Why did you allow social scientists to murder the united states and all our happiness?

Why did you allow social scientists to murder the united states and all our happiness?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=wOHAdfyRUI8
youtube.com/watch?v=jyoOfRog1EM
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Wanna be more specific there, champ? You come across as some punk with an axe to grind instead of a person with an actual point.

butthurt detected

and you come across like a guy in a 50s movie

OP is either a shit tier troll or an alt-right edgelord. Either way, why even bother?

Still don't see a point, try again.

LOL GET TROLLED

because you're too stupid to see why sociology is destructive.

you r 2 mad

I want you to explain it to me. Lay it out. Make your case, I really don't have an opinion so you could conceivably convince me you are right if you are actually able to articulate an argument. Can you do that? Is that something you are actually capable of doing?

>inb4 more trolling and you continue to take the bait because you're a retard

Alright man you clearly don't have an actual argument so I'm gonna leave the thread now. See ya on the flip side, kid.

I'm not even OP you pompous dipshit

Same fag gonna same fag

Yeah, it's normative crap paraded around by leftists to exert control over society.

Sociology should be permanently banned from colleges. If it isn't, not only will the united states fall, we will have nuclear war.

Yeah because of that malicious left wing agenda which is...what again?

>no one allowed to have guns
>help criminals because they're the real victims
>destroy military
>tell women to be independent and never have families

liberals are literally suicidal

Which is real and bad

Eh...

Justifying various forms of frivolous egalitarianism.

>literally the only thing I know about liberals and their views is what right wing extremists say about liberals

They love killing babies, and they want everyone to be gay too right? Fucking delusional cunt.

For what purpose?

Because they want a more egalitarian society.

why is that bad?

And they want mass immigration from 3rd world countries.

flatly untrue

It worsens the cultural effects of capitalism.

Maybe, but they are willing to defend it when it occurs.

That would be the neoliberals, my friend.

>It worsens the cultural effects of capitalism

...what?

think outside the box for once

>It worsens the cultural effects of capitalism.
Explain what you mean by this.

And you allow them to say those things. You're the problem.

>denying the truth and blurting falsities is thinking outside the box

whew

I'm not a liberal, they're too right wing for me.

>denying the truth

hehehe

>hehehe

Get out alt right kiddie

hehehehe

hehehehehehehe

hue hue hue hue hue

...

ho ho ho ho ho

ha ha ha ha ha ha

...

Sociology proposes that all human constructs have no value because their subjective.

In a philosophical sense this is true, but in a practical one this is patently false.

That by itself is enough to condemn sociology as a science, but the professors that teach it all too often take it further and push the notion that any kind of counter culture or cultural chaos is superior to the established culture.

Especially if that culture was designed and primarily facilitated by a majority, whom are also the primary beneficiaries. ESPECIALLY white western culture.

Sociology is the SJW credo.

>Sociology proposes that all human constructs have no value because their subjective.

False. Sociology is the study of human social constructs. If an individual sociologist says they are all valueless because they are subjective then they are idiots, but that does not invalidate sociology. Sociology is a tool for understanding, not an ethical philosophy.

If Sociologist murdered your happiness, the happiness of your country was fake. A social construct of American Propaganda.

>Sociology is a tool for understanding

Yeah they're trying to understand things they don't study and put their opinions in things they have no understanding of.

Wanna be more specific?

Literally this

>False

b-b-b-but that's not what Breitbart-sama told me!

Social constructs like gender. Gender roles is fine - that's actually a cultural phenomenon, albeit one that was practiced by 99% of cultures with relative similarity.

The paradigms around gender are cultural, but not gender itself. That's biology, but sociology tries to muscle in on it.

And racism/colonization. Again, practiced by every culture with a racial standard against literally any and every race that they had power over. However, as taught in US and UK colleges, only white cultures are actually capable of racism/colonization.

The duty of sociology may be to identify and study social constructs, but the end result is never objective analysis, but rather skewed ethical judgment.

>but the end result is never objective analysis, but rather skewed ethical judgment.

Which is literally the point of critical theory in sociology. Bias is unavoidable, so wear it on your sleeve and always challenge paradigms.

Also I pretty much agree with everything you said. I find the increasing tendencies among supposed leftists to be dogmatic an authoritarian in their thinking to be disturbing, but once again this doesn't invalidate sociology.

My sociology professor wasn't a cultural Marxist, just a plain old communist. Dude fucking hates SJW shit and loves free speech more than anyone I've ever met.

Umm, I'm only 20.
Not like I had much of a say in what happened in the past few decades.

I suppose my biggest complaint about it is that the inherent bias to the study always encourages the position of "take no action."

Now, on the surface, a "live and let live" mentality sounds fine and dandy. But it's contrary to the old saying "the only thing required for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing."

But that could be balanced out with Ethics or Civics courses. What I don't like is that sociology always poisons minds against the current status quo. The status quo is pretty goddamn good! It could be better, but tearing it down certainly won't do anything good, and yet that's the position that sociology majors and staff often take. "This aspect of the culture kind of sucks, so we should cut it out, like a tumor, by shaming everyone that doesn't see anything wrong with it or who doesn't care about it."

Or, more succinctly, "anyone that disagrees with us is wrong and should feel bad."

That fact is you don't want to hear other opinions

I agree with you on gender, feminists are killing the left. But on race/colonialism I think you are wrong. Historically speaking the bulk of imperialism done by nations that is still relevant today was done by Europe and the United States. Japan had some shit going but then WWII happened.

On a global scale, sure, but look at the history of warfare in Africa and the Middle East. There were EXTREMELY HEAVY racial overtones in the conquering of neighboring nations, and the penalties of those who were conquered. The only widespread conquerors that didn't have much in the way of racial motivation was the Mongols.

