![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no_apologiesI'm reasonably ticked off at him. He wanted to debate some politics stuff with me, but apparently only in the way that he likes it.
We were discussing about land ownership earlier, and that's pretty much the only thing about the anarcho-capitalist point of view that he doesn't like. It's basically semantics stuff that I don't think he understands thoroughly. I know I don't understand what the fuck he's talking about. (He is pro-market socialism, or mutualism. He believes capitalism creates unjustified hierarchies, in which is not true. STATES create all sorts of unjustified shit, and what a lot of capitalism involves is through voluntary interaction. And I'm sure he believes in that theory of private property being different from personal property. It's a rabbit hole theory that is inconsistent.)
There was a point in which I asked him on where property rights come from. He answered that they come from society. I brought up self-ownership, and he knew I was going to mention it. I knew how I could explain about the 8 principles of objective logic, libertarian philosophy, and property rights - but he didn't want to know any of that. His mind shut down right then, and he argued this:
"I'm not going to be a libertarian anyway when I'm against owning land with no justification, and when I believe property rights don't come from self-ownership don't exist." Then he asked, "What's your point in doing this?"
I told him that I just wanted to show him the list that he never saw before, and that each part of these principles connect together as a chain of logic. All I wanted to do was to demonstrate how property rights come from self-ownership in logic.
Not-Zen replied to me, "I don't like libertarianism. It's probably a nice list, but I don't think it will help me in any way though."
I simply asked him, "Logic won't help?"
That triggered him emotionally. "Do I need to be written about logic? 'Don't be a stupid and ignorant cunt!' Made it simple, in one sentence. No need to go through 8 principles."
He's not very intelligent, I know. I was willing to be patient with him and go over this with him, slowly and dumb it down as far as I could go, but he kept arguing out of confirmation bias, or contempt prior to investigation, in which has been what I have been calling this pseudo-principle that holds people back from actually thinking for themselves, and empowering themselves in a consistent, positive, and peaceful manner.
I tried to explain how the 8 principles are like a set of 8 steps or links of a strong chain that connect together. Not-Zen responded, "I'm not a baby needing to be written common sense to be a logical human being. Unless you think I need it."
I told him that it's very important to be consistent with yourself, all the time. (This is self-evident truth. If you don't have consistency, then you have nothing. How, how could anyone trust a person who always says one thing, and then does another? How could anyone trust someone who is two-faced? How could anyone put any trust in someone that is a narcissistic sociopath, for example? THIS is one of the major problems about statism, in the producing of inwardly weak, gullible, dependent thinking SHEEPLE. And Not-Zen calls himself an anarchist... He clearly does not understand this.)
What he did next was deflect all of I what was trying to explain to him. I was trying to be civil, patient, and it took every ounce of willpower in me to refrain from calling out any logical fallacies and telling him that he was throwing red herring statements, and straw-man statements.
I told him, "I'm backing off." A bit later, I explained how he was blocking me off from informing him and arguing out of ignorance by explaining about Contempt Prior to Investigation. Then, I told him that I was done talking to him.
I'm not going to reply to him for about a week.
Here are some of the rude and arrogant statements of his that pissed me off.
"And I'm not blocking all information... I'm just not in the mood. There's way more important things in life then learning the 8 principles of libertarianism." (Translation: I'm not denying anything. I'm just very selective about reality! I don't like libertarianism at all, even though what you say would be a nice list of logic. But that would not apply to me, because of my sentimental reasons.)
"Oh look you might be a goddamn self-hatin' idiotic and depressed guy." (I think he was talking about himself here.) "But here, have 8 principles that won't fix what you're now and won't help you at all in the situation you're now." (Yep, he was. I DON'T get his thinking about something he doesn't know anything about that he'd rather completely reject. This is a form of ultimate ignorance.)
"It's falsified and poisonous that I want to take care of my well-being for the time being before I go through 8 shits that won't change what's really important. Which is what I feel." (Translation: I want to be done with kicking myself and wallowing in self-pity for now, before learning anything about those 8 principles of libertarian philosophy that don't apply to me, when I know nothing about them. This is how I feel.)
"It's poisonous that I'd prefer a hug, some love...something, any kindness. Right now that I need it instead of going through the 8 shits or shitism." (What the hell? He wanted to debate politics earlier. Debate, or seek out comfort and advice. You can only pick one, not both. Now, you get neither, Not-Zen, because you were being very rude to me.)
"When you have a problem you focus on that and not focus on some random shit that doesn't worth time spent for the time being?" (Chalking logical principles up as "random shit"? No, that totally isn't dismissing anything...)
Again, I'm not going to say anything to him for about a week or so. I'll only be irritable at him otherwise.
To finish this off, I'll embed my friend Filthy Heretic's video about the 8 Principles, for those who don't know about them, and would be interested to know. He explains and presents them well.
We were discussing about land ownership earlier, and that's pretty much the only thing about the anarcho-capitalist point of view that he doesn't like. It's basically semantics stuff that I don't think he understands thoroughly. I know I don't understand what the fuck he's talking about. (He is pro-market socialism, or mutualism. He believes capitalism creates unjustified hierarchies, in which is not true. STATES create all sorts of unjustified shit, and what a lot of capitalism involves is through voluntary interaction. And I'm sure he believes in that theory of private property being different from personal property. It's a rabbit hole theory that is inconsistent.)
