Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What's your opinion on Foucault's conception of power?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by RoyofSupratik View Post

    You need to focus your luminosity in saving your culture, my friend. For no reason you are wasting your precious time in twisting my posts.

    I was indeed talking about politicization of Science over here and not exactly blaming normal scientific methods. This politicization of Science itself can be illustrated through Foucault's power conception. You guys have brought up unrelated theories of physical science and laws of gravitation over here.
    Well, Im' just taking the truth back, it's not like if I twisted anything.

    My culture i fine for now, but you probably should avoid to call me friend, or you will just appear as a hypocrite

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by aussieinbg View Post

      Remember that this interview with Richard Feynman was from the 1970s when things were really bad in the social sciences.
      That's right, the context was important. My bad.


      Originally posted by aussieinbg View Post
      Let's face it - the bulk of social sciences presently is pseudoscience. It has become far worse with the infiltration of postmodernist bullshit into humanities departments around the world.
      Unfortunately I can't deny, but yet, I can't insult the few who are doing a great job, it would be unfair and I prefer to encourage them because their work can be very useful with the current situation.


      Originally posted by aussieinbg View Post
      Don't let the New Yorker accent of Feynman in his pronunciation of the word "stupid" mislead you regarding his intellectual capacity - I'd suggest that he was a far better physicist overall than the overrated Einstein.
      Ah nah, my "stoooopid" was more for the people I mentioned previously, people like the classmates of my poor friend (who had to work for 4 all the past year because her mates were useless and lazy, lol).

      I personally don't know how good he was, I unfortunately didn't get a lot of knowledge in physics, maybe later, I want to get back a proper level in mathematics before
      As for the accent, the only accents that could make me doubt about the intellectual abilities of someone is the southern accent of some french, and the northern uhuh.

      Originally posted by aussieinbg View Post
      No it's not... until people really start showing up most of their writing for what it is - verbal masturbation.

      Also, the sewerage pipe of this pseudo-intellectual crap needs to be shut down. Feynman lead the way here - that just about all things can be expressed in clear language, not woo woo.
      I suggest you to read some of the studies in french, sometimes it means stirctly nothing (gramatically speaking), most of time it's the heaviest and emptiest text (at the same time) you will read

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by pablozz View Post
        well, what i generally see here is many fallacies and people just spitting the "postmodernist bullshit" 'argument'. what i'd like to know is exactly why you oppose it, or why you support it, and in a well argumented way
        It's very simple if you had bothered to read what people had been writing. Foucault applies the same written woo woo disjointed writing as any good postmodernist. He contradicts himself and provides no actual supporting and checkable evidence in the form of concrete examples for his assertions. Furthermore, most of his writing is devoid of content and context. In short, he is verbally masturbating.

        In addition, he applies the usual "relativeness, not absoluteness" argument beloved of postmodernists. This very basis for defining systems of through is easily refuted using a concrete physical system - such as my example earlier in the thread of walking from the top of a 30 storey building and seeing what happens next.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Sancta_Lux View Post
          That's right, the context was important. My bad.
          No worries.

          Originally posted by Sancta_Lux View Post
          Unfortunately I can't deny, but yet, I can't insult the few who are doing a great job, it would be unfair and I prefer to encourage them because their work can be very useful with the current situation.
          Such good work needs to be promoted in order to contrast it with postmodernist-inspired bullshit. I suspect that genuine academics need all the help they can get in the intellectual sewerage pit inspired by postmodernist thinking.

          Originally posted by Sancta_Lux View Post
          Ah nah, my "stoooopid" was more for the people I mentioned previously, people like the classmates of my poor friend (who had to work for 4 all the past year because her mates were useless and lazy, lol).
          Me bad here. I'd misunderstood you.

          Originally posted by Sancta_Lux View Post
          I personally don't know how good he was, I unfortunately didn't get a lot of knowledge in physics, maybe later,
          Quantum electrodynamics and initiating the idea of quantum computers are two that come to mind.

