Good article by the SPGB 1973 Brendan Mee

[LBird]

Tim Kilgallon wrote:

LBird wrote:

They all, including you, Tim, turn to abuse – and I return it. I'm a working class bloke, and when 'fools, morons and clowns' think that they can be funny with me, I'll be funnier.

so presumably that makes you the specialist when it comes to being funny. Perhaps you might even consider yourself to be amongst the elite of funny people. 

No, where I come from, Tim, being funny isn't a 'specialism'. It's a common-or-garden 'generalist' ability we all have.No doubt, your categorising of 'funny' as something that only belongs to an 'elite', says more than I could about your 'people'. I can't say that I'm surprised at this, though, having read what passes for 'humour' from you. If you are amongst your 'elite'… [snigger]…… I suppose that your 'materialism' ensures that your 'humour' is a simple, honest, 'pies-in-the face', physical, slapstick, sort of 'humour'.You really should try 'consciousness', sometime, Tim. Y'know, ideas, wordplay, inventiveness… there's a whole world waiting out there for you, to go alongside your 'materialist' reality. Perhaps, after the revolution, we Marxists can bring some levity into your dour 'material existence'.

[LBird]

Vin wrote:

LBird wrote:

 Say 'hello' to 'matter', the next time it talks to you

Hello! from more matter

Yes, and we know from which end this 'matter' is talking through, don't we, when it comes to epistemology?The 'Engelsian End', of course!No doubt, the cruder elements from Tim's neck-of-the-woods had a more 'profound', earthy, answer.

[LBird]

LBird wrote:

ALB wrote:

Here's a prime example of his intellectual dishonesty

ALB wrote:

read the article on the following page on "Men, Ideas and Society":http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/1970s/1973/no-829-september-1973/men-ideas-and-societyHe will see that it ,too, specifically repudiates the view

Quote:

that the brain is a kind of camera photographing the world

Dishonest Intellectual wrote:

when you have a consciousnessless access to matter.

Hmmmm…OK, let's take ALB at face value.How can you consciously know 'matter', ALB, without a vote being taken by your fellow social producers?

Let's hope ALB gets back to us, soon. Perhaps then we can all form an opinion upon just who is the 'Dishonest Intellectual'.

[Bijou Drains]

LBird wrote:

Tim Kilgallon wrote:

LBird wrote:

They all, including you, Tim, turn to abuse – and I return it. I'm a working class bloke, and when 'fools, morons and clowns' think that they can be funny with me, I'll be funnier.

so presumably that makes you the specialist when it comes to being funny. Perhaps you might even consider yourself to be amongst the elite of funny people. 

No, where I come from, Tim, being funny isn't a 'specialism'. It's a common-or-garden 'generalist' ability we all have.No doubt, your categorising of 'funny' as something that only belongs to an 'elite', says more than I could about your 'people'. I can't say that I'm surprised at this, though, having read what passes for 'humour' from you. If you are amongst your 'elite'… [snigger]…… I suppose that your 'materialism' ensures that your 'humour' is a simple, honest, 'pies-in-the face', physical, slapstick, sort of 'humour'.You really should try 'consciousness', sometime, Tim. Y'know, ideas, wordplay, inventiveness… there's a whole world waiting out there for you, to go alongside your 'materialist' reality. Perhaps, after the revolution, we Marxists can bring some levity into your dour 'material existence'.

Many thanks L Bird, I couldn't have wished for a better illustration of your elitist world view, with you at the pinnacle.As to quite who the "my people" you refer to are I have no idea. Sounds like there are a class of people who are different and of a lesser intellectual level than the Mighty L Bird.As to your nonsensical proposal to have votes for every single scientific development, I'll put forward a scenario for you to consider with regard to your proposal. I heavily suspect that you will resort to you usual tactic of obfuscation and sophistry, however we live in hope.This is the scenario. We are living in a socialist society which works along the lines of your proposal for voting re scientific theories. In an area of the world an outbreak occurs of a particular illness at a level of deadliness previously unknown, perhaps a little like the recent Ebola outbreak. Would the development of an effective treatment for this illness be required to go through the lengthy, time consuming process of organising a worldwide vote, with all of the requisite sharing of relevant information, etc.at every stage of the process, before a treatment for this deadly disease could be given to the victims of the disease?

