freetimes3x
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
There's still stuff in circulation with the http://www.worldsocialism.org address, so I'm glad it's getting a makeover as I can imagine that many people are put off by the old look of it or maybe are confused or can't be bothered to work out how to get to this site. If they actually clicked on some of the other country's sites they would be very put off indeed, I would say.
Walk, amble, march? If I get anywhere near the Unison Latin American rhythm band I may very well salsa!
ALB wrote:Like yours my christian neighbours are a bit woolly but less radical than yours. They don’t agree withQuote:a world where the profit incentive is not only void, it is taboo.They have nothing against profit as such, but only object to capitalist firms making too much profit, which they regard as unethical. For them, it’s not Profit, but the Love of Profit, that is the Root of All Evil (or something like that). They think ethical profits are ok.
And ethical armies should kill people with ethical weapons in ethical wars perhaps.
Here’s a film from some people pushing the idea that taxation and bankers enslave us.
Hold on a moment though. The reason why I’m posting it is twofold:
1/ They are making a point about needing to understand the system (which I don’t think they do) before you just end up with some toothless reforms or, worse, have your revolution hijacked by someone else.
2/ How difficult would it be for us to produce something along the lines of this video?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Myqffx8Mdg4&feature=player_embeddedgnome wrote:freetimes3x wrote:I have highlighted the word ‘another’ because it led me to believe that he was saying that I also should have supplied evidence despite the fact that no one had asked for evidence from me.You’re making exceedingly heavy weather of all this. The phrase in question was:-“A comment made earlier in this thread “that socialist consciousness is……more prevalent outside the party than inside it” is just another bald assertion without, unfortunately, a single shred of evidence advanced to support it.””Another” means “being one more or more of the same; further; additional”; it was an unspecific remark intended to cover the many occasions when there have been assertions made in posts without corroboration. It did not, neither was it intended to be, a reference, direct or otherwise, to anything you had said.
Well in that case I apologise unreservedly. I thought you were referring to me.
gnome wrote:freetimes3x wrote:So, you never say anything without providing evidence then? You never give your opinion without first researching and obtaining evidence that can be used to substantiate your point of view?
Oh yes; I once told a woman I loved her!
But I’m not talking about subjective feelings as well you know.
The development of the scientific method has made a significant contribution to our understanding of knowledge. To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based on gathering observable, empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning. The scientific method consists of the collection of data through observation and experimentation, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses.
What is the alternative ‘method’ to the above? It generally comes under comes the umbrella term of ‘belief’ which is the psychological state in which an individual holds a proposition or premise to be true without feeling the need to provide substantiation. An earlier post containing the phrase “socialist consciousness is……more prevalent outside the party than inside it”, in the absence of any supporting verification whatever appears to fall neatly into this category.Yes, and when one of the guys down the pub asks you if you’re having the same again you don’t pull out dossiers of emprical research into every drink’s chemical makeup before giving your reply ;~)
If, when we’re all just discussing an issue, you feel you need someone to substantiate what they have said you could just ask them.SussexSocialist wrote:freetimes3x wrote:Evidently, no one is allowed to say anything without supplying evidence. No one is on trial here you know.
Jim, I have read through the posts before and after this comment and can’t see what you’re referring to? Has anyone said anything like that I have missed?gnome said in a post almost entirely in answer to one of mine “A comment made earlier in this thread “that socialist consciousness is……more prevalent outside the party than inside it” is just another bald assertion without, unfortunately, a single shred of evidence advanced to support it.”
I have highlighted the word ‘another’ because it led me to believe that he was saying that I also should have supplied evidence despite the fact that no one had asked for evidence from me.
