[ prog / sol / mona ]

sol


If I were a solipsist, I'd have all these idiots removed.

1 2020-02-26 09:19

So I'm reading about (social) structuralism, which posits that each is only as it relates to things. I happen to generally be a structuralist. (Especially when I'm at work as an Analyst; although, I've been meaning to learn about categories, which seem like they might be astructural.) The article is OK, but then it says

structuralism was criticized for its rigidity and ahistoricism.

Even though there's nothing about structuralism that might suggest ahistoricality. I don't know whether there really are people who might think this, or whether the authors of the article only think that there are such people. Either way, it goes to show that there are still idiots around. It's not even a matter of not knowing something. It's not that far from any of the involved definitions.

2 2020-02-26 09:28

Also, rigidity isn't a bad thing. If they mean that it's limiting, they'd still be wrong: it's not. When a particular rigid thing is limiting, it means that that particular rigid thing is not generally applicable. The case with structuralism is that it is a rigid thing that is generally applicable. It's not limiting in any way. Certainly, if you are considering a particular set of relations, you're limiting yourself to that set of relations (and the (sub-) structure that they generate), but that doesn't mean you can't, when you've temporarily stopped considering those relations, consider other relations. The rigidity, contrariwise, is helpful, because it keeps different substructures from confusing.

3 2020-02-26 18:31 *

What is (social) structuralism?

4 2020-02-27 07:45 *

>>3 is an idiot

5 2020-02-28 19:33

>>4
But is he a (social) idiot?

6 2020-03-17 21:05

>>5
Not (social) >>4, but yes. >>3 is a (social) idiot, because a post is an act of sociage and his idiocy is postal. Ergo non socialis, et alia.

7 2020-03-20 06:38

I am not who you think I am. I am not who I think I am. I am who I think you think I am.

8 2023-10-15 01:33

Bump

9 2023-10-15 02:39 *

>>8
No!

10 2023-10-15 03:19 *

>>7 lucid little soundbyte there for the charlie manson meets mr peanut boomerang polisci pollywog gone wild.

That said, I'm for radical individualism: there is no reason a grown ass man can't dress up like tony the tiger every damn day if he wants to. Sometimes the poor and needy happen to bud and a wild Wesley Willis occurs. Cultural cancers don't mean a thing to the stouthearted Olympian. Renegade hardware is a real issue, but I just want to understand. Drinking her soul out of a long pause glance through her eyes, yeah, but I just want to understand. I wish I understood, I wish I knew.

11


VIP:

do not edit these