honuk wrote:ganjitsu wrote:honuk wrote:"everyone should be free to attach any context or meaning to any word they want, so long as this meaning and context agrees with mine."
You accuse me of saying something that means this, but this is exactly the opposite of what I said. Comically enough, this is exactly what I have accused you of implying, and instead of defending yourself you turn the accusation around on me!
nope. I know that's what you think. I know you think that you're at the top, that you're 'strong' for wanting to apply your meaning to words and actions freely, while everyone else is 'weak' for telling you you're being an idiot while doing it. hell, the only thing you have left to do to complete the cycle is flail around and pretend you've read and understood Nietzsche. but it's the other way around. you're the one acting weak, because you want to be able to do whatever you want without being judged for it. you want to extend your bubble to the entire world, because you can't possibly imagine a scenario in which you are forced to engage actual people as they are, rather than as they are in your head. and you can't imagine this scenario because, paradoxically, this scenario is your everyday life. like everyone on 4chan, you've taken your personal failures, intellectual or otherwise, as evidence of systemic marginalization. you've taken widespread dismisal of your ideas not as evidence of their intellectual and moral bankruptcy, but as evidence of oppressive collusion. all your flailing and appropriation of certain language is one grand, collective "but what about
me" outburst of the super ego. It's almost cute. But instead it's just sad. Because instead of trying to do anything worthwhile, everyone is preoccupied with dragging people down with them. Which is why I'm a retard in every sentence. Why everything that doesn't sound like you has to be born from either idiocy or pretension. Why every challenge is oppression, and every judgment unjustified. If someone doesn't agree with you, just try to piss them off. When they don't immediately respond to your immaturity and anxiety with the patience of a saint and rigor of a monk, that's yet more evidence of their corruption and incompetence. So call them a faggot. Because then you can win. You can huddle up with like minded people and collectively snark. Safety in numbers. You have to win everything. Because if you don't win, you lose. And you've had enough losing.
I have to justify myself for a living. I have to do so as a moral obligation to intellectual rigor. And so you can believe me when I say I know a farce when I see one.
So you know what? Call me a nigger. I can't change you. I can only semi comfort myself by saying that I don't even have to deal with you if I don't want to. But you have to deal with some version of me. Every day.
I have been accused of ranting, but at least I bother to separate my thoughts with line-breaks and occasional capitalization of letters at the beginnings of my sentences. Did you take a breath while typing that furious mess of self-insecurity?
I'm glad to see what I'm saying is starting to sink in. Your fervent reply is evidence of the weakening of your insane point of view.
You keep going on and on with your made-up tales of where I am "from" on the internet and all these assumptions of my personality and real-life circumstances. Do your fantasies of me make you feel justified?
"I have to justify myself for a living. I have to do so as a moral obligation to intellectual rigor. And so you can believe me when I say I know a farce when I see one."
I could just believe you. OR I COULD KEEP INSISTING THAT YOU STATE SOME KIND OF RATIONALE FOR YOUR THOUGHTS.
You have given very, very little reason for anything you have said in this thread. You have ignored and then reconstructed my argument in a heavily altered form. You have in no way refuted it. You just keep going on and on and on with your insane subjectivity. I doubt very much you "make your living by justifying yourself", for you seem extremely unwilling, and therefore unable to do so, in this case.
Here's one last chance for you, I'll state my argument for the freedom of all speech including "hate speech" again.
PLEASE TRY TO RESPOND TO THE ARGUMENT USING LOGIC AND REASON;
THEN YOU CAN SAY ALL OF THE THINGS YOU WANT TO.
Please DO NOT change the subject to "this doesn't explain why you think you can say nigger to everyone" or anything else like a person attack.
WHAT >EXACTLY< ABOUT THIS IS INCORRECT?
I'll really spell it out for you this time:
Words are flexible, because they represent the most mutable of all things, ideas. They change meaning in various contexts, and they absorb context into their meaning in the minds of those who use them and interpret them.
They can mean whatever the speaker or the listener want them to mean. The understanding is for the speaker and the listener to hammer out. This is vital to the process of communication.
There is often difficulty in this process when it is between only two people. In such difficult situations, any third party that advocates for one side or the other is likely to disrupt the process of coming to an understanding. To be constructive, a third party should instead mediate between the two points of view.
Any institution that tries to intervene in this process of communication by asserting that one point of view is correct is certainly malicious because it attempts to take the process out of the control of both the speaker and listener.
It attempts to remove the speaker's right to assert the meaning he intends, and it attempts to remove the listener's right to decide what the motives of the speaker are.
This is a grievous destruction of freedom.
It important that people express their thoughts. This is a vital mechanism for obtaining new points of view of their ideas. People who express their thoughts get feedback that helps them determine the extent of the validity of their thoughts.
People should not be afraid to express any thought, because there is no thought that does not deserve to be examined. If a person thinks something honestly and can attribute reason to the thought in some detail, it is vital to show the person respect by responding to their thoughts in a reasoned manner. This is the only way to come to an understanding.
If you don't want to come to an understanding with a person, then why would you talk to them at all? To do so disrespects yourself as much as them, assuming you value your time somewhat.
Therefore to argue against a person while asserting no reason is insanity, for it is insane to disrespect one's self.
Arguing without reason is mindless self-indulgence. It is the spread irrationality. It is the spread of death. It should be dealt with in a harsh, reasoned manner.
