@RiggedKrad@janusZer0 Yep. I don't think the exchange was prominent enough so that Janus would be reacting to it, but his overview on the limits of myth, political eschatology, the need for dynamism, bridging the particular to the universal, etc, still applied and was a very compelling adaptation.
High Theory is just prosthetics for niggas who can't do first-principles.
If you're not choosing dynamism, adaptability of form as contingent, yet tethered to a perennial core, you're ngmi.
@janusZer0 is the only one who understood what happened.
Part of the reason why such an approach is so disruptive has to do with the reliance high-theory thinkers have on a specific rhetorical trap, whereupon they accuse technical thinkers of naive utopianism, deliberately conflating control with determinism.
@janusZer0 You could say that formula is like MVP of marketing in information warfare, minimum viable product. It offers the most offensive flexibility while retaining the smallest attack surface.
Imago Dei should armor the Traditionalist against the fluctuations of science, but in this materialistic reading, the doctrine is just as vulnerable to those shifts as Liberalism, leading to a pathological, defensive aversion.
To them, Imago Dei is less a transcendental truth and more a confirmation of their own ideological priors—a perceived theological admission of man as a tabula rasa, subject only to strictly historical and environmental forces.
It's a symptom of a weak trascendental anchoring that cannot bestow man with value beyond the material.
These nu-tradcaths rave about the DR just "letting the Left define everything." Yet they seem unable to operate outside Nietzsche's definitions.
Part of the reason why such an approach is so disruptive has to do with the reliance high-theory thinkers have on a specific rhetorical trap, whereupon they accuse technical thinkers of naive utopianism, deliberately conflating control with determinism.
That said, using operationalized Voegelin hasn't even been necessary yet.
Insufficiently proleptic eschatology is always going to be vulnerable to the shittiest pragmatic probes.
And disingenuously portraying the subsequent defense as reformism.
An insufficiently proleptic eschatology is exceptionally vulnerable to pragmatic probing here, for it has essentially walked halfway toward the pragmatic epistemological path already by deploying the trap.
Happy birthday to thethe 77th Director of the Wangsheng Funeral Parlor. A quirky and cheerful girl. One of my waifus of this series. Happy birthday Hu Tao #GenshinImpact#hoyoverse#mihoyo 🎉🎊🎂❤️🖤❤️🖤❤️🖤❤️🖤❤️🖤❤️🖤❤️
@CATBury1212@warm_teacup@itspaikon Everyone can experience it, if you want to claim it isn't possible it falls squarely on you to legitimize whatever definition you're running.
Sociology assumes historical inertia via inconclusive data, but the burden of proof is entirely on whomever is making the claim.
@hyunhoneyb We know Blackrock and Vanguard forced companies to compromise their creative freedom for the sake of "diversity." We have verifiable and concrete institutional actions.
But these people will still insist it's the exact opposite based on an unfalsifiable sociological framework.
@morbidlylolita Zero creativity to design their own characters, of course.
Blackrock, Vanguard, etc, can push for diversity in official documents, but schizophrenic xitter sisters will still rave about "White Supremacy" psionically controlling all companies.
@Rimi1099 Black washing doesn't exist. The reason why black people make other characters black is due to the normalized racism and years of billion dollars companies being afraid of having the slightest tannest character that they begin doing it themselves to bring attention to their—