eh definitely not the post-moderns but the yes to the frankfurt school in their most uninteresting moments by their least valuable members (walter benjamin)

i have so many thoughts about this passage

entirely contrary to james' point, this is the unpragmatic conservative political consequence of religious belief: it has the power to arbitrarily justify any amount of gruesome pointless suffering and give it cosmic purpose

but precisely for that reason it carries it's most valuable asset. like idk if you're the dog and you're powerless to stop your own vivisection, then fuck it entertain any fantasy you like if it helps you cope.

if i were a neoliberal: religion is game theoretically dire because the short term utility maximizing play is horrid in the long run and because it's treated like a private matter but has externalities

also though - i hope people don't get the wrong idea that i support "religious tolerance" or any such nonsense because of this. i'm sympathetic in the sense that i see frail humans confronted by suffering, gasping and flailing for respite, and i feel sorry for them

no thanks!!! :) i've read enough policy wonks, that arc is complete

i mean kinda yeah

marx is clearly the bottom but has to be listed first out of convention srry

YOU JUST DID IT AGAIN???!!?

i’m mr. mouton in this clip

i’m feeling somewhat sympathetic for those who feel the pull of the metaphysical need. how else is one to cope with weakness in the face of monstrosity and no power to overcome the conditions this horrific world is predicated upon? for most it is too much to bear.

it’s psychologically more agreeable to indulge in a palliative compensatory fantasy and retain some semblance of order and justification rather than constantly run against frustration and failure.

footnotes: william james, ludwig feurbach, karl marx, raymond geuss, richard rorty

asshole

@kasey.cafe nooo that was such a banger oomfie why’d you delete the engels sketch

teaching evaluations are vile professors are cops and therefore any positive evaluation makes you a bootlicker sellout; but negative evaluation is futile complaining to the police dep bureaucracy in either case, you’re also just filling out a consumer survey and greasing the wheels of capital

reflection inspired by:

original post was largely partial to student’s pov, but reviews also obviously reinforce every existing prejudice on the teacher’s end. there’s a whole lot of precarity in academic work and reviews make you complicit in economic oppression.

even if participating in ousting a genuinely abusive instructor, the position of authority that enables, facilitates, and produces abuse remains intact. and using the masters tools of university administrators brings you no closer to abolishing this power relation.

it makes me feel powerful ٩(◕‿◕)۶

me at my 8th cup of tea today:

you should be in my covers hnggggg

dewey is such a dreadful writer

motherfucker

at what point do you wake up and go "oh wait i'm like literally mussolini"

i legit will never comprehend what goes through the mind of a 61 follower soundcloud artist that makes derivative work from already derivative work decide "ah yes today i will enclose the commons" literally what's wrong with you

somehow it used to be closer

while we're here this will never not be funny to me

i attended a class and signed in for her and that was like the best college story i have tbh

i was super antisocial for a year+ prior so it was pretty nerve-racking to message, but i really wanted her to remember me and to see her again so i gathered a pittance of courage

this was the first night we ever met lol

this was first messages post-stalking uwu

@kasey.cafe we're so cringe for being such lesbians

not me desperately composing an email tone discord message to keep contact with the most captivating person i’ve ever been around

i wanted to leak our first dms but penguin unadded me

and i yapped about how much i hated locke 💖

my understanding is that rorty is using the strong sense of “intrinsic/essential”, as in some a priori gödel-proof theory of numerical forms not relative to axioms going back to the first screenshot: “mathematicians can in fact produce a mechanism for generating all the true descriptions of 17…”

though i don’t know enough math to say if im still missing your point or not :)

i was thinking about this more too and i read a paper defending platonic essentialism about numbers re:rorty but that didn’t help because they were stupid i just need to take a math class or something

i don’t know shit about shit

its funny that he kinda says as much but phrases it in characteristic pluralistic fashion alongside other definitions

(non-rigourous, commonsensical) "definitions" as obviously his entire point is to escape the essential definition and to emphasize the human embeddedness of the concepts

rorty says this is his favorite passage from dewey and it makes complete sense i can appreciate it, but mostly in the sense that it makes clear where the battle lines are between the reformist and revolutionary pragmatists

also can you explain the rationale behind why arguments are comma delimited? like why not just write out the whole thing as a string

(obviously this isn't a very interesting candidate for discussion because it's deflationary and pragmatist, but there's lots of wacky stuff out there)

@kasey.cafe talking about philosophy of math would be fun

also imagine writing "we feel gypped" in an academic paper i'm dead