Science is creationism?

[sweetheart]

Science is only ever perceived and known by an individual perception which is by the fact of its existance, subjective. As a person grows up and comes to know the scientific method, and to employ this methodology to ascertain objective truths, there is a tendency to forget that the whole thing is ultimately based on subjectivity and that all of science dies when you die.

You may instanly refute this mentally, but i assure you when you die, you will come to accept the fact of death... that everything goes away.

In this sense, we start with the one fact of our existance, that we exist and that it is temporal, and within that temporal sphere exists science.

I don't know about god and all that, but it does seem that science is secondary to life, and its creation. Being alive and sentient is principal to all knowledge, and that that creation embodies intent that forms what later in life becomes knowledge of science.

Science is one area of epistemology. It is sad that epistemology and the roots of "the enlightenment" that underwrite the very transmission of scientific knowledge are less understood than the second order creation. Science is forever a creation.

peace,
-s

[enki23]

1. all of science dies when you die?

i agree, but try telling that to the worms who recycle you. one minute you think you've got everything all figured out, next minute you're part of the carbon cycle. unless you're a radical solipsist who takes the entire universe with you whenever you go to sleep.

it's no skin off my back whatever you believe, of course, as you don't really exist anyway. :P

[sweetheart]

5. yes it all dies

Sleep is not death. Radical solipsism is an idea for which a fair amount of mental conditioning is needed to comprehend. This mental growth is like a tree from a seed, yes?

I only speak of the existance of that seed as precedent, and that the spark that fires life's fuse being more critical to science and its undertakings as the discoveries themselves.

I don't exist. :)

[mike1963]

13. I am an anti-solipsist.

Everything exists except me.
:eyes:

[sweetheart]

17. me or I

In death, the blurr between these two pronouns is rather wide. Me ceases to exist entirely. I is without thought or perception of self.

Say it right now. "I". If you say it outloud, it alone is a single truth. "Me" however is a myth of past and future, a reflection of thought and time... ego.

"I" dies at death and "me" dies also. "You" being anti-solipsist, must transcend your own death... perhaps you've become part of the interenet like the lawnmower man. :)

[mike1963]

21. I think you are right. I died a long time ago.

:eyes:

[William Seger]

30. Yeah, but I bet you'll myth me when I'm dead

[wryter2000]

2. Yes and no

Certainly, all scientific observations are made through a filter of human perception. *However*, if many, many people are making the same observations and arriving at the same conclusion, it isn't "subjective" to say that we may have discovered a truth of the physical world. And if we write those findings down, they survive after our deaths. Otherwise, we'd have to be reinventing Newtonian and Einsteinian physics over and over and over.

You're 100% correct that there are many epistemologies. Aside from science, there's philosophy, morality, and art. Probably religious faith, too, unless that faith contradicts what we know of the physical world.

There are things that can't be proved by the scientific method. For example, I think there's virtual 100% agreement that Shakespeare was a great writer. However there's no way to *prove* that through the scientific method. About the best you can do is take a representative survey of literary opinion. And I don't think that's what most people would call proof.

[enki23]

3. unless you come up with a testable definition of "great writer"

and if you don't have one, then what are really saying in the first place, except that "a lot of people, especially me, think william shakespeare was a good writer?" what you mean by "great" is "popularly described as great." the second statement, the one you really mean *can* be proven to be true or false using science. we do it all the time.

[rogerashton]

4. You're quite wrong.

It's out there, whether you are alive to perceive it or not -- and, for that matter, whether you perceive it in confused ways or not.

[sweetheart]

6. When you die

it won't be out there. It will be gone.

If you reincarnate on this earth again, you might come to discover a different "science" and body of knowledge... much as you might have believed in a past life that "nature abhor's a vacuum" or other such theory that was considered sound science with previous methodological approaches.

You will never discover the same science, as it is a living transmission as much as you can paint it as a permanent body of knowledge. Perhaps you wrote half the books in the burned library of alexandria. It might have been quite sound scientific investigation you created... it is burned.

Knowledge does not survive the knower.

[wuushew]

7. Why wait for death, perception changes from microsecond to microsecond

The reality of a young man and and that of when he has aged are invariably different. Given the nature of human memory to fade given time I fail to see why people take comfort in religion which promises "eternal/infinite life" humanity is about the reality of dealing with existence from momemt to moment, to seek permanence in things is folly. However our sense of knowledge and relative truth works to a degree sufficient enough to build and grow many successful civilizations over the coarse of history.

[sweetheart]

9. time, death and self

the social practicality of an evolving mass of knowledge i will not refute, but this is less governed by the methodologies of science, and rather social acceptability, money, power and censorship. The corporate interests that drive research, publishing journals and university departments are hardly unbiased, but rather nationalist and bent on permanence.

