I'm not trying to explain them. Why don't you explain despotic collectivism first?
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
-
Replying to @Outsideness @Imperius__13 and
btw, I'm still waiting for a response on what's the genesis of power from neoabsolutists.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @cyborg_nomade @Outsideness and
starting from "there's a king" isn't exactly an explanation.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @cyborg_nomade @Outsideness and
Why not? This is an issue of first principles. You position relies on abstract first principles derived from Franciscan theology.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Neoabsolutism @Outsideness and
because you're not explaining how the hell a king came to be, or how he remains or is removed.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @cyborg_nomade @Neoabsolutism and
telling me the history of liberalism is not gonna solve *that* problem.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @cyborg_nomade @Outsideness and
Again, same as with a science. You begin from observing a phenomena and then work to the first principles in that science.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Neoabsolutism @Outsideness and
phenomenon: kings exist(ed) conditions of possibility: ????
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cyborg_nomade @Outsideness and
Humans are inherently heirachical.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Sure, keep pushing the anthropological universalism. There's an Evo Psych professorship up the road.
-
-
Replying to @Outsideness @cyborg_nomade and
Your position literally requires an anti-social, pre-societal superman able to just operate without any input from social relations.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
- 9 more replies
New conversation -
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.