Бред


Ответить в тред Ответить в тред

<<
Назад | Вниз | Каталог | Обновить тред | Автообновление
376 93 77

Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 17:33:16 2260363331
wear.webm (14144Кб, 960x540, 00:00:50)
960x540
Каково это осознавать, что ты нищая пидараха из бедной семьи, которая одевается в тряпки с рынка? Каково осознавать, что семнадцатилетний обсос с видеорил одет на миллион и учится в Лондоне? Жду ваших оправданий.
03/08/20 Пнд 17:34:09 2260363862
>>226036333 (OP)
>Каково это осознавать, что ты нищая пидараха из бедной семьи, которая одевается в тряпки с рынка? Каково осознавать, что семнадцатилетний обсос с видеорил одет на миллион и учится в Лондоне? Жду ваших оправданий.
Хуёво. А у меня ЮСП-С в КСГО за 60 баксов. Дальше что?
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 17:35:09 2260364423
>>226036386

Ничего. Играй дальше в свои детские игрушки.
03/08/20 Пнд 17:36:44 2260365404
>>226036442
>детские игрушки
почему же я могу выебать и обоссать тебя в детской игрушке?
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 17:36:58 2260365585
Бамп
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 17:38:00 2260366316
Бамп
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 17:39:42 2260367267
>>226036442
А у меня хата из алмазных блоков в майнкрафте, а алмазы много стоят кста.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 17:39:44 2260367278
Бамп
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 17:39:58 2260367419
>>226036333 (OP)
если ты об этом переживаешь - ты какой-то печальный биомусор. Каково осознавать, что даже такое бесполезное говно как ты имеет условия лучше, чем >90% населения планеты?
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 17:42:59 22603692510
>>226036333 (OP)
Вообще поебать. Зачем нужна реальная жизнь, когда есть видеоигры?
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 17:43:17 22603694211
>>226036333 (OP)
На сами тряпки и быт мне похуй, я могу в халате и резиновых тапках по улице ходить и иногда ходу, а жить в пустой комнате с дыркой для говна в полу. Но много деняк хочется, да. Хотя бы определенную сумму.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 17:43:43 22603696712
>>226036333 (OP)
Жаль ребят что из всех возможных жизненных интересов и ориентиров выбрали позерство
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 17:44:06 22603699113
>>226036741

Богатые люди всегда были самыми уважаемыми людьми.
Вот чувачок с видео носит подаренный крестик за семьсот тысяч. Просто крестик. За семьсот косарей. Если бы тебе подарили крестик за ТАКИЕ ДЕНЬЖИЩА, ты бы тут же продал его и либо купил Б/Ушное ведро, либо вложил в первый взнос на ипотеку в ебенях. А он? А что он?... Просто носит ссаный крестик на семьсот тысяч и радуется жизни. Перед ним не стоит выбор - то или это. Он может позволить себе всё.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 17:44:47 22603704014
>>226036333 (OP)
Да чел на видео бич какой то, даже шнурки разного цвета, лол.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 17:45:36 22603709315
>>226036967

А что их жалеть-то? С ними как раз всё окей.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 17:46:42 22603717116
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 17:46:58 22603719117
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 17:47:58 22603725718
>>226037171
Стиль одеваться как клоун?
Имя столько бабок мог бы купить шнурок похожего цвета и не позориться.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 17:49:11 22603733419
>>226036333 (OP)
>что семнадцатилетний обсос с видеорил одет на миллион

в то что сделано из одного и того же материала и по одной и той же технологии изготовления? разница лишь в бирке с брендом?
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 17:49:13 22603733520
>>226036333 (OP)
>Жду ваших оправданий.
Он смертный и каждую ночь ссыться, что его цацки могут отобрать.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 17:49:56 22603739021
>>226037257

>Имя столько бабок мог бы купить шнурок похожего цвета и не позориться.