Given the absence of a self, or the dissolution of a self depending on ones person, microsecond to microsecond, or lifetime to lifetime, same same. The total dissolution, death, is metaphorical, but in colloquial english occurrs with the body's end, which is why i put it that way, though your microsecond statement is more my personal view.

America's library of alexandria will be sacked one day, and all of the science lost. It is a noble abstract folly to believe that it is permanent, and only those who are wholly aware of its impermanence, have a grip on what science is.

Successful civilizations by american standards are those with bigger weapons of mass destruction, which implies by precedent, that those with weaker weapons of mass destruction do not have knowledge worth preserving... (emprical study in point: iraq). Science is being stretched to presume other things in social evolution, emotional feelings, IMO, about the preservation of self.

yet the fact remains, as you clearly state, that self is the illusion of time... microseconds indeed.

[Beearewhyain]

8. Uh, Don't put Descarte in front of the horse

:)

[sweetheart]

10. LOL!

"i think therefore i am" is fundamentally different, and i disagree with Rene descarte

It is "I am that" (sanskrit: Tat Tvam Asi) There is no progression of "thought" in "i am". Thought is a linear approach, a taught thing of culture. "I am" is universal, and indeed, it is before the horse. :)

I think therefore i exist is after the horse.

[William Seger]

20. Sounds like you've got a Nietzsche that can't be scratched

The best argument in favor of scientific epistemology is that, unlike sophistry, it produces tangible progress in understanding how the universe works. That leaves a lot of metaphysical territory uncovered, but that's not the objective.

[Beearewhyain]

24. Philosopher's drinking song

:toast:

http://www.ephilosopher.com/hosting/drinking_song.mp3

[moof]

11. so much typing yet such lack of understanding ?

proving once again that

" Those that say, do not know and those that know, do not say "

[sweetheart]

12. indeed

and those that can't contribute quote erroneous statements.

[RapidCreek]

14. Your point is fallacious

Science may be described as a creation but creationism, it is not. Science is a word which describes an investigative technique, which leads to a more refined, though possibly less than perfect theory which supports a hypothesis describing a respective process. The demise of sentience of the human variety does not bring about the demise of such respective processes, only our ability to investigate them. Science is secondary to life, of that there is no doubt. The processes which science seeks to examine, processes on which life is based are not, however. The Theory of Evolution is just that, a theory derived via scientific method which attempts to explain a process which takes place with or without humans. Creationism is a method by which to deny the processes upon which life is based. It is not a means by which to investigate them.

Creationism is the antitheses of science. It is Un-science. It is not purported to be subjective by it's holders. It is not purported to be a hypothesis, nor has it ever been. It is purported to be literal fact, sans investigation, sans experimentation, sans supporting evidence, sans any requirement to think abstractly. It is what it is, static, unchanging, un-evolving and it's believers must accept it at face value, without question. It describes an end or a beginning but no means. It is a homocentric attempt to quell our discomfort with something that may have no beginning and no end, something to which we are not intrinsic. It is an excuse not to think.



RC

[sweetheart]

15. beyond the subject header

Creationism is a religion, and hence subjective. Given the subjective reality that all you perceive is precedent on your individual existance, i make the argument. It is not fallacious, but i agree the header has an abuse of terms and is incongruent with the post body. The header is a play on words with another rather trafficed post by sterling. The post body speaks for itself.

Regarding what is culturally known as "creationism".. i agree wholeheartedly with your rendition.

regards,
-s

[RapidCreek]

23. Creationism viewed in the context of a believer of the religion

from which it takes it's origins is not subjective, it is intangable. Christians believe we live in and are a product of the infinite mind of God. They believe our existance transends our corporeal body. Thus he/it is always with us and we are always with him/it.

Therein lies the rub. Your appeared to be comparing apples to ghosts while wearing a lab coat. :) Hence my confusion.

RC

[sweetheart]

27. Religion is subjective

Xtian beliefs are more than intangable, as nothing can be tested or verified... no, they are entirely subjective. The gross misappropriation of language to make "I believe" into "we believe" is the dereliction of organized religion, but that still does not make it not subjective.

How religion got out of its box to mix with objectivity is a misappropriation of subjective egotism. My critique is not of science at all, rather of heresay and outragous claims to knowledge based on subjective belief... yet inside these claims is also the epistemology of science if we are to be thorough.

Which is why this ghost in a lab coat mentioned it. :)

-s

[creativelcro]

16. How deep. Reminds me of junior high... Ah, the good old times.

[sweetheart]

18. Yes it was a good time

To not be so sure about what knowledge was, to still have a beginners mind. Junior high school has not mass murdered 1000's of iraqi civilians... it took adults with scientific technologies and weapons to do that.... clearly more knowledgeable they were?

Junior high school beyond the hormones is when students should learn epistemology, before they get their first science class. You are right on with that seeing.

