Via OccupyPhoenix

[madscience.livejournal.com]

Comments

[farchivist.livejournal.com]

No, I just neither like you or him. You're the constant I-am-the-ubermensch-to-you-subhumans rape apologist and he's the I-am-the-philosophical-superior-to-you-unelightened-subhumans pot hippy. The both of you range well along the bottom of my prioritization pyramid.

[farchivist.livejournal.com]

Hey, if you want to support the rape apologist, that's your business. Me, I decline.

[madscience.livejournal.com]

I am not and have never been a rape apologist. Only illiterates and philosophical dimwits believe I am.

And I do not think I am innately superior to anyone, as the words "ubermensch" and "subhuman" suggest. I am intellectually superior to around 99.5% of the human population mainly because of educational privileges I was afforded before the age of three — privileges that cost nothing and should be available to everyone. If everyone enjoyed those privileges, I would likely only be average. Most people alive today have no hope of ever being my equal, but it is my ardent wish that many of their descendants should be my superiors.

[farchivist.livejournal.com]

I am not and have never been a rape apologist. Only illiterates and philosophical dimwits believe I am.

It's a pity it isn't about what you think, but how others perceive you.

And I do not think I am innately superior to anyone

I find it amusing that you say that and then proceed to say "I am intellectually superior to around 99.5% of the human population" and "Most people alive today have no hope of ever being my equal".

If everyone enjoyed those privileges, I would likely only be average.

Yeah, I've heard that before too. From more people than I can count, both on the internet and in real life.
Fact: You sound like this LJ-famous guy. (https://encyclopediadramatica.se/Lovecrafty)

[madscience.livejournal.com]

. . . it isn't about what you think, but how others perceive you.

You think others' perception makes a person what they are? What does that make you?


I find it amusing . . .

I guess you overlooked the word "innately". Typical.

[farchivist.livejournal.com]

You think others' perception makes a person what they are?

No, I think you are the one constant in all of the variables that make up your problems. Pretty much everyone here on LJ reads what you write and claims rape apologist. (And anti-semite.) Your sole defense is that of the typical crank and MRA, the Galileo fallacy (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Galileo_fallacy). We poor plebes just can't understand your exalted pronouncements.

Sorry, you ain't no Galileo. You're no different than most of the MRAs that post in the Manosphere. You'd probably like it better on Reddit or The Spearhead or Men Going Their Own Way. Your 'genius' would be more appreciated there.

What does that make you?

Exactly what I am: an asshole. See the Denis Leary song for more details.

I guess you overlooked the word "innately". Typical.

No. I didn't. I still find it amusing. Innate or not, you still expect us proletarians to worship your immense genius. Except no.

[madscience.livejournal.com]

I don't have any problems. I am, however, the constant in my consistent success.

"Pretty much everyone here on LJ . . ."

...has the IQ of a turnip.

To quote that article, the Galileo fallacy is the notion that if you are vilified for your ideas, you must be right. That's not what I think. What I think is the converse: if you are right, you will be vilified for your ideas. Being vilified does not prove that you are right, but neither is it a reason to suspect you're not.