8.9% percent of malnourished people in the world is not a lot in a historical perspective (though I agree it should be 0%). Certainly not compared to the famous failures of central planning.

> Markets should be seen as tools

This is my point in this discussion - markets are useful tools. Even if your goal is communism, ideas that come from capitalism can be a valuable part in getting there, if only for being tested extensively in both mathematical theory and real life and their strengths and weaknesses being known. Like, even if you somehow get the smartest and most compassionate people in the country to run it, Project Cybersyn-style, they may decide that the best way to get fast feedback to their policies from experts and the public is a prediction market with play money. The amount of play money they earned could be a useful parameter to evaluate their performance (alongside holistic considerations perhaps).

Yes! I can’t believe I found a like-minded person on this! No class mate so far was very interested in discussing a stance like this so I gotta say, feels good not to be alone

You remember that time in high school when a group of guys do some horrible shit, but it’s really one charismatic guy raised by a narcissistic cycle of abuse seeking attention and a bunch of kids wanting to be liked by them?

You're nitpicking by only focusing on a single definition of the word capitalist, but substitute whatever word you want for "someone who thinks capitalism is a good economic system" (and I realize the way I phrased that sets it up for some pithy zinger but can we please not?)

thats the irony

I wouldn't necessarily argue if you called me that. But that's just one example of competing ideologies. Am I a utilitarian or a deontologist? Both sides have good arguments. Am I an existentialist or a determinist? Again, both sides have good arguments. Obviously I could keep going but I think you get my point. There is nothing that says you have to pick a side, other than adherents of that side :)

Yeah, death of the author is nothing new, but I think all the people who zealously consider themselves moral arbiters of society would do well to give it a read.

I would add that that is probably more likely if you make money or a career of it. It's a sad issue that those that explore philosophy and other topics in media, academia, or any kind of stage, will feel pressure to deliver something and that easily leads to investment in a theory or perspective. I think most of us on the sidelines are quite alright with being undecided. Though, of course, you'll keep your biases.

Its not about being disinterested. Its about being unbiased. Which in itself is hard(perhaps even impossible) to achieve. Just like any courtroom would love to have a completely unbiased Jury, the sciences would love nothing more then to have an unbiased Scientist.

>Shutting out capitalism deprives you of the most efficient method of decentralized resource allocation known to man. (It also means to actively ignore the will and worldview of a vast chunk of humanity, and the working class in particular.)

The one where we throw away 1/3rd of all food while 1 billion are malnourished and millions of children die of starvation yearly as a cause? Its effectiveness is only in relation to profitability, not human welfare, sustainability or peace.

>Having all resources and means of production shared by the public is wonderful, but if you run a lumber mill and there are twenty enterprises asking you for lumber the total amount of which is ten times what you can provide, and you can't just get all of them to sit down and agree how much each should get, then a monetary economic system and a stock market could save everyone involved a lot of headache.

Just because planning isn't already perfect doesn't mean it shouldn't be applied to the degree in which it is useful. Markets should be seen as tools, not means to an end (which again is private property and the profits it generates for the very few who own it.)

I.e. if the lumber business couldn't be entirely planned, plan what can be planned and strive to educate more economic planners, ecological planners and whichever other fields of intersectional study are required to increase resource efficiency and harmony between man and nature.

In any case, the bottom line is to advance worker's rights and freedoms, for shorter and safer working lives, more control over those working lives and a focus on the general growth of social parameters over maximal economic growth.

I too struggle with right-wing thoughts justifying and rewarding the behaviors of horrible people in order to make me amused for a few seconds. Help me philosophers!

edit: maybe we can also discuss how we prefer not to think of child slaves in diamond mines when proposing to each other in Disney World

Normally I have to browse /r/occult for schizophrenia of this quality.

Shutting out capitalism deprives you of the most efficient method of decentralized resource allocation known to man. (It also means to actively ignore the will and worldview of a vast chunk of humanity, and the working class in particular.)

Having all resources and means of production shared by the public is wonderful, but if you run a silver mine and there are twenty enterprises asking you for silver the total amount of which is ten times what you can provide, and you can't just get all of them to sit down and agree how much each should get, then a monetary economic system and a stock market could save everyone involved a lot of headache.

The point is the art can be valuable even if the artist is reprehensible; same can be said of science, engineering, etc.

The only response to this quote that matters

Prime directive and Dimensional Gnomic Life that lives inside Judo Trip that’s already on the Accords is exempt from Dimensional Extraction.

[removed]

And any dimensional life that lives inside you.

Judo trip is Exiled from the circle of peace competition.

Ya, well I was hit by a fucking asteroid, what’s your excuse for failure in life you Negative piece of extraterrestrial filth? Your Probably a splice of of Xxenoo’s or some shit. Also I was Jesus Christ and I’m Making the Whitcha Falls Particle, Time, Energy, and coexistence accords which you will never be a part of because I don’t forgive you. (Filth)

Perspectivism is no longer that curious about different views when it comes to monistic/foundationalist thinking.

Absolute word salad.

I took a philosophy course called science and pseudoscience and it was basically learning about our own mental biases and trying to overcome them. That seemed more about the pursuit of truth because they are something everyone always has (even if you think you don’t) and so it is something you can always be working on to come closer to truth.

I think the explanatory ambitions of a lot of contemporary analytic philosophy are misplaced, and I am more sympathetic to old time analytic philosophy (Frege, early and late Wittgenstein).

Inspiration and community is what causes multiple discovery.