No reason to give a point by point rebuttal of such a poorly thought out critique, but let me point to one thing that is indicative of the whole. Look at the critique of 'determinism' in u/acc. (1/9)https://twitter.com/nihilaxis/status/1041856136364797953 …
-
Show this thread
-
There is a very basic confusion of the level where determinism is in u/acc. But let's assume that her critique is actually connecting to something. Here is her couple de gras (2/9):pic.twitter.com/iEgJUMtucf
1 reply 0 retweets 8 likesShow this thread -
To be plain, this is an intro to philosophy critique of determinism. But again, benefit of the doubt, right? Here is a question, if we determined (at the level that the author is critique) how could we decide NOT to write a blog? (3/9)
4 replies 0 retweets 10 likesShow this thread -
It would not be as though one group of people are determined and another not. One person is determined to write and one person is not. But this is not what is discussed in u/acc. There the question is whether humans are capable of interceding in the movement of capital. (4/9)
2 replies 0 retweets 11 likesShow this thread -
U/acc is a theory of capital, or a meta-theory of capital. There are questions about the human subject and Capital-as-subject but those questions are so easily dismissed. The author is incapable of function at the intellectual level necessary to think these things through. (5/9)
2 replies 0 retweets 13 likesShow this thread
This should read "not so easily"...
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.