Kansas Crimson

When were hippie libs saying truth is subjective? And right was about absolute truth? Could you please give examples or something?

ousdahl wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 5:30 pm When were hippie libs saying truth is subjective? And right was about absolute truth? Could you please give examples or something?

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/ar ... nd/534231/

PhDhawk wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 4:45 pm It's interesting because 20 years ago, it was the hippie dippie libbies who were saying that truth is subjective and that we all have our own truths, and shit like that, and the right were more likely to talk about truth being absolute and based on facts, objective, etc.

Now it seems to have evolved to where many on the right just don't care if you lie as long is it's for THE cause. And trad's link supports that. It's not that they weren't blaming oil companies, or saying they shouldn't be held accountable for damages to the environment...they were saying they shouldn't be held accountable for funding disinformation campaigns.

But this was a small subset of the left, not the majority. Things are different now.

um...

https://www.livescience.com/talking-din ... extinction

PhDhawk wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 7:18 pm

ousdahl wrote: ↑Wed Oct 27, 2021 5:30 pm When were hippie libs saying truth is subjective? And right was about absolute truth? Could you please give examples or something?

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/ar ... nd/534231/

Holy shit what a long article! Just finally got through. Lots of interesting points, but man it’s pretty all over the place too. What were your takeaways?

The article seems to spend about the first half or so illustrating how the 60s hippie moment championed some new understanding of reality, and gives lots of good examples.

Several times it attempts to suggest the 60s hippies almost as some singular moment responsible for the rise of conspiracies and superstition, as if that shit hasn’t been present as part of the human experience all along. “The hippies did this in the 60s, therefore alternative facts today.” The author doesn’t do a great job of fleshing out this correlation.

Then it more or less ventures away from the cartman hippie rant, and jumps around to all these other factors - religion, John Birch Society, Ayn Rand, Rush Limbaugh, social media, the GOP embrace of absolutism and media distrust and abandonment of standards of discourse.

But it does seem to linger on religion for a bit, which I just asserted in this thread. Superstition and faith-over-reason have been features of religion all along, and for far longer than any sort of 60s hippies. (IMHO Jesus was some sort of OG hippie, but that’s for another thread)

I think the hippies and the religious folks and the modern GOP for that matter are different flavors of the same phenomenon - of the questioning of reality as we know it.

But to me, at least, the hippies were more about questioning reality in a questioning established ways to think about the world. Religious folk seem more likely to question reality in a way that more so tries to preserve a certain establishment understanding and world view. Hippies try new drugs and bang each other and expose themselves to new cultures, while religious folks get all faux-puritanical and try to frame things within the same old Bronze Age lens.

Then the article gets to the spray-tanned elephant in the room: Trump! At this point, no effort is made to correlate ol’ Cheeto Mussolini with hippies. Instead, links are suggested more so between him and the whole religious cherry picking faith-over-reason mentality.

Then the article finally…somehow…ends! But not before a call to action: teach your kids to distinguish truth from untruth, oh and also “contain Trumpism.”

It gives no real direction or blue print to do so, though. So I think there’s only one reasonable conclusion to make:

The article is Fake News.

is that the cliff’s notes version, or the “for dummies” version?

The Cliff notes is pretty much my previous post.

But I’m also biased, cuz imho hippie chicks are more fun in the sack than religious ones.

ROME (Reuters) - Leaders of the 20 richest countries will acknowledge the existential threat of climate change and will take urgent steps to limit global warning, a draft communique seen ahead of the COP26 summit shows.

As people around the world prepared to demonstrate their frustration with politicians, Pope Francis here lent his voice to a chorus demanding action, not mere words, from the meeting starting on Sunday in Glasgow, Scotland.

The Group of 20, whose leaders gather on Saturday and Sunday in Rome here beforehand, will pledge to take urgent steps to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit)...

i’ll believe substantive action is coming when i see it

Imagine if the pope gets believers as worked up about climate change as he does about abortion

ousdahl wrote: ↑Fri Oct 29, 2021 4:43 pm Imagine if the pope gets believers as worked up about climate change as he does about abortion

Oh, I'm sure that there are a lot of American Catholics pissed off at the pope for not being a climate change denier.

I think a lot of American Catholics pay more attention to what they're evangelical protestant friends tell them than what the pope says.

Ha, maybe.

Having grown up Catholic, I always got the vibe that Catholic folk look down their nose at any other Christian denomination, as if those guys weren’t OG enough believers or such. Catholics ain’t gonna take no cues from filthy mudblood Protestants.

If anything, the view is more likely the other way around: that Catholics believe Protestants take all their pro-life and other cues from Catholics.

And Catholics proudly follow their cues from the pope. It’s quite hierarchical. Heck, I had a St. Lawrence Center friend back in the day whose vanity plate was literally “papist”

But I suppose it could vary from person and person, and community to community, and such. That’s not to say there isn’t a single Catholic anywhere who walks more with the evangelicals.

I think the bigger factor yet may be that climate change has a lot more angles, and may require a lot more changes - both to individual lifestyles as well as big bidness practices - than “pro-life” as the religious folks define it (starting and ending with abortion)

And at the end of the day, even the most devout religious folks are just picking and choosing what to believe, based largely on what’s most convenient at the time. (Kinda like how Christians are more likely to get an abortion)

ok and - Qusdahl alert! If one posits the Marxist view that religion is largely some tool of the ruling class, then one would think it’s highly unlikely the pope ever gets that serious about changing the ways of big industry and the bourgeoise.

ousdahl wrote: ↑Fri Oct 29, 2021 6:30 pm Ha, maybe.

Having grown up Catholic, I always got the vibe that Catholic folk look down their nose at any other Christian denomination, as if those guys weren’t OG enough believers or such. Catholics ain’t gonna take no cues from filthy mudblood Protestants.

If anything, the view is more likely the other way around: that Catholics believe Protestants take all their pro-life and other cues from Catholics.

And Catholics proudly follow their cues from the pope. It’s quite hierarchical. Heck, I had a St. Lawrence Center friend back in the day whose vanity plate was literally “papist”

But I suppose it could vary from person and person, and community to community, and such. That’s not to say there isn’t a single Catholic anywhere who walks more with the evangelicals.

I think your view of american catholics was true prior to THIS pope. I don't think it's true anymore.

I think a lot has changed with pope Francis, the Trump presidency, and now Biden.

Most Catholics I know do not like this Pope. Preachin peace and love and all that hippy stuff. They much prefer the hellfire and brimstone stuff and fully support refusing Biden Communion. I think they miss the previous guy.

TraditionKU wrote: ↑Wed Nov 03, 2021 9:58 am

Powerful.

yup

* Click here for an article from Just Facts that exposes how certain scientists and media outlets have misled the public about sea level acceleration.(Taken from an article re climate change and CO2 levels. This can be found from an app called “Just Facts”.
Maybe I shouldn’t be so apprehensive about purchasing a home in Southwestern Florida.?
Anyway I’ll be dead long before the year 2100, so it’s probably mox nix.

dolomite wrote: ↑Sun Nov 07, 2021 2:19 pm * Click here for an article from Just Facts that exposes how certain scientists and media outlets have misled the public about sea level acceleration.(Taken from an article re climate change and CO2 levels. This can be found from an app called “Just Facts”.
Maybe I shouldn’t be so apprehensive about purchasing a home in Southwestern Florida.?
Anyway I’ll be dead long before the year 2100, so it’s probably mox nix.

Dumbfuck