Here is Satyr’s latest defense of objectivism embedded in genes [natural behaviors] as opposed to subjectivism embedded in memes [social behaviors]
This guy goes on and on up in the clouds of intellectual abstraction coming down to earth only in regard to trees and trunks and branches and apples. Then delving into particularly dense, abstruse reflections on “psychobabble”. Then equally obscure references to religion.
He starts out by saying that…
“Relativism reduces every element of absoluteness to relativity while making a completely illogical exception in favor of this reduction itself. Fundamentally it consists in propounding the claim that there is no truth as if this were truth or in declaring it to be absolutely true that there is nothing but the relatively true; one might just as well say that there is no language or write that there is no writing. In short, every idea is reduced to a relativity of some sort, whether psychological, historical, or social; but the assertion nullifies itself by the fact that it too presents itself as a psychological, historical, or social relativity. The assertion nullifies itself if it is true and by nullifying itself logically proves thereby that it is false; its initial absurdity lies in the implicit claim to be unique in escaping, as if by enchantment, from a relativity that is declared to be the only possibility.”
Well, not my own relativism. The laws of matter, mathematics, the empirical world, the rules of language. My own nihilism would never suggest that knowledge communicated in regard to them…in regard to material and human interactions in the either/or world…is relative to the subjective interpretation of the individual.
Then preposterous assumptions like this:
“In the existentialist universe there is no room for objective and unwavering intellection.”
Huh? Do the laws of matter, mathematics etc., not apply to existentialists? To nihilists?
And the irony is that minds of Satyr’s ilk are ever and always intent on insisting that only their own arrogant “intellections” regarding race and ethnicity and gender and sexual orientation and every other example of a “conflicting good” counts as “natural” behavior.