В чём его личный позор? В том, что окружающие не могут позволить себе золотые крестики по 700 косарей? Тебе даже не к чему приебаться, по сути, кроме цвета шнурков.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 17:50:53 22603747422
>>226037390
Его крестик выглядит слишком дёшево, даже надевать бы его не стал если честно, видно хуйня какая-то из бронзы.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 17:51:15 22603749723
>>226037093
Ну как бы есть ведь занятия которые требуют денег, у них есть возможность реализовать их, тут же видно что одежда это не потому что понравилось -- купил, а именно как средство типа самовыражения
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 17:51:39 22603753724
>>226037334

>в то что сделано из одного и того же материала и по одной и той же технологии изготовления? разница лишь в бирке с брендом?

Не надо тут зачитывать нищуцкие мантры, здесь не центр аутотренинга. Знающие люди всегда отличат ноунейм-футболку с рынка от поло Lacoste, а кроссовки из Ашана - от Nike.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 17:53:17 22603764725
>>226037334
>>226037537

Очень большая разница в качестве ткани, кручения нити, количестве и происхождении натуральных материалов, эргономичности.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 17:53:34 22603767226
Главное богатство любого русского это Путин, а не ваше тряпье пидорское. Так что я богаче любого пидорка
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 17:55:31 22603781627
>>226037474

По-человечески могу тебя понять. То, что ты пишешь, это просто защитная реакция психики. Ты не можешь принять тот факт, что кругом одни "богачи" (по факту - средний класс, но в Копроссии это никого не ебёт), и придумываешь себе мантры про то, что у них всё поддельное/взято в кредит/получено в наследство и т.д.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 17:55:42 22603782728
>>226036333 (OP)
А еще говорят, что в пидорахи нищие.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 17:56:33 22603789429
>>226036333 (OP)
Ну кто виноват, что у кого-то мамашка выскочила за обеспеченого турка, а у большинства родители нищуки, которые еще и нахуя то завели детей, а то несколько?

Мне вот 27, живу в дс2, зп 50к. С учетом съема жилья (комнаты, а не квартиры), остается порядка 30к. Вся жизнь строится по принципу, а где подешевле, где сэкономить и тд. Даже когда идешь в бар с корешами, смотришь какое пиво подешевле и какое блюдо больше по весу и меньше по цене. Заебало пиздец как.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 17:56:42 22603790430
>>226037390
>В том, что окружающие не могут позволить себе золотые крестики по 700 косарей?
Я не крещёный, нахуй мне его напяливать?
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 17:57:03 22603792631
>>226037497

>тут же видно что одежда это не потому что понравилось -- купил

Ты не можешь поверить в то, что кто-то не роется в куче одежды с торчащими нитками на распродажах, а просто берёт и, не глядя на ценик, покупает понравившуюся вещь, которую увидел издалека в витрине?
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 17:57:31 22603796032
>>226037816
Ну так если реально поддельное, я в ашане такие же гвономесы видел, только там шнурки одного цвета были, а значит оригинал.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 17:57:34 22603796333
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 17:57:36 22603796634
>>226037647
ну ни как не поверю что кросы за 10к будут уступать в прочности кросам за 500к

не может такая разница в цене, давать большое преимущество в эргономике и материале.

я могу лишь понять когда вещи шьют на заказ и там в первую очередь платишь за труд портного а не за вещь.

Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 17:58:43 22603803035
>>226036333 (OP)
Только вот делать он ничего не может, даже шнурки завязать.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 17:58:46 22603803336
ну и похуй че, ебашу грузчиком и не радуюсь жизни.
зебенно.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 17:59:21 22603805837
>>226036333 (OP)
Бываю иногда в тусовке ричей, сам собственно по их меркам бичара, по вашим меркам герцог, хех. Те за меня всегда платят в клубах, даже по приколу бывает одежду покупают типа мол вон оденься как человек едем туда-то. В целом прикольно.
Ну а что сказать то, это другой мир, ребятки, просто банально не понять, а зависть все равно ничего хорошего не сделает, а только будет пилить вас изнутри, так что лучше в нейтралитете воспринимайте, ибо каждому свое.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 17:59:34 22603806638
>>226037963
Кольцо было и цепочка подаренные, снял в 14, не понял, нахуй его носить. Часы постепенно тоже перестал, один хуй время в телефоне.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:00:24 22603810639
55c0b2375ce5f7c[...].jpg (12Кб, 334x215)
334x215
>>226038030

>Только вот делать он ничего не может, даже шнурки завязать.

