How would I? I don't know anything about this movie. It's about sailors okay. Why should I care?
The Feminine Perspective against the Manosphere
- Thread starter ?!..!?
- Start date
-
- Tags
- a bunch of trolls trolling each other aesthetic jihad chicks dig guys with money cia lesbian david lesbian do you tongue punch the dirt star? dolezal1977 eating pussy without asking everyone on this board is a troll extraterrestrial bisexual feminist travis bickle justified ancients of noncing lesbian separatism luka's crop top malelesbian: english rp boy toy malethespian mansplaining feminism mr tea confirmed pegging freak mrs tea eaten out 24/7 prevent prevent! sarlacc pit taking the filth the art of trolling the feminonce massive the perils of self-publishing the viper of cunnilingus undisciplined lockerroom pussy eating unimaginable anguish version's throbbing penis
I wanted to stop 20 pages ago but Teabag had to keep carrying on. It's his fault.
mixed_biscuits
_________________________
Are you a man or a mum?
version
Well-known member
Rumbled.
did you honestly just say you post on rumble. that's a massive self report. maybe you guys are right wingers after all?
I'm a man who is also a mum.
I think its wrong.
mixed_biscuits
_________________________
You're a creationist?
I reject scientism and creationism. Irreducible Culture is understood independent of our knowledge of nature. We don't need to use natural sciences to study culture.
mixed_biscuits
_________________________
What is Irreducible Culture and how can anything be outside of nature?
mixed_biscuits
_________________________
You have this strange habit of packaging up the terms you use with their own assumptions eg. not 'culture' but 'irreducible culture' so that when someone asks you why it's irreducible, you just say 'because it is, as it's called irreducible culture'
Murphy
cat malogen
sounds like a familiar tack
Culture is irreducible to the natural sciences. I can't learn about culture by studying physics alone. If culture reduced to natural science we would be able to show how natural scientific propositions compose all cultural propositions. But we can't.
Culture doesn't exist outside of the material world, it's just that we don't need to use the natural sciences to study it.
mixed_biscuits
_________________________
You're doing it again: a circular argument...sheeshh
Um no I'm just defining a term you asked me to define? I didn't even make an argument.
If you want to know why culture can't reduce to science, it's simple: I don't need to know science to read a novel. Nor will any amount of scientific knowledge replace the cultural knowledge I gain from reading a novel. Those are simple empirical facts.
But please do assume my argument is circular if it will get you to stop talking to me faster!
mixed_biscuits
_________________________
Evolutionary psychology doesn't rely on physics, for a start...the science you're looking for is called 'biology'
And you can 'learn about culture' by studying biology even if you can't learn everything about culture by doing so
If you don't know anything about biology and other aspects to human beings, culture makes a lot less sense
Sure! Biology can teach us particular things about culture. The point was it can't teach us EVERYTHING about culture.
mixed_biscuits
_________________________
You think in these weaselly ways and I do wonder whether you're aware and using them cynically or just constantly confusing yourself with logical errors