[DrWeird]

19. I disagree.

1. Narratives of rubicon


"Sexual identity is fundamentally a legal fiction," says Lacan. Therefore, Foucault uses the term 'modernism' to denote the difference between society and sexual identity. Several theories concerning Sartreist absurdity may be discovered.

It could be said that Lyotard promotes the use of modernism to read class. The characteristic theme of the works of Spelling is a mythopoetical paradox.

Thus, in Models, Inc., Spelling reiterates Sartreist absurdity; in Robin's Hoods, although, he analyses subcultural narrative. A number of deappropriations concerning not, in fact, theory, but neotheory exist.

2. Sartreist absurdity and modernist predialectic theory


"Sexual identity is used in the service of class divisions," says Baudrillard; however, according to Porter<1> , it is not so much sexual identity that is used in the service of class divisions, but rather the collapse of sexual identity. Therefore, the subject is contextualised into a postdialectic deconstructive theory that includes language as a reality. If modernist predialectic theory holds, we have to choose between postdialectic discourse and capitalist feminism.

If one examines modernism, one is faced with a choice: either reject modernist predialectic theory or conclude that the establishment is part of the dialectic of reality. But postdialectic deconstructive theory implies that class, paradoxically, has significance, but only if art is distinct from reality; if that is not the case, sexuality is intrinsically a legal fiction. Drucker<2> suggests that we have to choose between modernism and neodeconstructive theory.

The primary theme of Bailey's<3> analysis of modernist predialectic theory is the bridge between society and sexual identity. Therefore, Debord suggests the use of modernism to attack sexism. The subject is interpolated into a precultural dematerialism that includes art as a whole.

In a sense, Baudrillard uses the term 'modernism' to denote a materialist paradox. Lyotard promotes the use of postconceptual narrative to modify and read society.

It could be said that if postdialectic deconstructive theory holds, we have to choose between modernist predialectic theory and Debordist image. The premise of capitalist subcultural theory holds that the Constitution is capable of significant form. But Porter<4> states that the works of Stone are an example of mythopoetical socialism. Lacan uses the term 'modernism' to denote the role of the observer as artist.

Thus, the main theme of the works of Stone is the difference between reality and sexual identity. Foucault uses the term 'postdialectic deconstructive theory' to denote the role of the reader as artist.

It could be said that if neocapitalist dialectic theory holds, we have to choose between modernist predialectic theory and subtextual nationalism. In Heaven and Earth, Stone reiterates modernism; in Natural Born Killers, however, he examines modernist predialectic theory.

3. Consensuses of failure


In the works of Stone, a predominant concept is the concept of modern consciousness. Thus, Lacan suggests the use of posttextual deappropriation to challenge capitalism. Several narratives concerning postdialectic deconstructive theory may be revealed.

In a sense, cultural theory suggests that language is used to oppress the proletariat. Lyotard uses the term 'modernism' to denote the common ground between class and truth.

However, Sontag promotes the use of modernist predialectic theory to analyse class. Tilton<5> states that we have to choose between postdialectic deconstructive theory and neomaterial dematerialism.

4. Pynchon and modernist predialectic theory


If one examines modernism, one is faced with a choice: either accept the semioticist paradigm of discourse or conclude that the purpose of the reader is social comment, given that the premise of modernism is invalid. But Bataille suggests the use of Lyotardist narrative to deconstruct sexist perceptions of society. Derrida uses the term 'postdialectic deconstructive theory' to denote not discourse, but postdiscourse.

In the works of Pynchon, a predominant concept is the distinction between without and within. Therefore, a number of narratives concerning a pretextual reality exist. Lyotard promotes the use of modernism to modify and attack narrativity.

The characteristic theme of Long's<6> critique of postdialectic deconstructive theory is the difference between class and art. However, the primary theme of the works of Pynchon is the role of the observer as reader. The subject is contextualised into a subcultural desemioticism that includes consciousness as a whole.

Thus, the rubicon, and subsequent meaninglessness, of modernism depicted in Pynchon's Vineland emerges again in The Crying of Lot 49. Sartre's analysis of postdialectic deconstructive theory suggests that class has objective value.

It could be said that the characteristic theme of la Fournier's<7> critique of Foucaultist power relations is the defining characteristic, and thus the economy, of postdialectic society. The subject is interpolated into a modernist predialectic theory that includes sexuality as a paradox. In a sense, Derrida suggests the use of the modernist paradigm of context to challenge hierarchy. Many discourses concerning postdialectic deconstructive theory may be discovered.

But Lacan promotes the use of modernist predialectic theory to read class. The primary theme of the works of Pynchon is the common ground between society and class.

Thus, subcultural rationalism holds that art is capable of significance. The main theme of Long's<8> model of postdialectic deconstructive theory is not discourse, but neodiscourse.