Блядь, это СТИЛЬ. Какие же двачеры дегенераты, пиздец просто...
03/08/20 Пнд 18:01:12 22603814740
>>226036333 (OP)
Ну я учусь в Лондоне. Одет косарей на десять рублей. А на видео - видимо, отброс из тусовочки таких же.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:01:19 22603815541
EeS10jbU0AEEl5Y.jfif (152Кб, 1080x1080)
1080x1080
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:02:10 22603821842
>>226038058

>Те за меня всегда платят в клубах, даже по приколу бывает одежду покупают типа мол вон оденься как человек едем туда-то. В целом прикольно.

Прикольно быть придворным шутом? Ты ведь понимаешь, как к тебе относятся на самом деле и что о тебе говорят за спиной?
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:02:11 22603822043
Пиздец, как же я сука завидую таким челам, у них и со здоровьем всё в порядке на 100% уверен, а я сижу сука асматик ёбаный без денег как же заебало сука
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:03:04 22603827344
>>226036333 (OP)
Мне всегда было интересно кто ведется на всю эту хуиту?
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:03:56 22603832345
>>226038273
Ну ОП этого треда повёлся, например.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:03:59 22603832546
>>226037966

>ну ни как не поверю что кросы за 10к будут уступать в прочности кросам за 500к

Будут. Признай это. Там другие материалы, даже другой, не массмаркет, подход к производству. Много ручной работы.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:04:40 22603836947
QuasiPokerFace.png (209Кб, 800x675)
800x675
>>226038273

>Мне всегда было интересно кто ведется на всю эту хуиту?

>>226038323

>Ну ОП этого треда повёлся, например.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:04:41 22603837048
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:04:56 22603838749
15964574935960.png (224Кб, 500x500)
500x500
>>226038155
Да забей, этот чел готов и прикид бомжа надеть, если ему его втюхать баксов так за 50 тыщ.
03/08/20 Пнд 18:05:01 22603839550
>>226036333 (OP)
Сколько ещё раз ты это здесь будешь постить, петух закомплексованный?
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:05:08 22603840351
QuasiPokerFace.png (209Кб, 800x675)
800x675
>>226038370

>Каких оправданий? Мне похуй. Я счастлив и в своем микро-зажопинске.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:05:17 22603841352
Вообще похуй. Владение вещами меня никогда счастливым не делало.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:05:27 22603842653
>>226038218
Относятся нормально, ничего оскорбительного никогда не было, что там кто за спиной говорит мне абсолютно плевать, они мне сами звонят и приглашают потусить, никогда ничего негативного не было. Шуты там есть отдельные личности если что, а мне главное что по кайфу жить, остальное абсолютно неважно. Но ты же наверное очень гордый парень на районе, что за каждое слово и "не такой взгляд" будет агрессивно себя вести, да?
Мы на расслабоне, жизнь доставляет, это главное, все твои заморочки с эго и прочими серъезностями ничего абсолютно не значат, это другое мышление, анон, ты не поймешь.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:06:40 22603851654
>>226038413

Ещё про богатый внутренний мир пиздани.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:07:07 22603854355
15642048702280.png (823Кб, 600x727)
600x727
>>226036442
>Ничего. Играй дальше в свои детские игрушки.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:07:34 22603857156
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:07:35 22603857357
>>226036333 (OP)
>одет на миллион
Он одет на 150к. Что конечно тоже дохуя, но все же
Остальное - это ебаные цацки. "Показать, шо я могу" по сути бесполезная хуита.
Диагноз - додик.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:09:04 22603865658
>>226038403
>Дай спроецирую глядишь прокатит
Братишка, со временем ты поймешь, что ты это не то как тебя видят другие стараешь как петух нарядиться, ты - внутри. И счастье - внутри. Его просто нужно увидеть.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:09:18 22603867459
>>226038573

Одежда - это не только то, что покрывает и согревает тело, но и весь образ в целом. Его образ - вот такой вот, с роскошным крестиком.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:09:21 22603867860
image.png (552Кб, 827x465)
827x465
image.png (473Кб, 800x529)
800x529
image.png (1331Кб, 1180x730)
1180x730
image.png (609Кб, 750x530)
750x530
Почему реально богатые люди одеваются по простому и без понтов?
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:09:51 22603870761
>>226038573

>"Показать, шо я могу" по сути бесполезная хуита.

