• 0 Posts
  • 136 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: September 28th, 2023

help-circle





  • Funkytom467@lemmy.worldtoMemes@lemmy.mlRemade for clarity
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    23 days ago

    Labour theory of value puts value on goods for the sole purpose of trading and explaining trades. Both LTV and STV does.

    Marx’s use of LVT is to criticize how Capitalism leads to exploitation. But although the specifics differ SVT could still be used to raise the same critiques.


  • Its usefulness never made me disappointed despite this drawback.

    I’m a physicist at heart, which might explains it… To me the use in philosophy is just as important, especially in philosophy of science and metaphysics.

    Simply put I couldn’t imagine studying how reality works without ever wandering what it is and how to best study it.


  • Funkytom467@lemmy.worldtoMemes@lemmy.mlRemade for clarity
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    edit-2
    23 days ago

    Dialectic can never be a science, you can’t apply the same methodology. Even when it’s material.

    However it is philosophy, and if your searching for some material reality then it’s ontology.

    Science too is a product of ontology, it’s a methodology created for this exact purpose and wich can be studied in this field.

    Saying physical properties are social abstractions sounds to me like social constructivism, which is epistemology, again philosophy.

    Social sciences can be soft science precisely when they are not dialectic and rely on the methodology of science.

    And to be clear, soft science is just a science that is based on a hard science, in which we don’t have enough work done to explain every emergent properties using fundamental properties of matter.

    Psychoanalysis is an outdated philosophical theory, so indeed just a scam now.






  • But should it be work?

    Should we really have a society where selling your body is an opportunity to make money.

    For instance, it imply that some poor women are gonna take it regardless the consequence, just because it’s the best alternative to pay the bills.

    I can barely tolerate the physical straining we put on some workers. Sex work’s consequences are unacceptable to me in that same sens, sometimes worse.

    So sure, no matter your opinion we should respect them, and not incriminate them!

    And of course not all sex work is the same… to be acceptable it just requires better conditions. It can’t be something you choose out of need.





  • I still get it, don’t mistake my comment for a lack of compassion.

    It’s especially true for teenagers that gets bullied because of things like it. (Although probably less of a problem for Karens since it’s a rather outdated name.)

    You’d be in the right to be bummed out sure.

    But as adults I don’t think you should hold as much importance to it, it’s how to avoid hurting, lightheartedness and humor is the better response.

    Someone named Karen making fun of Karens is just perfect, and the jokes for someone named motherfucker would write themselves!




  • I agree, the sooner the better.

    Sex ed is what makes children mature enough to have sex once they reach the age of doing it.

    But what’s the point of raising the age of consent?

    My point is there isn’t any if sex ed is done well, it only makes sex more taboo.

    Conversely, if you want to raise it, maybe it’s because sex ed wasn’t done properly, making teens not able to be mature enough for an activity they are gonna do anyway.

    For driving, I would agree in general we aren’t good at driving, but changing our means of transport isn’t easy, despite being the best solution. That wasn’t really the topic though…