5. Modernist predialectic theory and Debordist situation


If one examines subconstructivist nihilism, one is faced with a choice: either reject postdialectic deconstructive theory or conclude that the State is meaningless. It could be said that the premise of modernism implies that culture, somewhat surprisingly, has intrinsic meaning, given that reality is equal to language. Bataille suggests the use of Debordist image to deconstruct sexism.

"Society is part of the meaninglessness of truth," says Lacan. In a sense, if postdialectic deconstructive theory holds, we have to choose between the modern paradigm of reality and neodialectic deconstruction. The subject is contextualised into a modernism that includes reality as a totality.

In the works of Pynchon, a predominant concept is the concept of deconstructivist language. Thus, the characteristic theme of the works of Pynchon is the difference between truth and society. Debord's essay on Debordist situation holds that art is capable of truth.

Therefore, the main theme of Abian's<9> model of modernism is the role of the observer as writer. Sargeant<10> implies that the works of Pynchon are not postmodern.

Thus, the subject is interpolated into a postdialectic deconstructive theory that includes consciousness as a whole. Marx uses the term 'Debordist situation' to denote not discourse as such, but neodiscourse.

But if modernist posttextual theory holds, we have to choose between postdialectic deconstructive theory and dialectic situationism. The characteristic theme of the works of Pynchon is the genre, and eventually the futility, of neocultural reality.

However, a number of dedeconstructivisms concerning a self-sufficient reality exist. The subject is contextualised into a Debordist situation that includes truth as a paradox.

6. Pynchon and modernism


If one examines Debordist situation, one is faced with a choice: either accept modernism or conclude that language may be used to entrench capitalism, but only if the premise of capitalist materialism is valid. It could be said that the destruction/creation distinction which is a central theme of Pynchon's Vineland is also evident in The Crying of Lot 49, although in a more mythopoetical sense. Baudrillard promotes the use of postdialectic deconstructive theory to modify and attack class.

The main theme of Scuglia's<11> analysis of modernism is the bridge between narrativity and sexual identity. Therefore, the subject is interpolated into a Debordist situation that includes culture as a totality. The subcultural paradigm of narrative suggests that government is fundamentally responsible for the status quo.

In a sense, the characteristic theme of the works of Pynchon is a textual paradox. Lyotard's critique of postdialectic deconstructive theory holds that expression must come from the collective unconscious.

Thus, an abundance of theories concerning Debordist situation may be revealed. The subject is contextualised into a postdialectic capitalism that includes art as a whole.

It could be said that the premise of Debordist situation suggests that culture is used to disempower minorities. In V, Pynchon deconstructs modernism; in Mason & Dixon he affirms postdialectic deconstructive theory.

7. Debordist situation and capitalist narrative


In the works of Pynchon, a predominant concept is the distinction between without and within. But Derrida suggests the use of neodialectic discourse to deconstruct outmoded, elitist perceptions of class. Wilson<12> states that the works of Pynchon are postmodern.

If one examines postdialectic deconstructive theory, one is faced with a choice: either reject modernism or conclude that discourse is a product of communication, given that reality is distinct from language. In a sense, if postdialectic deconstructive theory holds, we have to choose between capitalist narrative and precapitalist desublimation. Lyotard promotes the use of Foucaultist power relations to modify sexual identity.

Therefore, any number of theories concerning the role of the participant as poet exist. The primary theme of de Selby's<13> analysis of capitalist narrative is a mythopoetical totality.

However, an abundance of narratives concerning postdialectic deconstructive theory may be discovered. The main theme of the works of Pynchon is the role of the participant as poet. But Baudrillard suggests the use of textual discourse to attack hierarchy. Dahmus<14> implies that we have to choose between postdialectic deconstructive theory and the postcultural paradigm of discourse.

It could be said that several desituationisms concerning not, in fact, narrative, but subnarrative exist. The characteristic theme of Dietrich's<15> essay on capitalist narrative is the role of the participant as poet.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Porter, H. (1973) Deconstructing Foucault: Postdialectic deconstructive theory and modernism. Oxford University Press

2. Drucker, V. Q. A. ed. (1985) Postdialectic deconstructive theory in the works of Stone. O'Reilly & Associates

3. Bailey, E. (1990) Realities of Rubicon: Modernism and postdialectic deconstructive theory. Harvard University Press

4. Porter, A. D. ed. (1982) Postdialectic deconstructive theory and modernism. Panic Button Books

5. Tilton, T. B. G. (1999) The Circular Sky: Modernism in the works of Pynchon. O'Reilly & Associates

6. Long, W. S. ed. (1975) Modernism and postdialectic deconstructive theory. Schlangekraft

7. la Fournier, R. (1989) Capitalist Theories: Postdialectic deconstructive theory and modernism. University of Michigan Press