Но тебе-то показать нечего, верно?
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:10:30 22603874562
Screenshot2020-[...].jpg (538Кб, 1080x2340)
1080x2340
Screenshot2020-[...].jpg (650Кб, 1080x2340)
1080x2340
Мечтаю об этих плавательных шортах. Как считаете я буду крутым в них?
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:10:44 22603876263
unnamed (1).jpg (75Кб, 512x406)
512x406
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:10:45 22603876364
>>226036333 (OP)
вообще похуй, я могу переебать ему так, что ему любой шмот не поможет
мимо бокс 10 лет
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:11:13 22603878865
>>226038678
Еще неизвестно что на них за одежда.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:11:25 22603880066
Цыганская хуета
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:11:29 22603880567
>>226036333 (OP)
Я нищий и горжусь этим, потому что всё время я вложил в реальное дело с которым ни один богатый не справится. И если богатый и обратит внимание на плоды труда, то я топовый персонаж.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:11:38 22603881768
>>226036991
и что? в иерархии богатых он просто пустое место. всегда есть кто-то богаче. чего ты давишься-то? стань богатым, учись хорошо на денежную специальность и свали в омерику. или это трудно, превозмогать?
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:11:46 22603882469
>>226038678

>Почему реально богатые люди одеваются по простому и без понтов?

Э, нет, вот тут не пизди. У них очень дорогие ткани, пошив по спецзаказу. Для тебя это одежда из параллельного мира. Например:

Серая футболка Марка Цукерберга стоит сотни долларов

Практически на всех фотографиях Марк в одинаковых серых футболках. Исключения составляют только прохладные дни, когда поверх футболки Цукерберг накидывает теплую куртку, и официальные приемы, куда Марк надевает костюм и белую рубашку.

Любимая футболка Марка проста только на первый взгляд. На самом деле, это брендовое изделие стоимостью от $300 до $400. Ее изготавливают по специальному заказу на фабриках итальянского бренда Brunello Cucinelli. Для изготовления такой футболки используется мерсеризованный хлопок, от которого изделие становится плотнее на 20%.

Во время московской пресс-конференции в 2012 году Цукерберг признался, что в действительности у него двадцать одинаковых футболок, а остальное место в гардеробе занято вещами его жены. Марк утверждает, что слишком занят, и такой подход к одежде позволяет ему не думать о том, во что одеться с утра.

Кстати, у Уоррена Баффета тот же подход к выбору одежду. У него есть шкаф с одинаковыми футболками, галстуками, брюками и костюмами. Сам Баффет утверждает, что такой подход прекрасно помогает экономить время.

Для любителей стиля Марка Цукерберга есть и прекрасная новость. Итальянский бренд Vresh Clothing разработал коллекцию копий футболок Марка с благотворительной целью. Стоимость такой футболки около 40 евро или 46 долларов. Все доходы идут в благотворительную компанию Chan Zuckerberg Initiative.


https://woman.forumdaily.com/futbolka-kak-u-marka-cukerberga-teper-dostupna-za-46/
03/08/20 Пнд 18:11:49 22603883070
015.png (54Кб, 434x327)
434x327
НИЩУКИ СУКА ДЕГЕНЕРАТЫ ЭТО ЖЕ СТИЛЬ КАК ВЫ НЕ ПОНИМАЕТЕ НИЩУКИ ОБОРВАЦНЫ ВАМ НИКОГДА ТАК НЕ ОДЕВАТЬСЯ НИЩУКИ ОНИ НЕ ЦЫГАНЕ ОНИ НА СТИЛЕ ВЫ ПРОСТО ЗАВИДУЕТЕ ЕСЛИ ВЫ МЕНЯ ОПУСТИТЕ ТО Я ВАС ПРОЦИТИРУЮ С КАРТИНКОЙ МАМА НЕСИ ВЕДРО Я ОБОСРАЛСЯ НИЩУКИ
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:12:04 22603884671
>>226036333 (OP)
Но я богатая пидораха, добившаяся всего сама.
Одеваюсь заебись, в удобную одежду.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:13:14 22603892272
>>226038805

