PatrickC

Yea, who couldn't remember the impact of 'On truth'.. what a book.. Thanks Stef!

Yea, almost anything from Alice is a gem frankly. Particularly her earlier stuff.

You'll have a hard time trying to make sense of the leftist mindset. It is stuck in the belief that stealing from others for the greater good of the collective as the highest virtue.

Yes, I wouldn't go quite as far as suggesting her characters were one dimensional. But I think the critcism of her story telling skills is often fair play. It was the philosophy that blew my mind reading her novels. She was by far a great philosopher and much less of a great novelist. Having said that, she was of the mind to write a novel that became the second most read book after the bible. So I applaud her for that. Of course this is just my opinion of course, so just ignore me if you disagree.

I've often heard people defend their schooling. Mostly women actually, which given the prevailing gender bias, would seem to fit of course. However, I think it's perfectly reasonable that someone assumes they had a good/ great /awesome time at school. How would I know any other way, despite my own less than pleasent experience. The point about schooling, is not whether you enjoyed it or not. It's about the way it's funded and provided for. I pay property taxes in London that goes towards paying for all my local schools. This whilst I have no children of course. Since I have no choice to pay for it, otherwise face imprisonment, the schools have no incentive to improve, other than perhaps a mild ego boost if they become the higjhest rank school in the area. Schooling is mostly not voluntary for children. Sometimes it is state enforced, other times parent enforced. I will certainly be unschooling any children I have myself in future.

I think you're right, rational self interest sounds more plausible than being born, 'good' or 'bad'. Those terms seems redundant when discussing the motivations of a baby.

I don't think anyone disputes that one is entirely responsible for oneself, despite our histories. Of course the author is either talking about himself (in the past tense), or he is talking about someone he knows. That said, if I had to listen to someone (or myself) constantly complaining about their parents (or anyone for that matter) and not doing anything about it, I'd probably grow weary of them too. However, his approach is exactly the same as there's. Rather than walk away from this complainer and move on (as he suggests), he prefers to berate and shame them, by suggesting they do nothing about it and just accept things as they are. One can certainly call the author a hypocrite at best, or (more likely) projecting his own history at worst.

Here's an interesting read for you, 'Being Logical: A Guide to Good Thinking' Otherwise Peter Beghossians latest book, 'A Manual for Creating Atheists'. Which uses critical thinking quite well. Actually, I'd say any of Peter's stuff relating to critical thinking is perhaps some of the best frankly.

Yes, I'm cautious in my criticism of MGTOW, because I've known some self aware men that certainly approach it in that manner. In many ways I approach life in a similar way I guess. It's just I see some exponents denigrating men that have found good relationships with women. I do like how the men's movement in general (inc MGTOW), has really improved my relationships with men. I now place a higher value (than I did) on those relationships now.

Just thought I'd point out that you're making a strawman again. How are Hitchins and Harris not skeptics exactly? Because they aren't coming from an anarchist perspective?I meet people at fdr who don't use philosophy either. But I don't dismiss their thoughts and ideas outright, just because I might consider them as having weaker positions elsewhere. I take their arguments on face value. Having a lack of comfort is not an argument against their ideas either.The MRA, or those that might affiliate with that term are some great thinkers for the most part, some of the best frankly. Karen Straughan, Warren Farrell, Jon the Other and many more. Whilst I don't agree with everything they say (like Hitch and Harris), I still recognise the value and the contribution they have brought the world.The mark of a good thinker is to understand that he still has a lot more to learn.

I always did associate the Left with vice, they certainly don't possess any virtue in their myopic view of the world.. Another rag (like Salon) to avoid.

I'd say Kevin knocked it on the head fairly well. Your response didn't seem plausible frankly. No insurance company would offer this. It would just mean woman making decisions based on insurance premiums. From a male perspective it could either be your life savings or the cost of buying lunch, dependent on the woman's choice. Therefore the responsibility must ultimately fall with her, seeing as it's her body and no one is going to force her either to go through with it or have an abortion. The fact is most couples know when the risk of pregnancy is high, which in those events you just get a morning after pill for her. On the rare occasion the pill doesn't work, then it's still her decision, but not the mans cost.

I use the paternity insurance of a condom. For extra insurance, then I would use two of them. For an iron clad guarantee, then I just don't engage in the more productive sides of sex. Or none at all. But I would be prepared to go halves on an the after morning pill, if in the unlikely event (for me), it ever came to that.

Listen, privilege is just a fact of life... attempting to foil an argument with it, is indeed lazy and inept. The idea that there will never be privilege is a leftists wet dream, so long as it happens to anyone else but himself.

The trouble is, it seems you make up those principles as you go along.

When it comes to leftists Darksky, I know what I'm dealing with of course..

Please, take your leftist garbage elsewhere. It's stinking up the house.

I also know how those of a leftist mindset feel that stealing another mans property (and labour) to give to another as being moral. Not to mention how little they understand of how individuals build and create their own lives, skills and professions from their actual hard work and not from others.I am used to being lectured and schooled in this manner friendlyhacker, but it doesn't wash with me frankly.

Well who are you worshiping then?.. It sounds like a tailor made buffet of your choosing... This is like, hey meet my invisible friend for whom I've given all these pleasant attributes too.

Thanks Wesley.. Which therefore still makes Gods love conditional. Edit - Well I don't get this, every time I attempt to write a new post, it attaches it to this one, as an edit.

Right, but if we don't, he will send us to the pit of fire.. Not much of a choice frankly, is it?

Ha! indeed.. The occasional dog walker would spot me answering my own questions.. hehe

Well sure, it's stealing right. I mean I don't rightly know how McD's work, but I imagine their waste to sell ratio is enormously tight. Of course, they still enjoy the same priveleged corporate status that could make them more suspectible to waste like supermarkets perhaps.

It's interesting that you bring this up, as I happen to know a few restauranteurs over the years. The thing about waste, is that it actually hurts their bottom line. So it's actually a bit of a myth they are throwing out much unsold food. The mainstay of trashed food is from customers leftovers. However, I will agree that supermarkets can often seemingly trash a lot of unsold food. Although in fairness they sell around 400 times more food than they actually waste. This has more to do with their massive market share, mostly garnered from their privelged corporate status, which means they can absorb absorb losses in a way that smaller businesses cannot.

I do have to laugh STer, this has become your stock position when ending most of the threads you've taken part in. And I mean that genuinely humourously. Not to mention having the last word also, which I will gladly hand to you.