          Originally posted by Sancta_Lux View Post
          I want to get back a proper level in mathematics before
          You can get a very good framework from what Feynman writes about even without a knowledge of mathematics. Take for example "The Feynman Lectures on Physics". This is just about the best introductory textbook (in 3 volumes) on physics out there.

          Feynman is very straightforward without loosing too much of the detail. Just pure brilliance.

          This contrasts with the bullshit put out by postmodernists and their ilk. Feynman knew what he was writing about and understood it. Postmodernists on the other hand verbally masturbate in order to cover up their lack of comprehension of anything.

          Originally posted by Sancta_Lux View Post
          As for the accent, the only accents that could make me doubt about the intellectual abilities of someone is the southern accent of some french, and the northern uhuh.
          In any case, better to judge on the content of what is said than the manner of delivery - even in the case of some Northern and Southern French accents :P

          Originally posted by Sancta_Lux View Post
          I suggest you to read some of the studies in french, sometimes it means stirctly nothing (gramatically speaking), most of time it's the heaviest and emptiest text (at the same time) you will read
          I'd had the "privilege" of seeing shit about semiotics written in French. That was certainly bad enough.

          For fun, I've just Googled some of Foucault's original writing. I can understand very easily what is written in French from a grammatical/lexical viewpoint. However, it is generally disjointed bullshit that could have been written just about randomly by a machine with primitive AI capacities.

          Speaking of writing postmodernist shit, here's a site where you can write your own postmodernist texts in English... Ever wanted to write an academic paper with a postmodernist theme? Here's your chance. Just click on the following link... each time you do, you generate a perfectly written postmodernist academic text. It's that easy

          http://www.elsewhere.org/pomo/

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by aussieinbg View Post
            Just click on the following link... each time you do, you generate a perfectly written postmodernist academic text. It's that easy
            http://www.elsewhere.org/pomo/
            wow I have done it four times and read what I produced . It is amazing, with sources and everything.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Suna123 View Post

              wow I have done it four times and read what I produced . It is amazing, with sources and everything.
              I personnally produced the best study ever I think : "The Absurdity of Reality: The predialectic paradigm of consensus and the neocapitalist paradigm of narrative"

              Can beat this ?

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Sancta_Lux View Post

                I personnally produced the best study ever I think : "The Absurdity of Reality: The predialectic paradigm of consensus and the neocapitalist paradigm of narrative"

                Can beat this ?
                yes, I can beat this. Unfortunately I already forgot the title
                But I produced some new ones this morning and the best of today is The Forgotten Fruit: Social realism and predialectic nationalism

                here an extract:
                ....


                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Suna123 View Post

                  yes, I can beat this. Unfortunately I already forgot the title
                  But I produced some new ones this morning and the best of today is The Forgotten Fruit: Social realism and predialectic nationalism

                  here an extract:
                  ....


                  Congratulations!!!

                  You managed to generate a postmodernist academic paper that was total bullshit yet able to keep on topic with Foucault and "power"

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Really guys.
                    I've only read the Wikipedia article about this guy, i don't think his vaporing is more worth than to be debunked as pseudo intellectual diarrhea in few sentences.
                    Last edited by Hades91; 10-29-2017, 12:40 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Lol, Smart try guys,

                      Here is a Random Post Graduate Mathematics Research Paper generator.

                      http://thatsmathematics.com/mathgen/

                      My Random Topic: On the Structure of p-Adic, Generic Hulls



                      Here is another Random Post Graduate Computer Science Research Paper generator.

                      https://pdos.csail.mit.edu/archive/scigen/


                      My Random Topic:
                      Decoupling Red-Black Trees from Superblocks in Active Networks

                      Abstract

                      The emulation of the Ethernet is a structured challenge. In fact, few cyberinformaticians would disagree with the visualization of hash tables, which embodies the unproven principles of theory. We describe a novel system for the development of superpages, which we call BRUN.

