QueerCommie@lemmygrad.ml to memes@hexbear.netEnglish · 9 months agoDeterminism Wlemmygrad.mlimagemessage-square117fedilinkarrow-up1100arrow-down10cross-posted to: memes@lemmy.mlmemes@lemmygrad.ml
arrow-up1100arrow-down1imageDeterminism Wlemmygrad.mlQueerCommie@lemmygrad.ml to memes@hexbear.netEnglish · 9 months agomessage-square117fedilinkcross-posted to: memes@lemmy.mlmemes@lemmygrad.ml
minus-squareQueerCommie@lemmygrad.mlOPlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·edit-29 months ago Dialectical materialism holds that both are at work but that material conditions are dominant. Am I supposed to take “both” to not include “free will?”
minus-squareMaoo [none/use name]@hexbear.netlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4·9 months agoYou’re supposed to review your claim to see whether it’s accurate.
minus-squareQueerCommie@lemmygrad.mlOPlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·9 months agoWhat claim do you want me to review?
minus-squareMaoo [none/use name]@hexbear.netlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·9 months agoThe one I quoted
minus-squareQueerCommie@lemmygrad.mlOPlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·edit-29 months agoI stand behind my impression that “both” was intended to mean that diamat is ultimately compatiblist. A claim I disagree with, as I am not a compatiblist, yet I see no conflict between that and my dialectical materialist outlook.
minus-squareMaoo [none/use name]@hexbear.netlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·9 months agoDo you really not know what I’m challenging you on?
minus-squareQueerCommie@lemmygrad.mlOPlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·9 months agoThe question is not yet settled by simply debunking religious dogma?
minus-squareMaoo [none/use name]@hexbear.netlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·9 months agoI guess that’s a yes lol
minus-squareQueerCommie@lemmygrad.mlOPlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·9 months agoThis conversation has gone all over the place, I don’t know what point you were originally trying to make.
Am I supposed to take “both” to not include “free will?”
You’re supposed to review your claim to see whether it’s accurate.
What claim do you want me to review?
The one I quoted
I stand behind my impression that “both” was intended to mean that diamat is ultimately compatiblist. A claim I disagree with, as I am not a compatiblist, yet I see no conflict between that and my dialectical materialist outlook.
Do you really not know what I’m challenging you on?
The question is not yet settled by simply debunking religious dogma?
I guess that’s a yes lol
This conversation has gone all over the place, I don’t know what point you were originally trying to make.