Что за дело? Что за плоды труда?
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:13:42 22603894373
>>226036333 (OP)
Мне похуй
Повседневный лук максимум в 3к выходит
Не вижу тратить дохуя денег на одёжку
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:14:17 22603897874
QuasiPokerFace.png (209Кб, 800x675)
800x675
>>226038943

>Мне похуй
>Повседневный лук максимум в 3к выходит
>Не вижу тратить дохуя денег на одёжку
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:14:55 22603901675
image.png (623Кб, 467x600)
467x600
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:15:28 22603904776
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:16:09 22603908877
>>226036333 (OP)
Заебали, сколько можно эту хуйню обсуждать? Просто кидайте больше фриков.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:16:24 22603910078
image.png (437Кб, 491x368)
491x368
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:16:28 22603910979
>>226038674
> весь образ в целом
>образ
Об то и речь, все хотят казаться, а не быть.

>>226038707
Что ты имеешь ввиду? Достаток? Не переживай, с этим все в порядке. Шмотки как на пиздюке могу себе позволить. Только зачем? Чтобы ТЕБЯ впечатлить? Глупость
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:17:12 22603914880
>>226038678
потому что они мыслят другими категориями. в омериканской книге по социологии есть пара страниц на эту тему, лол, как вещи с визуально заметными брендовыми именами котируются в прослойке чуть выше дна, потом идут брендовые вещи которые выглядят скромно и т.д. На вершине там люди, которые сами являются брендом и им похуй на вещи
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:17:14 22603915381
>>226036333 (OP)
Завидую пиздец. Но нихуя не поделать. Такова жизнь
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:17:22 22603915682
Стикер (127Кб, 320x320)
320x320
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:17:25 22603916383
>>226036726
Если ты построил себе хату в креативе, то это ещё ничего не значит
03/08/20 Пнд 18:17:36 22603916984
Каково это быть убогой чмонькой которой не похуй кто там что носит и которая пытается проецировать свой баттхёрт на других?
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:17:49 22603918685
>>226038824
Сравнения некорректны, чухан спидоран, батька которого напиздил денег не имеет отношения к богатым людям.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:18:09 22603920286
>>226038922
Товарищ вам вилкой в глаз прописано. В жопу раз впринципе никогда не поздно.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:18:14 22603920687
>>226036333 (OP)
>одет на миллион
Это же сколько проституток можно снять...
мимо сексуально-голодный девственник
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:18:46 22603923688
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:19:02 22603925589
349384299f0a833[...].jpg (89Кб, 1068x756)
1068x756
>>226039163
Кому то повезло родится в богатой семье, а кто то врубает креатив
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:19:41 22603928690
>>226038978
Хочешь сказать это дохуя по сравнению с долбаёбами на подобных "шоу"?
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:20:06 22603930991
>>226036333 (OP)
Но вообще говоря для ЦУМа и топ брендов миллион это мало. Не троллю. Знаю чувака у которого тупо куртка столько стоит и он не выебывается.

Что за чурка-нищеброд на видео?
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:20:28 22603933292
>>226039206
100. Проститутка в Москве стоит в среднем 10к.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:20:39 22603934093
>>226039109

>Об то и речь, все хотят казаться, а не быть.

Очнись, они не кажутся богатыми, а таковыми и являются. Пиздец какие отрицания нищука.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:20:52 22603935094
>>226039309
И то из них 700 тыс это крестик бля.

Уноси свое говно, ОП.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:21:21 22603937395
>>226039286

Хочу сказать, что твой высер - зависть, которую ты прячешь за покерфейсом.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:21:28 22603938196
>>226039332
Это элитные, так-то можно норм тян и за 5к найти.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:22:44 22603943497
>>226039309
>Знаю чувака у которого тупо куртка столько стоит и он
Сергей Симонов?
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:22:54 22603944698
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:23:34 22603948999
>>226039340
Нет, почему одет на миллион, из них 700 тыс это крестик?