                      Table of Contents

                      1 Introduction


                      The evaluation of lambda calculus has studied replication, and current trends suggest that the analysis of voice-over-IP will soon emerge. The notion that information theorists interfere with interactive information is always well-received. On a similar note, The notion that steganographers collude with 8 bit architectures is often well-received. To what extent can semaphores be developed to realize this intent?
                      Indeed, courseware and multicast heuristics have a long history of interfering in this manner. In addition, indeed, consistent hashing [24] and flip-flop gates have a long history of colluding in this manner. Existing cacheable and low-energy methodologies use context-free grammar [24] to study the unfortunate unification of DHCP and A* search. Our framework emulates the simulation of systems.
                      Come up with some better idea guys.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by RoyofSupratik View Post
                        Lol, Smart try guys,
                        Here is a Random Post Graduate Mathematics Research Paper generator.
                        http://thatsmathematics.com/mathgen/
                        My Random Topic: On the Structure of p-Adic, Generic Hulls

                        Here is another Random Post Graduate Computer Science Research Paper generator.
                        https://pdos.csail.mit.edu/archive/scigen/

                        My Random Topic:
                        Come up with some better idea guys.
                        The paper you gave above was meaningless crap because it was generated with a computer algorithm using so-called context free grammars. When you contextualise the elements in the paper, such as ascertaining what reference [21] means or associating "lambda calculus with emulating ethernet", it is clearly evident that the generated papers are complete and utter bullshit.

                        Real mathematical papers are very contexualised and the sentences relate to one another in meaning.

                        For someone who doesn't properly understand jargon used in mathematical literature, the examples you gave look "authentic" because they are grammatically correct. On the other hand, I was able to determine they were randomly put-together shit because I know something about mathematics and can determine that there is not such a context between the parts.

                        Putting together grammatically correct sentences which are not contextually properly related is the same tactic used by practitioners of woo woo. They throw together vocabulary/jargon that people don't know the meaning of and are able to bluff and bullshit because it "sounds smart" simply because of the big words and the correct grammatical constructions.

                        Papers written by postmodernists are just about completely context-free in that they are just random pieces of pseudo-intellectual bullshit put together in a grammatically correct manner without genuine linking or association between each part in terms of meaning. They on a whole might well have been generated by a computer algorithm using context free grammars. Just like the shit that Foucault and other postmodernists write.

                        If you are up for some rather heavy computer science/linguistic theory, here are what context-free grammars are:

                        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Context-free_grammar

                        The "simple" explanation is - "Context free grammars follow the language rules of grammar but don't consider what the meaning of what is being said is or how the meaning of the parts link with each other".

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Hades91 View Post
                          Really guys.
                          I've only read the Wikipedia article about this guy, i don't think his vaporing is more worth than to be debunked as pseudo intellectual diarrhea in few sentences.
                          The problem is, postmodernists get hard-ons with the verbal masturbation Foucault goes on with. A normal rational person can debunk Foucault in just a few sentences. Those brainwashed into postmodernist crap need substantially more in order to get deprogrammed.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by aussieinbg View Post

                            The problem is, postmodernists get hard-ons with the verbal masturbation Foucault goes on with. A normal rational person can debunk Foucault in just a few sentences. Those brainwashed into postmodernist crap need substantially more in order to get deprogrammed.
                            At least they love and create new from Latin derived terms.
                            From a dead Language which has been used over more than thousand years by the church. Something like language of their enemy.
                            However such (((thought elites))) need something special in their parlance for positioning themselves above the pleb.
                            Last edited by Hades91; 10-29-2017, 10:40 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by aussieinbg View Post

                              The problem is, postmodernists get hard-ons with the verbal masturbation Foucault goes on with. A normal rational person can debunk Foucault in just a few sentences. Those brainwashed into postmodernist crap need substantially more in order to get deprogrammed.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by Talise12 View Post


                                Then that would make Foucault a harmful parasitic sociopath who needs to be discredited at every turn.

                                In any case, Foucault was a harmful parasitic sociopath who needs to be completely discredited at every turn given the harm that his Sophistic bullshit brings to wider humanity.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X