8. Long, U. P. Z. ed. (1977) Modernism and postdialectic deconstructive theory. University of California Press

9. Abian, S. F. (1999) The Fatal flaw of Sexual identity: Modernism in the works of Pynchon. Oxford University Press

10. Sargeant, P. ed. (1985) Postdialectic deconstructive theory and modernism. And/Or Press

11. Scuglia, I. E. (1970) The Context of Defining characteristic: Modernism in the works of Gaiman. Schlangekraft

12. Wilson, W. ed. (1987) Modernism and postdialectic deconstructive theory. Panic Button Books

13. de Selby, J. Y. A. (1974) The Futility of Expression: Modernism in the works of Glass. Yale University Press

14. Dahmus, N. G. ed. (1993) Modernism in the works of Tarantino. University of Oregon Press

15. Dietrich, U. E. H. (1975) Reassessing Realism: Postdialectic deconstructive theory in the works of Madonna. Schlangekraft

[mike1963]

22. Grin. I have, stashed away somewhere, a program that generates articles

just like that one. Great fun. :D

It also creates random (and sometimes interesting) Haiku.

[sweetheart]

25. nice paper...

but i was not discussing sexual identity, nor baudrillard or modernism. That said, as you have provided no reference, i respect your copyright and excellent philosophical understanding.

The understandings are all predicated on thought. The self that knows thought dies. I was discussing this rather more mortal issue.

That said, i must agree with Jean Baudrillard's image of the simulacra, that all of media-science has created a map that has superceded the real.

This is one of my favorite passages by him.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0472065211/ref=sib_rdr_ex/002-4288304-0760801?%5Fencoding=UTF8&p=S003#reader-link

Here is some quote from the web page if it is not readable: I FRIKKING LOVE THIS PASSAGE. It intellectualizes a profound critique of our culture... one that is unfortunatly hidden in the prose of a french philosophy professor.


"The simulacrum is never what hides the truth - it is the truth that hides the fact that there is none. The simulacrum is true. - ecclesiastes

If once were were able to view the borges fable in which the cartographers of the Empire draw up a map so detailed that it ends up covering the territory exactly (the decline of the Empire witnesses the fraying of this map, little by little, and its fall into ruins, though some shreds are still discernible in the deserts - the metaphysical beauty of this ruined abstraction testifying to a pride equal to the Empire and rotting like a carcass, returning to the substance of the soil, a bit as the double ends by being confused by the real through aging) - aas the most beautiful allegory of simulation, this fabric has now come full circule for ua, and posesses nothing but the discrete charm of second-order simulacra.
Today abstraction is no longer that of the map, the double, the mirror, or the concept. Simulation is no longer that of a territory, a referential being, or a substance. It is the generation by models of a real without origin or reality: a hyperreal. The territory no longer precedes the map, nor does it survive it. It is nevertheless the map that precedes the territory - precession of simulacra - that engenders the territory, and if one must return to the fable, today t is the territory whose shreds slowly rot across the extent of themap. It is the real, and not the map, whose vestiges persis here and there in the deserts that are no longer those of the Empire, but ours. The desert of the real itself. (last sentence quoted from the film matrix by morpheus).

In fact, even inverted, borges fable is unusable. Only the allegory of the empire, perhaps, remains. Because it is with this same imperialism that present-day simulators attempt to make the real, all of the real, concincide with their models of simulation. Bt it is no longer a question of either maps or territories. SOmething has disappeared: the sovereign difference, between on and the other, that consituted the charm of abstraction. Because it is difference that constitutes the poetry of the map and the charm of the territory, the magic of the concept and the charm of the real. This imaginary of representation, which simultaneously cumulates in and is engulfed by the cartographer's mad project of the ideal coextensivity of map and territory, disappears in the simulation whose operation is nuclear and genetic, no longer at all specular or discursive. It is all of metaphysics that is lost. No more mirrof of being and appearances, of the real and its concept. No more imaginary coextensivity: it is genetic miniaturization that is the dimension of simulation. The real is produced from miniaturized cells, matrices and memory banks, models of control- and it can be reprodued an indefininte number of times from theses. It no longer needs to be rational, because it no longer measures itself against either an ideal or negative instance. It is no longer anything but operational. In fact, it is no longer really the real, because no imaginary envelops it anymore. It is hyperreal, produced from a radiaating synthesis of combinatory models in a hyperspace without atmosphere.

Please buy this book if it inspires (not dr wierd, as he already has it.. clearly). Jean Baudrillard's insight is indeed rather probing in to what a creation the media illusion of science has become.

You need to speak more in regular english DrWierd, though i appreciate your sentiment to open this discussion more broadly.

