Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Do you actually understand what he meant by that? I suggest you do a little research on it. Because he didn't mean what you think he meant by that.He also said
Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of a spiritless situation. It is the opium of the people.
So you must agree with that too right?
That you can't see that you dehumanize certain human lives only means that you know it is wrong to do so. And the only reason you can't see that you are doing it is because you need to rationalize that you aren't doing wrong.That doesn't make them my company. Only a low IQ moron or desperate attention seeker would think that fallacy is valid.
Ah, I see the next attention seeking post . I guess that answers that.
I didn't do that. Another ad hoc ding strawman.That you can't see that you dehumanize certain human lives only means that you know it is wrong to do so
Incorrect. There is nothing out of context. Marx believed that removing God from society would lead to communism. That was exactly his plan."I take irrelevant quotes out of context and think I am making a point" - ding
Actually you did. See?I didn't do that. Another ad hoc ding strawman.
So... only some human life is important?
Correct!
That's overstated nonsense for someone who has obviously not read Marx and has only read soundbytes.Incorrect. There is nothing out of context. Marx believed that removing God from society would lead to communism. That was exactly his plan.
Adam is the allegorical representation for when men first became self aware.Adam did not exist. What is this, bronze age storytime?
No, that's you intentionally misunderstanding me to generate 20 pages of pedantic red herring. As always.Actually you did. See?
Maybe you should actually read his works. My opinion is about how similar your views are to his.That's overstated nonsense for someone who has obviously not read Marx and has only read soundbytes.
But i don't care either way. Have whatever opinion you want of Marx.
And commit your fallacies in defining or criticizing humanism. It's far superior ethically and morally to anything found on the immoral turd that is the Bible. And it will remain so after this thread is forgotten.
Haha, no it isn't. No illiterate, ignorant fool from that time had any sense of the evolution of human beings. This is just a typical apologist attempt to retrofit the ancient myth to newfound knowledge.Adam is the allegorical representation for when men first became self aware.
No. That was actually a very simple question followed by a very simple answer. How was it misleading?No, that's you intentionally misunderstanding me to generate 20 pages of pedantic red herring. As always.
I have. You have not. Thanks for the link you didn't read.Maybe you should actually read his works. My opinion is about how similar your views are to his.
Human Requirements and Division of Labour, Marx, 1844
Because it was an acknowledgement of fact of the human condition. Humanists are not afraid to speak frankly, we aren't putting on an act for a celestial dictator.No. That was actually a very simple question followed by a very simple answer. How was it misleading?
The subject wasn't evolution. The subject was man's knowledge of good and evil.Haha, no it isn't. No illiterate, ignorant fool from that time had any sense of the evolution of human beings. This is just a typical apologist attempt to retrofit the ancient myth to newfound knowledge.
The development of sentience in our ancestors absolutely requires and is the topic of evolution.The subject wasn't evolution. The subject was man's knowledge of good and evil.
If you had you wouldn't be arguing that Marx didn't mean that communism is naturalized humanism when he wrote that communism is naturalized humanism.I have. You have not. Thanks for the link you didn't read.
Again... Adam is an allegorical representation of the first humans who became self aware. I don't really care if you believe this or not. That's the reality. Ignore it if you want. It won't change reality.The development of sentience in our ancestors absolutely requires and is the topic of evolution.
No illiterate fool that made up these myths had any knowledge allowing them to craft the allegory you just made up out of thin air.
Apologist nonsense.
Ii didn't. I sa you overstate it out of context and commit a stupid fallacy to try to characterize humanism.If you had you wouldn't be arguing that Marx didn't mean that communism is naturalized humanism when he wrote that communism is naturalized humanism.
Yes, I am aware that you made that up in a desperate apologist effort to retrofit your newfound knowledge to your fetish myths.Again... Adam is an allegorical representation of the first humans who became self aware.