[robbo203]

Tim Kilgallon wrote:

This is the scenario. We are living in a socialist society which works along the lines of your proposal for voting re scientific theories. In an area of the world an outbreak occurs of a particular illness at a level of deadliness previously unknown, perhaps a little like the recent Ebola outbreak. Would the development of an effective treatment for this illness be required to go through the lengthy, time consuming process of organising a worldwide vote, with all of the requisite sharing of relevant information, etc.at every stage of the process, before a treatment for this deadly disease could be given to the victims of the disease?

 You wont get an answer from LBird on this question, Tim.  I note that it is his clear policy to shy away from  anything remotely connected with the mechanics of how a global vote on thousands of scientific  theories is going to be organised.  Little wonder too.  He has been hoisted by his own petard and is too embarrassed to admit it

[ALB]

Tim Kilgallon wrote:

As to your nonsensical proposal to have votes for every single scientific development,

Tim, it's not just on scientific developments that he wants a vote. It's also on how we describe everyday things such as a table — the perceivable and perceived regular pattern in "external conditions", "inorganic nature", "the world of phenomena", "matter", or whatever you want to call it, that was called (in French and then English) "table" generations ago without a vote having been taken, a description and social convention passed on to succeeding generations through learning and which will no doubt continue into socialism:

A Funny Man wrote:

How can you consciously know 'matter', ALB, without a vote being taken by your fellow social producers?

[Anonymous]

LBird wrote:

Vin wrote:

LBird wrote:

 Say 'hello' to 'matter', the next time it talks to you

Hello! from more matter

Yes, and we know from which end this 'matter' is talking through, don't we, when it comes to epistemology?The 'Engelsian End', of course!No doubt, the cruder elements from Tim's neck-of-the-woods had a more 'profound', earthy, answer.

What really matters is that matter really exists or you couldn't insult me. Oh, it doesn't matter as a matter of fact.  

[robbo203]

ALB wrote:

Tim Kilgallon wrote:

As to your nonsensical proposal to have votes for every single scientific development,

Tim, it's not just on scientific developments that he wants a vote. It's also on how we describe everyday things such as a table — the perceivable and perceived regular pattern in "external conditions", "inorganic nature", "the world of phenomena", "matter", or whatever you want to call it, that was called (in French and then English) "table" generations ago without a vote having been taken, a description and social convention passed on to succeeding generations through learning and which will no doubt continue into socialism

 Which reinforces the point made in an earlier post which is that if we can extract/salvage  anything useful at all out this surreal debate with LBird then it should be to focus minds on where the practical limits  of democratic decisionmaking in a socialist society should lie and to what extent democracy has to be counterbalanced by other considerations.http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/forum/general-discussion/socialism-and-democracy This is an important subject that deserves further discussion 

[Anonymous]

robbo203 wrote:

Which reinforces the point made in an earlier post which is that if we can extract/salvage  anything useful at all out this surreal debate with LBird then it should be to focus minds …………

On socialism. And how in future we can avoid pointless debates on bullshit while workers suffer from war and poverty.Capitalism supplies the science for its own destruction.  

[Dave B]

The irony is that is L bird is the religious idealist;  =  “the unrealistic belief in or pursuit of perfection” Or the "perfect" idea of micro managing ‘democratically’ all aspects of the division of labour of which science is but one.

[LBird]

So ALB won't answer the social question about his political epistemology.No surprise, there, eh?