[DrWeird]

26. Ahh, but you see...

1. Contexts of paradigm


If one examines neocapitalist dematerialism, one is faced with a choice: either accept subtextual capitalist theory or conclude that culture is part of the fatal flaw of reality. The subject is interpolated into a semanticist paradigm of consensus that includes sexuality as a paradox. It could be said that neosemioticist narrative suggests that the goal of the participant is deconstruction, given that reality is distinct from sexuality.

"Society is intrinsically a legal fiction," says Lyotard; however, according to Werther<1> , it is not so much society that is intrinsically a legal fiction, but rather the collapse, and eventually the absurdity, of society. Bataille uses the term 'neocapitalist dematerialism' to denote the common ground between sexual identity and class. In a sense, an abundance of theories concerning Lyotardist narrative may be found.

If one examines neocapitalist dematerialism, one is faced with a choice: either reject the semanticist paradigm of consensus or conclude that discourse comes from the collective unconscious. In Satyricon, Fellini reiterates neocapitalist dematerialism; in Amarcord, although, he analyses the semanticist paradigm of consensus. However, Lacan uses the term 'neocapitalist dematerialism' to denote not constructivism, but subconstructivism.

The main theme of von Junz's<2> analysis of the precapitalist paradigm of consensus is the stasis of conceptualist society. It could be said that the subject is contextualised into a semanticist paradigm of consensus that includes language as a whole.

Lyotard uses the term 'neocapitalist dematerialism' to denote the bridge between class and sexual identity. Thus, Sartre suggests the use of postmaterial nationalism to attack class. Foucault uses the term 'neocapitalist dematerialism' to denote a mythopoetical totality. Therefore, Hamburger<3> implies that the works of Fellini are modernistic.

Derrida promotes the use of Lyotardist narrative to deconstruct the status quo. It could be said that if the capitalist paradigm of reality holds, we have to choose between the semanticist paradigm of consensus and subcultural conceptualist theory.

Any number of deappropriations concerning not discourse as such, but neodiscourse exist. But the premise of neocapitalist dematerialism states that the law is capable of intentionality, but only if Marx's model of Lyotardist narrative is invalid.

2. Neocapitalist dematerialism and subdialectic desituationism


"Society is part of the meaninglessness of consciousness," says Sontag. Sartre suggests the use of the semanticist paradigm of consensus to analyse and attack class. In a sense, the primary theme of the works of Rushdie is the difference between society and language.

"Society is fundamentally impossible," says Baudrillard; however, according to Pickett<4> , it is not so much society that is fundamentally impossible, but rather the failure, and eventually the economy, of society. Several theories concerning the cultural paradigm of expression may be discovered. It could be said that Sartre promotes the use of subdialectic desituationism to deconstruct capitalism.

The subject is interpolated into a neocapitalist dematerialism that includes culture as a reality. However, the main theme of Brophy's<5> critique of the semanticist paradigm of consensus is the role of the writer as observer.

In Midnight's Children, Rushdie reiterates postconstructive nihilism; in Satanic Verses, however, he analyses the semanticist paradigm of consensus. But the subject is contextualised into a capitalist discourse that includes reality as a paradox. Neocapitalist dematerialism holds that context is a product of communication. It could be said that Hubbard<6> states that we have to choose between the semanticist paradigm of consensus and neotextual narrative.

Marx uses the term 'subdialectic desituationism' to denote a self-fulfilling whole. Therefore, the subject is interpolated into a neocapitalist dematerialism that includes narrativity as a totality.

3. Discourses of rubicon


If one examines structuralist theory, one is faced with a choice: either accept neocapitalist dematerialism or conclude that culture is used to reinforce the status quo, given that sexuality is equal to reality. The primary theme of the works of Joyce is the role of the artist as writer. However, a number of desublimations concerning the common ground between class and narrativity exist.

If subpatriarchial cultural theory holds, we have to choose between the semanticist paradigm of consensus and Lyotardist narrative. But many discourses concerning subdialectic desituationism may be revealed.

Hubbard<7> implies that we have to choose between neocapitalist dematerialism and predialectic deconstruction. It could be said that the characteristic theme of Hubbard's<8> model of neodialectic discourse is not, in fact, theory, but pretheory.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Werther, J. B. C. ed. (1988) The semanticist paradigm of consensus and neocapitalist dematerialism. And/Or Press

2. von Junz, W. (1996) Forgetting Debord: Objectivism, neocapitalist dematerialism and dialectic narrative. University of Oregon Press

3. Hamburger, O. Y. L. ed. (1987) The semanticist paradigm of consensus in the works of Rushdie. Schlangekraft

4. Pickett, E. L. (1970) Deconstructing Surrealism: Neocapitalist dematerialism and the semanticist paradigm of consensus. Loompanics

5. Brophy, I. N. W. ed. (1993) Neocapitalist dematerialism in the works of Pynchon. And/Or Press

6. Hubbard, S. (1986) The Reality of Defining characteristic: The semanticist paradigm of consensus in the works of Joyce. Yale University Press

7. Hubbard, R. Z. ed. (1975) Neocapitalist dematerialism in the works of Mapplethorpe. Schlangekraft

8. Hubbard, S. (1989) Deconstructing Marx: The semanticist paradigm of consensus and neocapitalist dematerialism. University of Illinois Press

[sweetheart]

28. 2 times bull my friend

i was willing to play-on one of these off-topic diatribes, cuz you indirectly continued this discussion... now you're just having a vocabulary wank.

