PoliticalChic
Diamond Member
- Thread starter
- #41
Nothing you wrote even addresses my points that you quoted.
you don't actually engage in debate. You simply regurgitate illogical claims. All you are doing is repeating guilt by association reasoning that is probably even unfounded.
"Nothing you wrote even addresses my points that you quoted."
Yeah, it does.
I love when you losers post 'is not, is not....."
"It is uninteresting to debate you because...."
I was gonna say because I beat your brains out....
But that would suppose you have same.
I can provide more.....just let me know if you require another spanking.
I'm going to make one more honest attempt to get through to you and maybe the lightbulb will go off in your brain. I will again use a simple analogy that even you should be able to understand.
According to your logic, Karl Marx likes bread and butter, therefore bread and butter is Marxist.
So I when I ask you to explain why Karl Marx liking bread and butter makes bread and butter Marxist, you completely fail to explain.
Instead you call me a befuddled stupid bird brain because I don't agree with your absurd assertions.
Do you get it? Just stating your assertion without explanation will never convince anyone. You need to support your dubious connections with some kind of explanation.
" I will again use a simple analogy...."
Pleeeeezzzzzee.....we've established over and over that you are SIMPLE....so...what else could you use but something that represents your ability?
Since I've shown numerous sources which identify Gould as a Marxist....well....why the heck would you refuse to admit it?
Oh....because you're a dunce.
Another?
Sure.
"Gould along with other Marxist and socialist critics of sociobiology understood it for what it was: an attempt to justify the stratification of capitalist society along class, gender and racial lines as an inescapable consequence of biology.... It is interesting to recapitulate some aspects of his argument since they show his political commitments not only in the side he took in the debate, but also in the method he employed which is very clearly compatible with, if not derived from, Marxist methodology....
Let me emphasize that while Gould's was a lonely voice, his was not the only one. Gould was on the fringes of a movement of leftwing scientists which in the 1970s called itself "Science for Vietnam," later becoming "Science for the People." He was also part of the "Sociobiology Study Group."
Like the earlier movement of radical British scientists in the 1930s, Gould was associated with a movement which included many eminent scientists including such figures as Richard Levins, Richard Lewontin, Ruth Hubbard, Steven and Hilary Rose, and Jonathan Beckwith among others.
Gould's thought owed much to the fortuitous coming together of these socialist thinkers and scientists. Throughout his life Gould continued to participate in socialist forums, such as the annual Socialist Scholars Conference and events at the Brecht Forum (on whose board he served) including the meeting on the 150th anniversary of the Communist Manifesto." An Appreciation of Stephen Jay Gould | Solidarity
BTW....do you know anything about 'Solidarity-US'?
"In left-wing politics in the United States, Solidarity is a revolutionary socialist organization associated with the journal Against the Current. Solidarity is an organizational descendant of International Socialists, a Trotskyist organization..."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solidarity_(U.S.)
Let's review your argument:
" There are no connections whatsoever between a scientific fact and communism."
Darwin's theory is not a fact....but is the support for communism. That's what Marx and Engels said.
" You have failed to prove that there has been a single evolutionary biologist who was a marxist."
Wrong. It was proven.
" The Theory of Evolution is the fundamental basis of all biological science."
Nonsense.
The fundamental basis of biological science is that living things come from other living things, by reproduction.
And when it was revealed that Stephen J. Gould was both brought up by Marxists, and based his support of evolutionary theory on Marx....
" How does Gould admit to his Marxism by lauding the way in which his science is informed by his beliefs?
Gould was not a Marxist."
You took quite the beating on this one, huh?
"I used to subscribe to Natural History Magazine when Gould wrote monthly columns. He never once espoused any kind of political philosophy in any of his monthly science columns."
Kind of retreating here, weren't you. Good move.
I used to think that you were a gibbering idiot. Now I have a much lower opinion of you.