There was a point in which I asked him on where property rights come from. He answered that they come from society. I brought up self-ownership, and he knew I was going to mention it. I knew how I could explain about the 8 principles of objective logic, libertarian philosophy, and property rights - but he didn't want to know any of that. His mind shut down right then, and he argued this:
"I'm not going to be a libertarian anyway when I'm against owning land with no justification, and when I believe property rights don't come from self-ownership don't exist." Then he asked, "What's your point in doing this?"
I told him that I just wanted to show him the list that he never saw before, and that each part of these principles connect together as a chain of logic. All I wanted to do was to demonstrate how property rights come from self-ownership in logic.
Not-Zen replied to me, "I don't like libertarianism. It's probably a nice list, but I don't think it will help me in any way though."
I simply asked him, "Logic won't help?"
That triggered him emotionally. "Do I need to be written about logic? 'Don't be a stupid and ignorant cunt!' Made it simple, in one sentence. No need to go through 8 principles."
He's not very intelligent, I know. I was willing to be patient with him and go over this with him, slowly and dumb it down as far as I could go, but he kept arguing out of confirmation bias, or contempt prior to investigation, in which has been what I have been calling this pseudo-principle that holds people back from actually thinking for themselves, and empowering themselves in a consistent, positive, and peaceful manner.
I tried to explain how the 8 principles are like a set of 8 steps or links of a strong chain that connect together. Not-Zen responded, "I'm not a baby needing to be written common sense to be a logical human being. Unless you think I need it."
I told him that it's very important to be consistent with yourself, all the time. (This is self-evident truth. If you don't have consistency, then you have nothing. How, how could anyone trust a person who always says one thing, and then does another? How could anyone trust someone who is two-faced? How could anyone put any trust in someone that is a narcissistic sociopath, for example? THIS is one of the major problems about statism, in the producing of inwardly weak, gullible, dependent thinking SHEEPLE. And Not-Zen calls himself an anarchist... He clearly does not understand this.)
What he did next was deflect all of I what was trying to explain to him. I was trying to be civil, patient, and it took every ounce of willpower in me to refrain from calling out any logical fallacies and telling him that he was throwing red herring statements, and straw-man statements.
I told him, "I'm backing off." A bit later, I explained how he was blocking me off from informing him and arguing out of ignorance by explaining about Contempt Prior to Investigation. Then, I told him that I was done talking to him.
I'm not going to reply to him for about a week.
Here are some of the rude and arrogant statements of his that pissed me off.
"And I'm not blocking all information... I'm just not in the mood. There's way more important things in life then learning the 8 principles of libertarianism." (Translation: I'm not denying anything. I'm just very selective about reality! I don't like libertarianism at all, even though what you say would be a nice list of logic. But that would not apply to me, because of my sentimental reasons.)
"Oh look you might be a goddamn self-hatin' idiotic and depressed guy." (I think he was talking about himself here.) "But here, have 8 principles that won't fix what you're now and won't help you at all in the situation you're now." (Yep, he was. I DON'T get his thinking about something he doesn't know anything about that he'd rather completely reject. This is a form of ultimate ignorance.)
"It's falsified and poisonous that I want to take care of my well-being for the time being before I go through 8 shits that won't change what's really important. Which is what I feel." (Translation: I want to be done with kicking myself and wallowing in self-pity for now, before learning anything about those 8 principles of libertarian philosophy that don't apply to me, when I know nothing about them. This is how I feel.)
"It's poisonous that I'd prefer a hug, some love...something, any kindness. Right now that I need it instead of going through the 8 shits or shitism." (What the hell? He wanted to debate politics earlier. Debate, or seek out comfort and advice. You can only pick one, not both. Now, you get neither, Not-Zen, because you were being very rude to me.)
"When you have a problem you focus on that and not focus on some random shit that doesn't worth time spent for the time being?" (Chalking logical principles up as "random shit"? No, that totally isn't dismissing anything...)
Again, I'm not going to say anything to him for about a week or so. I'll only be irritable at him otherwise.
To finish this off, I'll embed my friend Filthy Heretic's video about the 8 Principles, for those who don't know about them, and would be interested to know. He explains and presents them well.
no subject
Date: 2018-04-16 04:38 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-04-16 06:08 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-04-16 06:51 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-04-16 12:59 pm (UTC)I don't know how give him what he wants when he doesn't let me explain what I'd like to explain. =/ Right now, I'm fed up with his pessimism, and his Muh Feelings arguments. I know he's young (15), but all he said to dismiss me was way out of line. He wasn't any better than a screechy statist yesterday afternoon. He also wasn't any better than the most dishonest and two-faced commies I've ever encountered online; Wolf Doofus and Squirrely.
I'm not saying anything to Not-Zen until he apologizes. I'm very disappointed in him.
no subject
Date: 2018-04-16 08:20 pm (UTC)Good for you!