[LBird]

robbo203 wrote:

Which reinforces the point made in an earlier post which is that if we can extract/salvage  anything useful at all out this surreal debate with LBird then it should be to focus minds on where the practical limits  of democratic decisionmaking in a socialist society should lie and to what extent democracy has to be counterbalanced by other considerations.http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/forum/general-discussion/socialism-and-democracyThis is an important subject that deserves further discussion 

[my bold]So, your concerns are the 'limits' of, and 'counterbalances' for, democracy?It certainly is an important subject that deserves further discussion – and it would help if those who are to discuss it were actually in favour of democracy (never mind workers' democracy, the concern of socialists).That doesn't appear to be the SPGB, though, does it?I think that those with robbo's concerns, need only read the texts produced by bourgeois academics over the last three centuries, to ascertain some useful advice on 'limits and counterbalances' regarding democracy.This certainly is a 'surreal debate'.

[Bijou Drains]

Tim Kilgallon wrote:

Many thanks L Bird, I couldn't have wished for a better illustration of your elitist world view, with you at the pinnacle.As to quite who the "my people" you refer to are I have no idea. Sounds like there are a class of people who are different and of a lesser intellectual level than the Mighty L Bird.As to your nonsensical proposal to have votes for every single scientific development, I'll put forward a scenario for you to consider with regard to your proposal. I heavily suspect that you will resort to you usual tactic of obfuscation and sophistry, however we live in hope.This is the scenario. We are living in a socialist society which works along the lines of your proposal for voting re scientific theories. In an area of the world an outbreak occurs of a particular illness at a level of deadliness previously unknown, perhaps a little like the recent Ebola outbreak. Would the development of an effective treatment for this illness be required to go through the lengthy, time consuming process of organising a worldwide vote, with all of the requisite sharing of relevant information, etc.at every stage of the process, before a treatment for this deadly disease could be given to the victims of the disease?

Well L Bird,, (the hypocritical "non – elitist" who talks about the "cruder elements from my neck of the woods" and talks disparagingly about "your people") the cruder element are waiting for your reply to this very basic question. I note that you have had sufficient time to make replies to other posters, Is it that you don't wish to dirty your elite hands answering questions posed by the cruder elements? Or is it, to put it in crude, earthy, working class terms, because your shit scared to give a straight answer to a straight questions? I suspect the latter.

[Bijou Drains]

Tim Kilgallon wrote:

Tim Kilgallon wrote:

Many thanks L Bird, I couldn't have wished for a better illustration of your elitist world view, with you at the pinnacle.As to quite who the "my people" you refer to are I have no idea. Sounds like there are a class of people who are different and of a lesser intellectual level than the Mighty L Bird.As to your nonsensical proposal to have votes for every single scientific development, I'll put forward a scenario for you to consider with regard to your proposal. I heavily suspect that you will resort to you usual tactic of obfuscation and sophistry, however we live in hope.This is the scenario. We are living in a socialist society which works along the lines of your proposal for voting re scientific theories. In an area of the world an outbreak occurs of a particular illness at a level of deadliness previously unknown, perhaps a little like the recent Ebola outbreak. Would the development of an effective treatment for this illness be required to go through the lengthy, time consuming process of organising a worldwide vote, with all of the requisite sharing of relevant information, etc.at every stage of the process, before a treatment for this deadly disease could be given to the victims of the disease?

Well L Bird,, (the hypocritical "non – elitist" who talks about the "cruder elements from my neck of the woods" and talks disparagingly about "your people") the cruder element are waiting for your reply to this very basic question. I note that you have had sufficient time to make replies to other posters, Is it that you don't wish to dirty your elite hands answering questions posed by the cruder elements? Or is it, to put it in crude, earthy, working class terms, because your shit scared to give a straight answer to a straight questions? I suspect the latter.

As a strange hush decends on the city of Liverpool, the squawking of the L Bird is eerily absent, the only sound is the rythmic flapping of a crude, childish, ill educated magpie, which swoops to perch an the head of the world famous Liver Bird. The Liver Bird sits quietly as the crude, childish, ill educated magpie asks the Liver Bird a straight question, not once, not twice, but three times. After waiting patiently the chubby (but strangely good-looking) magpie gives up, defacates on the head of the Liver Bird and then flies back to his own "neck of the woods"

[moderator1]

Just out of interest this article might help to settle the democratic issues being deliberated here:  http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/1980s/1986/no-987-november-1986/socialism-and-democracy

[Author]

Posts