a negotiation, a compromise, is two people with power coming to an agreement that works for both.
if only one side has power, that’s not a negotiation. there is no discussion.
there can be no compromise
your claim would be like saying a person can have a discussion with a rock. that’s not a discussion, and it is absurd to say it is.
ad hominems don’t have any bearing on the argument, correct.
you didn’t want to wrestle with the argument, just make obtuse red herrings and non secquitars, all under the pretense of being taken serious.
you should be mocked for such behavior. ad hominems are great for that
philosophers typically use “absurd” when referring invalid logic
as in, only one with retarded mental faculties could think such a thing follows
how can something be “absurd” if there is no objective measure? 🤦♂️
i guess being immune to logical contradictions has an “ignorance is bliss” type of upside
A smaller publisher was first to respond!
Said they would be delighted to publish my #bitcoin book!!!
how many pull-ups in an hour?
it’s both, if u haven’t picked that hylomorphic theme up yet.
yes, those preferences are objectively evil.
if someone tied u up, put a gun to your head and asked for a reason not to kill you, how would u respond?
if ur consistent, u would have to simply say, **I** would prefer if you not kill me, but I understand my preference is completely subjective and isolated from your preferences, so do whatever you prefer
you have no appeal to anything objective, no moral plea
it’s absurd
i think that’s really why i even engage with you, knowing you get bitcoin at some level, means something objectively true got in
no, just that objective reality exists. not “my god” but acknowledge something supernatural is in the sauce
the idea of a fucking triangle is “supernatural” form, order, logic itself.
it’s such a low bar.
you can try and wiggle around, straw man the issue, it’s just intellectually lazy and pathetic.
defend being a bitcoiner to yourself.
why do you prefer a volentary open protocol to coercive extraction?
it’s not just some accidental preference like enjoying strawberry ice cream over chocolate.
“why” isn’t stupid and for some things it’s accessible.
if you understand why bitcoin is objectively good, the seeds are already planted even if you deny it.
i know these are heavy philosophical weights. it’s ok u can’t lift them now. objective truth doesn’t need me holding it up, it will be there ready for you whenever u come around
fiat needs its gnostics propping it up the same as materialism needs its.
eventually the illusion will break.
another benefit of hylomorphism:
you can comprehend the formal principles even if filled with different matter.
a kitten and a tiger are both feline
in the same way a family and a big government are both “states”
it’s just an objective truth
“They can just be separate”
not if you follow logic
separation leads to impasses, problems which have no answer.
Putnam and Nussbaum were the first secular philosophers to acknowledge how “untenable” the task of keeping form and matter, material and immaterial separated.
reality is hylomorphic, a fusion of both.
if you don’t want to wrestle with that objective fact, then ur just retreating into a hyper reality invented inside your mind.
https://academic.oup.com/book/32491/chapter-abstract/269649237?redirectedFrom=fulltext
dont need to argue about any definition of bad, just that you use the category.
your preference of this over that creates the immaterial category.
but since they are no objective truths to ground those preferences, we are back to Thrasymacus and might makes right.
unfortunately feeble grounds to try and fight against the state
you speculate about some fantastical reality where all that exists is matter, and invite me into your gnostic bubble.
it’s just as invalid and stupid as all other gnostic theologies.
u use language, speak to others, attempt to persuade them that your way of thinking is better, should be adopted, all while denying the thing the that makes it all happen
how order came to be is of primary importance because it’s what determines man’s relation to reality.
we find some alien spacecraft, and you want to focus on what color it is, instead of understanding how it came to be.
thx for the mental exercise 🫡
but imma enjoy my saturday
as soon as a person in the stateless society has a kid, it is no longer stateless.
they just imposed a non voluntary social relation on another and formally created a state.
here is a why question for you.
why is a big tyrannical state bad?
can we only have “opinion” on that matter? or is there an objective truth there?
“assuming some priors”
yeah, and and not all assumptions are valid
“if i assumed all of reality was made of cheese” you wouldn’t take it serious.
it’s demonstrabley wrong. it doesn’t have an answer to account for everything not cheese
it’s the same as assuming all of reality is just matter.
in the post, u use categorization, syntax, semantics, all outgrowths of order itself
the order that subatomic particles follow: no logicially valid argument for how that came to be materialistcally
materialism can only go as far as random chaos, if u are trying to explain any order beyond that, ur reliant upon the immaterial
to even say “the apple is on the table” relies upon the immaterial.
it’s an objective fact
and it doesn’t fit with materialism
How do you explain reliance upon immaterial phenomenon while simultaneously denying them?
How is it anything exists at all? as opposed to nothing exists?
materialism has no valid answers
it just presupposes its own conclusions
what’s an empirical question? a universal property of human existence?
it’s like saying all human bodies having extension in space is an empirical question.
we could go count every human on earth, and count every human on earth with extension and empirically see if the numbers match.
or use rationality, abstract the universal property and know with 100% certainty that the numbers match.