If you don't grasp Spinoza's parallelism, of course his concept of intuition will appear to be nothing but a mysticism, a pre-Kantian metaphysics that should be relegated to the dustbin of the history of philosophy.
This website turned me into a professional hater. I became reactive and obsessed with shitting on the people I had a poor image of rather than actively producing thought.
I needed to take a step back.
@The_Sublimatory@morallawwithin Humans do not, in fact, have to carefully construct the framework of a moral universe with a hierarchy of value on the basis of how similar some being is to humans.
That's essentially what you, and others like Florence, argue for.
@The_Sublimatory@morallawwithin Because at its root @morallawwithin believes in a human-centered moral universe in which humans determine value even FOR the animals -- since, of course, they are too stupid to partake in our rational community of universal reason.
Absolute charlatans, the lot of these people
@2Philosophical_ This argument is retarded. A concept can be internally consistent and still correspond to nothing in the real field of individuation. More theological nonsense. Do us a favor and introduce yourself to your God -- ASAP
@morallawwithin You're an idiot, Florence. Almost as bad as @PAHoyeck
Neither of you understand that the "subject behind the veil" is actually a representation of the liberal / bourgeois subject. It is not an ahistorical, universal / rational agent at all.
They are assumed to be rational, risk averse, mutually disinterested choosers.
This is the bourgeois subject presented as though it were ahistorical, universal, rational.
The Veil is a representational device: it represents justice as something deducible from an ideal, symmetrical situation of ignorance.
What Florence and other clowns miss is that the "agents behind the veil" are actually thinly disguised liberal subjects.
Please read Rawls. The Veil of Ignorance is an ILLUSTRATION meant to reflect the fact that justice has to be reasoned about in abstraction from your particular conditions. It’s not a metaphysical thesis about persons being separable from their circumstances or whatever.
@tenshi_anna Why insist on the ineffable at all in relation to human measure? This beyond you refer to, what is its nature if it is not comprehensible?
@Morgan_Anastasi You have a college degree, you should apply for college admissions jobs. They usually just require ANY bachelor's degree and can be decent careers.
@0jzk4@maiamindel Academia as such? The fuck are you talking about? I labor for a living, I'm not an academic.
You have a partial, one-sided view of Marx. Eventually you'll learn there is more than the early Feurbachian Marx to which you are so devoted.
@0jzk4@maiamindel Of course they are transferred to the mediator for you -- you're clearly a dialectician, and thus proceed by way of negation.
I reject the humanism implicit in your thread here.