-
My apologies Anenome. Sometimes memory fails me. The compliment is still extended, that it was eloquently written. I see the idea simplistically in that one must first secede and then he is free to form new voluntary associations. Otherwise it is a kind of infidelity to existing agreements/relations.
-
"a single attack on your home ... the conferate army attacked the union army." Surely there is room in this for extenuating circumstances such as the Union Army occupying a piece of South Carolina. IF the Union recognized CSA sovereignty then they needed to remove their troops from a sovereign foreign nation. IF the Union refused to recognize
-
I think it was Clayton that has written eloquently about individual secession as the best path forward. Ghandi developed the plan of peaceful non-cooperation with the British overlords. But to withdraw, or secede, from the legitimacy of the State means a material loss and/or personal risk that most Americans won't embrace.
-
AJ, I can't disallow that you might be able to think abstractly sans language but I would be curious if you might be able to confirm it as a surety over a mere belief. I've tried many times, sitting in sensory deprivation I try to think about some abstract idea and chase the demon words out of my head, always in total failure. Then in a rest
-
As I understand it the thread is about the understanding of words and the emotion laden connotative baggage that gets attached to them with use. "Subjective" is only an example word to be understood. Can you think of the abstract idea (Mises' definition) embodied in the word subjectivism without using the language of an inner dialog ?
-
AJ, " we need words to describe "subjectivism" to another person, but not to understand it ourselves. " The thinking process has been described by some as an "inner dialog." I can't speak for all humanity, but for me that is the form that my thinking takes when I think about an abstract idea. When I think about a material
-
Over analyze? No way. The finale was Cartman's rejection of the new meme in favor of the older traditional meme. He makes the analogy in his emotive speech: "I won't do it! I won't do it! Do you hear me? I'm better than this. To hell with you Mister Kitty! You're a bad kitty. Bad! bad Kitty! It's time somebody stood-up and
-
Looked for but couldn't find the constitution. Ron Paul and the Cat have several possibilities. In the opening debate Ron Paul was the "background noise" a sort of unintelligible gibberish sound as a backdrop for the Faith Hilling caper. In the last scene he is replaced with the cat. Both may have spoken profound ideas but no one understood
-
"The whole episode is pregnant with metaphor." I'd say your interpretation is pregnant with eisegesis. South Park always tries to display the human condition through parody. And they are equal opportunity parodists where any critique of human follies, faults and foibles are to be applied by every individual to themselves. The show was
-
AJ, Generalities are not necessarily abstractions but could merely be categories of observable (non-verbal) reality such as your things that are under things . Abstractions are ideas pulled away from the observable reality and this requires language. I observe the reality of the cat under the bed but need words to think about subjectivism or about objectivism