I'm 99% certain you believe what you believe because those who you view as your ideological enemies must argue while rejecting the axioms in your model.
This results in your views having never been honestly challenged, because to situate the axioms of your worldview in their proper context (among a broader set of axioms,) your opponents must first admit the validity of your smaller set of axioms.
From the fact that there is a disparity between races in general intelligence and crime statistics, it does not follow that one must be a racist. Moreover, it does not follow that a worldview based only on such sound premises is reasonable.
The same is true for differences in sex and intelligence, religion and terrorism, and left-leaning economic policies and the general welfare of nations.
troll declares himself interesting strategy cotton
Justin Price
I declare myself because of the confidence I have in my (re: Pinker's) argument.
This sort of troll is sure to generate more butthurt with a direct approach than a subtle one.
Jacob Cox
Stick it up your axiom
Grayson Turner
I used to be a full-on red libertarian socialist, don't tell me that my mind hasn't been honestly changed.
Cameron Mitchell
It's amazing how Pinker has to give so many qualifying statements and be so defensive it takes him forever to say anything meaningful.
Daniel Bennett
I'm 99% certain you just spouted off a bunch of autistic bullshit you heard in a (((college))) course just to sound smart
Justin Hernandez
>From the fact that there is a disparity between races in general intelligence and crime statistics, it does not follow that one must be a racist. Moreover, it does not follow that a worldview based only on such sound premises is reasonable.
virtually no one here would be racist if leftist faggots would stop trying to cover up the truth and just let white people live in peace among themselves
Aiden Kelly
>claims certainty You don't know you're not a brain in a vat.
Nicholas Taylor
You forget that leftists are the ones applying labels to all this.
I'm not racist for realizing that black women specifically are an incredible drain on society and should be dealt with. At least the men usually end up shooting each other, cutting down their negative impact.
Owen Long
if you accept that racial differences in intelligence are rooted in genetics white nationalism is the only logical and sane political position you can hold
Jayden Hughes
You've set two conditions in your conditional proposition.
What's funny is the first condition is the premise in my argument, while the second condition reflects the limited worldview my argument is directed toward.
If leftist faggots would stop trying to cover up the truth, radical fringe groups like yours wouldn't believe the only alternative to anti-race realism is forming race-based policy.
Justin Morgan
>nigger crime >nigger intelligence >axioms
These are empirically derived truths. An axiom would be "all races have equal cognitive potentials." It is something that has not been demonstrated, and yet is assumed to be true.
Connor Ward
Ok
Isaiah Torres
>You forget that leftists are the ones applying labels to all this.
Every side has skin in the label game.
>I'm not racist for realizing that black women specifically are an incredible drain on society and should be dealt with. At least the men usually end up shooting each other, cutting down their negative impact.
This is a genetic fallacy. You cannot generalize properties of a group onto an individual and remain logically consistent.
Adrian Price
>You cannot generalize properties of a group onto an individual and remain logically consistent. What individual? He said black women. He was referring to the group as a whole.
Easton Smith
Sure I can, statistically, per capita, black women as a segment of society consume vast quantities of resources without contributing to the system.
The fallacy you're thinking of is if I try to apply this to an individual black woman.
Anthony Torres
>I'm 99% certain you believe what you believe because those who you view as your ideological enemies must argue while rejecting the axioms in your model. the same could be said for most communists/antifa You must understand that national socialism is more of a political philosophy than it is a economic system. Kant and Hegel's book on German Idealism can give you an idea of what it really means, I'm not gonna explain it because I'm too tired and I got class in the morning but yea, I agree to an extent about most self proclaimed natsocs don't really know allot of the doctrine, but that's to be expected in any ideology. The only people who know it through and through are the leaders, that's why they're leaders The reason many of us are "natsocs" is because we see consumerism destroying our culture, we're being replaced by foreigners. We're going the way of the Native American, and it won't take long before our beautiful and accomplished race to be out bread by the billions of others competing for resources. I'm fine with socialism, but only for my people, because it's because of my people that I enjoy the civilization I live in today. The men and women who fought and died to preserve this civilization. I don't want my generation to be remembered as the ones who gave it all away to unappreciative third world hordes who'll turn it into one of the endless shit holes they came from It's not about hate, it's about preserving what we have
Joseph Ward
Kek I love you mad cunts
Ryder Hall
And in doing so he introduced a large amount of error into his model. One can make the negative case and have a conclusion with the same truth value. (Black women specifically are not a drain on society)
(Unless you actually believe that all black women as a discrete category behave differently from all other human beings.)
Colton Miller
Why not become even more discrete in your categorization? Why not say black women who make less than ~$50K/yr are a drain and should be dealt with?
