Comments by "CynicalBroadcast" (@CynicalBastard) on "Weltgeist" channel.

  1. Yeah, well, I just skipped it, and then was induced to say something to you with invective so...here you go.
    3
  2.  @roygbiv176  You are naive.
    2
  3.  @botero01  Or, being-an-existent.
    1
  4.  @botero01  In the world of appearance, there is a formality, which is in existence there, in the place of appearance (appearance qua appearance), a being, or form, which is it's own content.
    1
  5.  @botero01  And now I'll tell you why you are both right and wrong [and how this is a case of application of replacing the logic of 'either/or', with 'both/and'], and why you are taking a wrong step in the right direction: "A[n] example here is the most notorious case of universal judgement: 'All men are mortal'. In its implicit libidinal-symbolic economy, such a judgement always excludes 𝑚𝑒 - that is, the absolute singularity of the speaker, qua subject of enunciation. It is easy to ascertain, from the observer's safe distance, that 'everybody' is mortal: however, this very statement involves the exception of its subject of enunciation - as Lacan puts it, in the 𝒖𝒏𝒄𝒐𝒏𝒔𝒄𝒊𝒐𝒖𝒔 [emphasis mine, here], nobody truly believes that ℎ𝑒 is mortal; this knowledge is disavowed, we are dealing with a fetishistic splitting: 'I know very well that I am mortal, but still...'."
    1
  6.  @botero01  Well, your articulation: you are speaking, and your saying one thing that comes out all wrong, because you are claiming there is no external authority, but you yourself are uttering the words to verify that claim in and of itself: you are even trying to inform people that you are right. Doesn't make you the authority you claim doesn't exist? [...]
    1
  7. A Bible? lol, that's not natural science. This is patronising.
    1
  8. Maybe something can be gleaned from their historical disparity. Both have entirely different reasons for their particular understanding of philosophy.
    1
  9.  @WeltgeistYT  Vidocracy and all.
    1