Question Your Reality - Answers to the Fundementals

Post Reply New Topic

Nominalist, you try so hard to debunk everything that is really wrong in our world.... Even if you've got another explanation to one or two simple things, when one arrow flies at a target and misses you can claim it was inintentional or whatever, but when 30 or more fly towards the same target, the odds that it was a mistake or a coincidence tends to diminish. Do you get what I'm saying here?
When so many signs point to one conclusion, all those signs act in accordance with one another, they unify to support the real conclusion. Disclaiming one or two signs doesn't make a lot of ground, chances are your disclaimer is flawed.

In other words, it would be a far bigger coincidence if all these signs pointing to the conspiracy were each individual coincidences.

.... Also seeing as conspiracy by definition means to operate in secrecy, the NWO is not a conspiracy, the people behind it openly admit to it, Rockefeller has publicly stated "some people believe me and my family are part of a global kabal to take over the world. If these are the charges, I stand guilty, and proud of it".
Of coarse theyr not gonna say it on television, TV is a portable, entertaining think tank to push propaganda.

Well, yes, without direct evidence, there is often a tendency is to construct one's conclusions out of disconnected pieces of information.



I do. However, I am a Marxist. I see no reason to come up with speculative metanarratives, like the various versions of the Illuminati conspiracy (and there are many of them). I can simply point to what I don't like about global capitalism. It requires no conspiracy theorizing to criticize the corporatocracy.



That is the problem with metanarratives and deductive systems. One accepted, everything suddenly "makes sense" like it never did before. That is why you can have devoted members of different religions all entirely convinced they are right, and everyone else is wrong.



IMO, one should focus on examining specific incidents and experiences and not assume some large meta-conspiracy which connects them all.



Yes, but that is how conspiracy theories proliferate. People can always say, "Well, the fact that you cannot find direct evidence is because they are so secretive." However, that is not critical thinking.

Rockefeller admitted to it, if that's not evidence then I don't know what would register as evidence to you.

Unless he produced some evidence, accepting what he said on face value would be the fallacy of authority. What did Rockefeller say?

Edit: P.S. Which Rockefeller? Nelson?

I believe it was David, but reguardless theyr all very powerful people. Big business has been abusing the people now and it doesn't take a genius to see this. Here is something useful from Naomi Wolf, 10 steps to fascism:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,2064157,00.html

As a Marxist, I agree with you. However, it doesn't take a conspiracy theory to recognize how big businesses look out for their own interests or how the U.S. has once again adopted certain fascist characteristics (imprisoning alleged terrorists in several foreign countries without, at least at one time, any prospect of trials). The problem is when people try to allege some perennial conspiracy with the Masons, the British royal family, the Papacy, extraterrestrials or reptoid aliens (in some versions), etc.

Not to totally shift the paradigm off to socioeconomic structure vs. religion, but I sat back and listened to a lot of the theory suggested on this site. IMO something like Marxism would need this to work properly.

For one if we're going to labor under the idea that there is no god, no hereafter, and that our achievements and what we can have materially for probably 90 or less years mean everything - the status quo of free-market capitalism couldn't be better. It'll leave some people happy others miserable but if human life and its value are no greater than genetics, so be it.

For something noncompetitive that doesn't involved a carrot and stick to push people into doing better you'd need something like Kabbalah to tie it together, in essence I think it would have to be deeply religious based just because personal ambitions, when your left to the idea of atheism, are pretty much all that remain of life.

From listening to this stuff I do like the fact that they do well at explaining a lot of things that don't add up (ie. enforcement of drug policy as so paramount, why so many people get turned away by mainstream religion, how ego works and how its genetically inexorable), but one thing that does drive me crazy is the idea that we have to do something over and above taking life lessons, learning from them, and even admitting that everything comes from god - I think its that extra mile above that which just feels like way more energy than I could summon to put in, the motivation wouldn't be natural, and like anything else that I try - unless it all logically adds up I can't make myself feel it, even if it were true and just another idea two or three lifetimes ahead of my current state.