4 ms·

This is a strawman. In fact if you go search for actual leftists that don't just repeat keywords on social media you will find that most agree in some sense wit

This is a strawman. In fact if you go search for actual leftists that don't just repeat keywords on social media you will find that most agree in some sense with what you just said (in the sense that the political situation is tons of superficiality). You cannot just put the spotlight on your weakest adversaries. This whole situation is because political education is at a general low level and universities are under pressure, hence even the leftists (just like everybody) are fighting hard with shortcuts/groupthink/.. inside their ranks. ps: it's definitely not unpopular, it's a mainstream media talking point, but that's another story

systemvoltage 4y ago
I like how you pointed out a strawman in my argument with another strawman. Not every generalization is a strawman. Sometimes, it is just simpler to state the truth and not beat about the bush. Today's Universities are insane and completely deranged. If you want to know exactly how we got here, Marc Andreesen talks about it frequently about last 100 years of education evolution. Universities today are an insurance product with a bunch of brainwashing built into the scheme.
- lapinot 4y ago
  > I like how you pointed out a strawman in my argument with another strawman. Not every generalization is a strawman. A strawman isn't about generalization it's about simplification of opponent points to the point that they make no sense. In which way did i simplify anything about your point with the aim of contradicting it? In fact imho i did the opposite: i took what i believe to be the actual valid core of it (superficiality etc) and said i agreed with it. Still you're not answering to my rebuttal: your initial point (1) contains no substance since anybody worth discussing with across the political spectrum agrees to some form of it (i do and OP most surely do as i pointed out, and seeing you cite andreesen we are definitely wide apart on the that spectrum, which in itself is ok) and (2) is part of a general pattern of passing opinions widely shared inside a well-known thought-school as being something "unpopular", which is a whole minefield of bogus concepts that get nice dialogues derailed into flames.

systemvoltage 4y ago

I like how you pointed out a strawman in my argument with another strawman. Not every generalization is a strawman. Sometimes, it is just simpler to state the truth and not beat about the bush. Today's Universities are insane and completely deranged. If you want to know exactly how we got here, Marc Andreesen talks about it frequently about last 100 years of education evolution. Universities today are an insurance product with a bunch of brainwashing built into the scheme.

lapinot 4y ago
> I like how you pointed out a strawman in my argument with another strawman. Not every generalization is a strawman. A strawman isn't about generalization it's about simplification of opponent points to the point that they make no sense. In which way did i simplify anything about your point with the aim of contradicting it? In fact imho i did the opposite: i took what i believe to be the actual valid core of it (superficiality etc) and said i agreed with it. Still you're not answering to my rebuttal: your initial point (1) contains no substance since anybody worth discussing with across the political spectrum agrees to some form of it (i do and OP most surely do as i pointed out, and seeing you cite andreesen we are definitely wide apart on the that spectrum, which in itself is ok) and (2) is part of a general pattern of passing opinions widely shared inside a well-known thought-school as being something "unpopular", which is a whole minefield of bogus concepts that get nice dialogues derailed into flames.