this post was submitted on 26 Feb 2026
44 points (100.0% liked)

Slop.

805 readers
519 users here now

For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.

Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.

Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.

Rule 3: No sectarianism.

Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome

Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.

Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.

Rule 7: Do not individually target federated instances' admins or moderators.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

I read it more as “I reject your theory”. A lot of times I feel the communist side push theory in a cult like propaganda manner to silence other opinions and ignoring the human element. Not to say theory doesn’t have its place, but it shouldn’t be revered as a religion. I don’t mind communist memes, not a fan of ML/authleft memes though. But I’ve had leftymemes blocked since they lied about their rules, so I don’t know how bad it’s gotten.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Dort_Owl@hexbear.net 26 points 1 day ago (1 children)

What do people think science is? No really?

It's just the study of the observable natural world.

So what do they mean 'human element'?! Are humans not a part of the natural world?

Who am I kidding, this is all vibes and no thought.

[–] Philosoraptor@hexbear.net 14 points 1 day ago (1 children)

To the extent that most people have a philosophy of science, it's just pure Baconian early Western enlightenment tripe, which is predicated on a strong division between experimenter and experiment, or between human and natural world. It's a foundational myth of western civilization.

[–] Dort_Owl@hexbear.net 10 points 1 day ago (2 children)

It's so strange to me that people can see themselves as separate from the natural world.

But maybe that's just because my definition of the natural world is just "whatever exists in nature" and my definition of nature is "The universe".

Like everything is just fundamental particles arranged I'm different ways. So we're all the same shit experiencing life from different angles, right? Or is that reductive?

But also I might just be weird and sleepy. Lol.

[–] zedcell@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 23 hours ago

Basically the core ideas of Monism. Spinoza big basis for this line of philosophical thought.

[–] purpleworm@hexbear.net 9 points 1 day ago

So we're all the same shit experiencing life from different angles, right? Or is that reductive?

I think "the same shit in different configurations" might be a little more accurate, at least when speaking of us compared to other massive bodies like plants or rocks or clouds, but that's probably what you were saying anyway.