/siberia/ - Off-topic

So your low I.Q. ass, not dialectics understanding ass, haven’t showered in a week ass hopped on Microsoft paint to make this pathetic image that is only displaying your own ignorance, and then you had the audacity to save it as “Trve.png”. I command you to delete this thread to spare yourself the embarrassment, wallahi.

Uhm, if anything this would have debunked the dialectics of Fichte, which is often confused with Hegel’s which Marx’s dialectics is based on.

All men are immortal.
Socrates is a man.
Therefore, Socrates is immortal.

The syllogistic method of reasoning is clearly flawed.

>>757548
Innovationism is true

the empiricoid believes calling something a "2" or a "5" should end the ongoing social process of investigation and instead, from mere appearance alone, assert truth has been violated. In truth(haha), truth is a religious dogma that does not exist. Truth destroys thinking, robs human agency, and prevents diversification l. Truth asserts itself as unquestionable when truth itself is constructed and constantly altered and under critical review. They halt the process and ask you to plug your ears, as once this "truth" is discovered no investigation of its social context should be worthy of discussion or, shock, to be questioned and experimented with.

The empiricoid cannot answer which 2 in 2+2=5 is false. Is it the left? The right? Is the 5 even the "correct" observation. The plus sign(+) the equals sign? which one is it empiricoid? How are the twos in the 2+2=5 different from the the 2+2=4? Are the twos in the 2+2=4 identical? Can they change into the "false" 2 of the 2+2=5 observed? Yes, this is the very point, the empiricoid stops only at observation and cannot and will not continue further. The point being of social activity to create and construct new hypothesis to describe the phenomenon of the empiricist derived 2 somehow defying the impossible and being able to equal another value(presumed hypothesis). Are the twos of 2+2=4 of different nature than the 2+2=5? how can one tell them apart? And why are we extrapolating 4.5, a presumed average as the new "synthesis". Again the empiricist obscures the social process behind these conclusions, the seemingly random average of the two proposed "conclusions"(2+2=4 and the 2+2=5). Why empiricist why? This is the enemy of the empiricist, and that is truth as a concept being a valid existence. It is merely a social process, giving our best guess of existence, and to be done away with or maybe re-earthed in a future time. it is irrelevant in its importance. Something to be considered, not worshipped. It denies the labor process the human activity and spits on its various constructions, deeming them unworthy despite being a construction itself.

>>757544
>haven’t showered in a week
Personal hygiene like taking baths is extremely bourgeois behavior.

>>757542
Dialectics applies to quality not quantity, mathematics serves that purpose just fine.

thesis: I rape OP and kill him
antithesis: I don't rape OP and I don't kill him
synthesis: I rape OP and don't kill him

>>757630
But what if you don’t rape op but kill him?

>>757545
Marx's dialectic is basically just Fichte's dialectic though.