Instead, they slip & slide abt responding to alternative interpretations of straightforward statements & arguing it is plausible to interpret them this way or taking straightforward statements back to fundamental philosophical debates that can never be resolved on their own terms
-
-
Show this thread
-
This is usually done to derail plainly spoken conversations about issues that are having a real impact on society right now. The key to this is to not engage with it or allow yourself to get taken off course into irresolvable abstractions.
Show this thread -
This will result in being called 'anti-intellectual' but, in reality, people can apply their intellects to many different topics most effectively and it is perfectly reasonable to decide not to spend yours on obscure and irresolvable philosophical/theological/postmodern concepts.
Show this thread -
If we want to know, say, how certain ideas about truth and knowledge have evolved over the last 50 years & are affecting society, we do not need to have solved the problem of accessing knowledge via human senses & brains or have read everything every philosopher ever said abt it.
Show this thread -
By contrast, this kind of "criticism" is much more bearable.https://twitter.com/TricoteuseToo/status/1050022076155916294 …
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Well, to be honest, are you really surprised? To be obscure is the point of postmodernism, an intellectual game of word salad sudoku (& like sudoku in that one must get the order right), that privileges the smart while giving them the rationalization of helping the disadvantaged.
-
This is exactly my opinion about postmodern philosophy, modern art, and academia in general. The overall ethos is something about populism, and yet how many average or especially truly oppressed people could fathom these encoded messages about themselves? Or assent to them?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I commend you for trying to reason with them, but sometimes you just have to walk away.
-
I agree
@CAndreola211@HPluckrose is a shining light in the darkness
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I'm reminded of Richard Feynman's "If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it," point. The people I've seen arguing with you were using obscure jargon to make nebulous points; If they had a compelling problem with what you did, they could state it clearly.
-
I had a similar reaction to these polysyllabic verbose responses. I call double-speak on that.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Hands up all those who had to look up "obscurantistly"? <Sigh> just me then...
-
<-- not this guy. the pros of speaking a romance language.
-
Obscurantism is like the “spaceship shield” of academia. So common as a defensive technique.
-
Thats a good way of putting it.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Dunning Kruger effect.
-
Could as well be attention / reputation seekers, or simply time wasters trying to overload political opponents with fallacious reasonings.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
If you ever catch me waffling obscurantistly, please feel free to go through my pockets and keep anything you find of value.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Yes, the peace of mind that comes from using the mute button feels always like a temporary Buddha state
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Here's an idea from an fart. Try to make some sort of statistic on who abuses you the most because of your recent activity. The left or the right. Given you are clearly on the left.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.