no objective proof of the existance of reality.(And no, to answer the question that I know is forthcoming, I AM NOT, HAVE NOT, WILL NOT, NOR DO I HAVE ANY INTEREST in fucking her!)She's fucking you.--Brantshe's right, btw--you don't and cannot prove axioms--it is not reality that is provable but aspects or particulars of reality Edited July 31, 2011 by Brant Gaede Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaalChatzaf Posted July 31, 2011 Share Posted July 31, 2011 Once again, with my marxist friendI claim that reality exists as an objective absolute.She tells me there's no objective proof of the existance of reality.(And no, to answer the question that I know is forthcoming, I AM NOT, HAVE NOT, WILL NOT, NOR DO I HAVE ANY INTEREST in fucking her!)Fred:I only asked the question once. As to how to handle this piece of red herring, you can use what I employed with the existential marxists in the 60's anarchist conferences. Out of frustration, at about 5 AM of an all night argument/discussion about this issue, I decided to tell the other party that since there was no such proof, that they should imagine that my fist, I began to draw it back, is a warn spring breeze as I drive it through your nose.Then I began the forward motion...you would be amazed at how quickly the person became completely convinced that their indeed was some quite objective proof. for them, of reality.AdamThis reminds me of a story I read about Samuel Johnson. He saw a rock on the street and kicked it out of the way. He said: "I refute Bishop Berkeley thus!". I don't know if the story is true or not, but the similarity is there.Ba'al Chatzaf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xray Posted July 31, 2011 Share Posted July 31, 2011 (edited) Once again, with my marxist friendI claim that reality exists as an objective absolute.She tells me there's no objective proof of the existance of reality.Well, that's pretty un-marxist. For to even insert a scintilla of doubt into the marxist premise of objective reality existing (by pointing out the impossibility of proof) - this goes so totally against marxist thought; it's as if a Biblical Creationist would advocate the theory of Evolution. Frankly, Fred, all that makes me somewhat skeptical, and I'm tempted to say: "Next time you construct a cyber discussion opponent for the forum here, make sure to study at least the basics of the ideology you equip your fictional character with." ;) Now I could of course be totally wrong and that girlfriend really exists. And since people can call themselves anything they like, maybe she just calls herself a Marxist because she thinks it sounds cool. (And no, to answer the question that I know is forthcoming, I AM NOT, HAVE NOT, WILL NOT, NOR DO I HAVE ANY INTEREST in fucking her!)Should that girlfriend exist as a cyber-creation only, I believe you 100 percent here of course. Edited July 31, 2011 by Xray Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reidy Posted July 31, 2011 Share Posted July 31, 2011 Would a marxist really say that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xray Posted July 31, 2011 Share Posted July 31, 2011 (edited) Would a marxist really say that?That's what made me so skeptical. Edited July 31, 2011 by Xray Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Cole Posted July 31, 2011 Author Share Posted July 31, 2011 A point of clarification:I classify her as a marxist. She thinks she's just really really really progressive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted July 31, 2011 Share Posted July 31, 2011 A point of clarification:I classify her as a marxist. She thinks she's just really really really progressive.What life form was she before she progressed?Also, what is her occupation, or area of study?Adam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Cole Posted August 1, 2011 Author Share Posted August 1, 2011 She does comp programming. Which is obnoxious as he'll bc she always points to Wintel as the ultimate expression of the pitfalls of unrestrained capitalism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merjet Posted August 1, 2011 Share Posted August 1, 2011 She does comp programming. Which is obnoxious as he'll bc she always points to Wintel as the ultimate expression of the pitfalls of unrestrained capitalism.What is her "better" alternative? Somebody in government dictating what hardware and software everybody uses? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted August 1, 2011 Share Posted August 1, 2011 She does comp programming. Which is obnoxious as he'll bc she always points to Wintel as the ultimate expression of the pitfalls of unrestrained capitalism.What is her "better" alternative? Somebody in government dictating what hardware and software everybody uses?Fred:Merlin's question pleads for an answer.Additionally, since I do not speak alphabet too well, I am not able to grasp your answer. By "comp programming" you mean...? By "...he'll [?]" "bc" [?] means...?ThanksAdam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xray Posted August 1, 2011 Share Posted August 1, 2011 (edited) Additionally, since I do not speak alphabet too well, I am not able to grasp your answer. By "comp programming" you mean...? By "...he'll [?]" "bc" [?] means...?ThanksAdamI assume "comp programming" = 'computer programming'. "bc" = 'because'. "he'll" = 'hell" (the apostrophe probably being a typo). Edited August 1, 2011 by Xray Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted August 1, 2011 Share Posted August 1, 2011 Additionally, since I do not speak alphabet too well, I am not able to grasp your answer. By "comp programming" you mean...? By "...he'll [?]" "bc" [?] means...?ThanksAdamI assume "comp programming" = 'computer programming'. "bc" = 'because'. "he'll" = 'hell" (the apostrophe probably being a typo).That is what I guessed also because Wintel is a: portmanteau of Windows and Intel, referring to personal computers using Intel x86 compatible processors running Microsoft Windows. It is mostly used to describe the monopolistic actions undertaken by both companies when attempting to dominate the market.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7]A portmanteau (pronounced /pɔrtˈmæntoʊ/ ( listen), plural: portmanteaus or portmanteaux) or portmanteau word is a blend of two (or more) words or morphemes into one new word.[1][2] A portmanteau word typically combines both sounds and meanings, as in smog, coined by blending smoke and fog.[1][3] More generally, it may refer to any term or phrase that combines two or more meanings.[4] In linguistics, a portmanteau is defined as a single morph which represents two or more morphemes.[5][6][7][8]Great little word! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Cole Posted August 1, 2011 Author Share Posted August 1, 2011 He'll is what the auto correct on my ipod changes hell to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted August 1, 2011 Share Posted August 1, 2011 He'll is what the auto correct on my ipod changes hell to.and it changes because to "bc" wow was it made in China? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now