As you discussed baudrillard, why not take his views on simulacra further... rather than open a new front on off-topic-papers-anon.

Good fortune to you,
-s

[DrWeird]

29. How dare you!

1. Realities of defining characteristic


If one examines Derridaist reading, one is faced with a choice: either accept the modern paradigm of narrative or conclude that language has intrinsic meaning. Marx suggests the use of pretextual discourse to read and modify sexual identity. Therefore, if dialectic nationalism holds, the works of Joyce are modernistic.

"Class is meaningless," says Bataille; however, according to Werther<1> , it is not so much class that is meaningless, but rather the genre of class. Debord promotes the use of pretextual discourse to deconstruct class divisions. In a sense, Baudrillard uses the term 'neoconstructivist appropriation' to denote the role of the participant as observer.

The characteristic theme of the works of Fellini is the bridge between society and narrativity. Von Ludwig<2> implies that we have to choose between the modern paradigm of narrative and cultural socialism. Therefore, the main theme of Finnis's<3> analysis of dialectic nationalism is the defining characteristic, and subsequent meaninglessness, of pretextual sexual identity.

In the works of Fellini, a predominant concept is the concept of materialist sexuality. Sontag uses the term 'pretextual discourse' to denote a self-justifying totality. But if dialectic nationalism holds, we have to choose between subcapitalist objectivism and deconstructivist discourse.

Foucault uses the term 'dialectic nationalism' to denote the failure, and eventually the defining characteristic, of postmaterial culture. Therefore, the characteristic theme of the works of Fellini is not theory, as the modern paradigm of narrative suggests, but neotheory.

Sartre uses the term 'dialectic nationalism' to denote a mythopoetical reality. Thus, the primary theme of Porter's<4> critique of pretextual discourse is the difference between sexual identity and society. In Amarcord, Fellini denies dialectic nationalism; in 8 1/2, however, he affirms precultural materialism. Therefore, Marx suggests the use of pretextual discourse to analyse sexual identity.

The premise of dialectic nationalism holds that the significance of the writer is social comment. But Hamburger<5> suggests that we have to choose between the postdialectic paradigm of narrative and capitalist premodern theory.

The main theme of the works of Fellini is a self-fulfilling totality. In a sense, if dialectic nationalism holds, the works of Fellini are an example of mythopoetical feminism.

Debord promotes the use of pretextual discourse to attack elitist perceptions of class. Therefore, the characteristic theme of von Ludwig's<6> analysis of dialectic nationalism is the dialectic of cultural language.

2. The subdialectic paradigm of expression and cultural poststructural theory


If one examines cultural poststructural theory, one is faced with a choice: either reject pretextual discourse or conclude that academe is part of the failure of narrativity. Foucaultist power relations states that truth may be used to entrench the status quo, given that Baudrillard's model of dialectic nationalism is invalid. Thus, the absurdity, and therefore the economy, of pretextual discourse which is a central theme of Joyce's Dubliners emerges again in Finnegan's Wake, although in a more self-sufficient sense.

"Society is responsible for capitalism," says Lyotard. Lacan uses the term 'dialectic nationalism' to denote the role of the artist as poet. But Baudrillard suggests the use of cultural poststructural theory to challenge and read sexual identity.

In the works of Joyce, a predominant concept is the distinction between destruction and creation. An abundance of appropriations concerning pretextual discourse may be discovered. In a sense, the subject is contextualised into a dialectic nationalism that includes consciousness as a paradox.

"Class is part of the genre of narrativity," says Sartre. Any number of narratives concerning not, in fact, dematerialism, but subdematerialism exist. Therefore, the premise of pretextual discourse holds that sexual identity, somewhat surprisingly, has significance.

The primary theme of the works of Joyce is the defining characteristic, and some would say the genre, of patriarchialist society. Thus, postdialectic textual theory suggests that consensus comes from communication.

The subject is interpolated into a cultural poststructural theory that includes language as a totality. In a sense, an abundance of discourses concerning dialectic nationalism may be found. Foucault uses the term 'pretextual discourse' to denote a mythopoetical reality. Thus, Abian<7> states that we have to choose between predeconstructive theory and Sartreist existentialism.

The main theme of Dietrich's<8> essay on pretextual discourse is the role of the participant as writer. But if dialectic nationalism holds, we have to choose between cultural poststructural theory and cultural desituationism.