Well, that's the difference between a bourgeois liberal and a never-seen-in-America real socialist.

Well, as you say, that's what ideology and ethics are for. Don't oppose things just because they could be better, have an idea for what a decent arrangement would look like and work to get there. Its hard to teach ideology without indoctrinating though, the only thing a professor ought to do is teach critical thinking and give people the tools to make up their own minds about what is right. That is, this is what they ought to do in their role as a teacher. Challenging people on their ideas is something we should all do and have done to us in the pursuit of truth.

But that's what's so disturbing about the modern left, they're mobilizing against free speech! Like what the fuck, that's one of the few things we got going for us that couldn't honestly get much better.

I blame the focus on identity politics and the lack of a true class politics in America, but of course I'm red so I'm biased.

Also I think that the status quo being pretty good is debatable. It depends who you are. For some the status quo is great, like rich people in the west. For some people its fucking unbearable, like poor people or people living in Palestine.

Ultimately I'd say that teaching people how to think critically and encouraging them to do so is an unambiguous good. That's the problem with SJW types, they aren't thinking critically, they're regurgitating social science as dogma instead of using it.

Yeah I agree with you there. The racialization of slavery began, by and large, during the Arab conquest of North Africa. Implicit in your point is the hypocrisy of white liberals defending the Islamic world while on the other hand decrying the evils of white western Christian nations. I find this hypocrisy to be infuriating, myself. Islam is vile and no genuine left-leaning person would defend it.

So then the problem isn't with the field of sociology itself, but the people that teach, practice, and participate in it already being a part of an authoritarian culture of shame and self-victimizing.

yall need to get ur dicks wet

That's one part of it, sure. I'd say, more broadly, this is all symptomatic of the broader encroachment of neoliberalism as the dominant force in the world today.

Identity politics are the left wing of neoliberalism. They tell us that who you are has more to do with your membership in various groups than with your traits, thoughts, decisions, etc. It reifies the very group identities as essential characteristics that sociology teaches us are contextual social constructs. It does not call for a radical restructuring of society, but merely a proportionally representative hierarchy of injustice.

So long as the elites running society are sufficiently diverse, the identity politics driven "left" is satisfied. Hence this brand of left wing politics is tolerated and allowed to flourish by our elites while a more materialist, radical, class based politics is opposed.

Neoliberalism seeks to privatize all aspects of life and erode all barriers that stand in the way of this goal, including national borders. IGO's like the EU and the immigration crises within are products of neoliberal ideology.

Once again I cite my own bias as a Marxist shading my worldview. Where some see a PC culture gone awry I see late capitalism and all of its magic tricks, like globalization and constant warfare, struggling to remain on its feet.

youtube.com/watch?v=wOHAdfyRUI8

I keep hearing about this Peterson guy, but am pretty unfamiliar with him and what he actually stands for. All I know is some of my alt-right friends really seem into him so that makes me somewhat suspicious. For me the gold-standard of free speech has always been the Hitch.
youtube.com/watch?v=jyoOfRog1EM

You blame sociology, but it's only natural that anthropology was taken to the home front as the savages invade our country.

Love Hitchens. He's a very eloquent speaker. I don't know much about his personal life, but I know that his media persona has always come off as respectable, staggeringly intelligent, and worth emulating.

Peterson is kind of an isolated notary, with a special spike in popularity because, while not as eloquent or worth emulating as HItchins, he's still obviously intelligent, and not coming from a position of bias or hate, but from a position of measuring the objective consequences of the SJW vendetta.

I believe he's popular with the alt-right because the instinctive revulsion of the SJW activism was difficult to justify. They knew that what they were doing was wrong, but we're so mired in identity and character politics that they thought it was their identities and characters they had issue with. Then this guy comes around, lays out very neatly what is going on and what they're trying to do in an objective manner, and that instinctive revulsion now has a rational outlet. An honest to goodness reason that isn't prejudice.

...

Well put.

That's the problem with the bulk of people, left or right. They're basically tribalists, they're not looking for the position that has the most evidence, they're looking for the evidence that validates their position and by extension their identity. And that's what the internet has enabled them to do, and so they've built echo chambers to hide in while the people with the actual power screw them over and loot the world outside their ideological safe spaces.

I really don't think things are going to improve. I hate to take the accelerationist position, but at this point I earnestly believe the only way forward is after some creative destruction clears the field a bit.

acting like a sassy little girl aint gonna get you anywhere here, dirty cunt lol. It doesn't make Sociology any less retarded, especially with the PC nonsense.

But you claim that sociology is bullshit without explaining why. Don't act like its on me to prove you wrong when you haven't actually made an argument to prove wrong.

It does seem ultimately kind of pointless. Anthropology and the study of different cultures seems like a better path than studying social constructs. Sociology tumbles down the rabbit hole of epistemology, which has always been my least favorite branch of philosophy.

Like linguistics. It's interesting to note the origins of certain words or dialects or written languages, but the sociological parallel would be arguing about the words themselves. "Why is blue a word? Because we decided that the sound 'bloo' was an appropriate identifier of a particular wavelength of light, regardless of the language roots or the culture that the word came from."

Sociology might be important for identifying the self, and the particular cultural oddities that you've always overlooked because they're normal for you, but anthropology and a little critical thinking can accomplish the same.

It's probably important to be more specific. Social science is a pretty broad topic. I agree that the social sciences are biased and can be some of the most useless degrees available to students. No one should go into debt to take classes that don't teach them employable skills.

Most of the social science fields are important and useful. Sociology and its derivatives that focus on social groups (women's studies, gender studies, black studies) are leftist pseudoscience. They are based on broad generalizations.

...