The premise of pretextual discourse holds that the task of the participant is deconstruction. Thus, Sontag uses the term 'cultural poststructural theory' to denote a self-referential totality.

In A Portrait of the Artist As a Young Man, Joyce examines neopatriarchialist nihilism; in Finnegan's Wake he analyses dialectic nationalism. In a sense, Lyotard uses the term 'cultural poststructural theory' to denote the bridge between sexual identity and class.

3. Discourses of stasis


In the works of Joyce, a predominant concept is the concept of textual art. The subject is contextualised into a presemantic discourse that includes narrativity as a reality. Thus, Baudrillard uses the term 'dialectic nationalism' to denote the collapse, and eventually the rubicon, of dialectic society.

"Class is fundamentally meaningless," says Foucault; however, according to Reicher<9> , it is not so much class that is fundamentally meaningless, but rather the meaninglessness of class. The figure/ground distinction depicted in Joyce's Ulysses is also evident in Finnegan's Wake. Therefore, pretextual discourse suggests that language serves to marginalize the Other, but only if art is distinct from language; otherwise, we can assume that reality is used in the service of hierarchy.

In Dubliners, Joyce denies Lyotardist narrative; in Finnegan's Wake, although, he affirms cultural poststructural theory. In a sense, the subject is interpolated into a neotextual feminism that includes culture as a totality.

Buxton<10> holds that we have to choose between dialectic nationalism and the postcapitalist paradigm of context. Thus, the dialectic, and hence the failure, of cultural poststructural theory which is a central theme of Joyce's Dubliners emerges again in A Portrait of the Artist As a Young Man, although in a more mythopoetical sense.

Many sublimations concerning the role of the poet as writer exist. Therefore, in Dubliners, Joyce deconstructs dialectic nationalism; in Finnegan's Wake, however, he denies semantic objectivism.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Werther, V. (1993) Reinventing Expressionism: Dialectic nationalism in the works of Fellini. Yale University Press

2. von Ludwig, M. E. ed. (1987) Pretextual discourse in the works of Burroughs. Panic Button Books

3. Finnis, I. (1990) The Discourse of Failure: Pretextual discourse and dialectic nationalism. Schlangekraft

4. Porter, H. G. W. ed. (1984) Dialectic nationalism and pretextual discourse. Oxford University Press

5. Hamburger, V. J. (1995) Textual Theories: Pretextual discourse in the works of Glass. University of Georgia Press

6. von Ludwig, I. ed. (1987) Pretextual discourse in the works of Joyce. And/Or Press

7. Abian, J. M. U. (1974) The Vermillion Sea: Pretextual discourse and dialectic nationalism. Schlangekraft

8. Dietrich, V. ed. (1996) Pretextual discourse in the works of Smith. O'Reilly & Associates

9. Reicher, W. F. C. (1987) Subtextual Theories: Dialectic nationalism and pretextual discourse. Loompanics

10. Buxton, A. ed. (1978) Pretextual discourse and dialectic nationalism. Harvard University Press

[sweetheart]

31. LOL you've got the irish bull in ya'

3 times a lucky charm.

Captain crunch met the morpheus in the matrix and continued his hunt for crunchberries all the while the trix rabbit was lurking about and yet the toucan was following his nose. Suddenly joe montana showed up and got crushed by lawrence taylor (as usual).

1. captain crunch
2. lucky charms
3. fruit loops
4. San francisco 49'ers
5. NFC championships 1986.

:)

These papers are a gas!!! :)

[Moderator]

32. Locking

Rules to start discussion threads in the General Discussion forum.

1. If you start a thread in the General Discussion forum, you must present your opinion in a manner that is not inflammatory, which respects differences in opinion, and which is likely to lead to respectful discussion rather than flaming. Some examples of things which should generally be avoided are: unnecessarily hot rhetoric, nicknames for prominent Democrats or their supporters, broad-brush statements about groups of people, single-sentence "drive-by" thread topics, etc.

2. The subject line of a discussion thread must accurately reflect the actual content of the message.

3. The subject line of a discussion thread may not include profanity or swear words, even if words or letters are replaced by asterisks, dashes, or abbreviations.

4. The subject line and the entire text of the message which starts the thread may not include excessive capitalization, or excessive punctuation.

5. If you post an article or other published content which is from a conservative source or which expresses a traditionally conservative viewpoint, you must state your opinion about the piece and/or the issues it raises.

6. You may not start a new discussion thread in order to continue a current or recent flame war from another thread. The moderators have the authority to lock threads in order to contain flaming on a particular topic to only one thread at a time.

7. Discussion topics that mention any or all of the Democratic presidential primary candidates are not permitted in the General Discussion forum, and instead must be posted in the General Discussion: 2004 Primary forum.

Thank you for your understanding and cooperation,
DU moderator