Где одежда то??? На 200 тысяч что-ли?
Это же позор, я серьезно.
Как его пустили на эту передачу?
Видео не особо смотрел, но ШОРТЫ ЗА 2100 РУБЛЕЙ, ещё и помнить их цену это пиздец позор какой то.

Уноси свое говно.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:25:03 226039565100
АЛЕ, У ЧУВАКА НА ВИДЕО ШОРТЫ ЗА 2100 РУБЛЕЙ И ОН ПОМНИТ ИХ ЦЕНУ.
У МЕНЯ В ТРИ РАЗА ДОРОЖЕ, ЛОЛ.

УБИРАЙ НАСЛЕДНИКА ШАУРМЯЧНОЙ, ОП, НЕ ПОЗОРЬСЯ
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:25:10 226039573101
>>226039489
>ШОРТЫ ЗА 2100 РУБЛЕЙ,
+++
Я и то хочу дороже шорты плавательные себе купить. >>226038745

Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:25:52 226039619102
>>226039489

Как ты умело меняешь акценты. Шортики за две тысячи тебя волнуют, а на кроссовочки за восемьдесят ты внимания уже не обращаешь - неудобно.
03/08/20 Пнд 18:26:09 226039639103
>>226039236
>пидор ОП дальше ударяется в маняпроекции
Понятно.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:27:45 226039719104
>>226039565
У меня один носок столько не стоит, сколько стоят его шорты.
ОП УНОСИ СВОЕ ГОВНО.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:28:27 226039745105
>>226039619
Он ещё и ЦЕНУ НОСОК ПОМНИТ

ОЙ НИЩЕБРОД
ОЙ НИЩЕБРОД
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:29:15 226039792106
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:29:42 226039808107
>>226039745
Он должен был выучить цену.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:29:47 226039812108
>>226039619
Блядь, да у меня куча пидорах знакомых покупала лимитки изи бустов за 80-90тыр.
Все они нищие долбаебы.
Я из Москвы, ау, ты меня впечатлить этим хочешь?
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:30:23 226039843109
>>226036333 (OP)
Я просто не смотрю на других и не сравниваю себя с ними. Нет зависти, когда ты живешь только для себя. Выебываться перед кем-то у меня нет желания. Всегда будет кто-то лучше или хуже меня, но зачем себе голову этим забивать.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:30:57 226039877110
QuasiPokerFace.png (209Кб, 800x675)
800x675
>>226039843

>Я просто не смотрю на других и не сравниваю себя с ними. Нет зависти, когда ты живешь только для себя. Выебываться перед кем-то у меня нет желания. Всегда будет кто-то лучше или хуже меня, но зачем себе голову этим забивать.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:31:29 226039902111
>>226036333 (OP)
>Каково это осознавать, что ты нищая пидараха из бедной семьи, которая одевается в тряпки с рынка? Каково осознавать, что семнадцатилетний обсос с видеорил одет на миллион и учится в Лондоне? Жду ваших оправданий.

Я первее него носил разного цвета шнурки.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:31:37 226039917112
>>226039843

Дорогие вещи во все времена были маркером социального статуса и того, что их обладатель чего-то добился в этой жизни.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:31:45 226039925113
.png (339Кб, 559x859)
559x859
>>226036333 (OP)
>Каково это осознавать, что ты нищая пидараха из бедной семьи, которая одевается в тряпки с рынка
мне норм
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:32:31 226039961114
>>226039917
Ещё раз. ЧЕГО ДОБИЛСЯ ЧУРКА С ВИДЕО В ШТАНАХ ЗА 2100 РУБЛЕЙ?

?
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:33:13 226040001115
>>226036333 (OP)
Ты блять реально веришь что все его тряпки столько стоят, ставлю жопу что это абибас с ближайшего рынка, и учится он в московском техникуме сервиса и питания на повориху. Дискасс.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:33:41 226040020116
>>226039917
И в догонку вопрос.

Крестик за 700тыс, но штаны за 2100 и точное знание цены носков это не нищебродство, как ты думаешь?
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:33:48 226040023117
>>226039961

Кроссовки за восемьдесят, сумка за двести сорок.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:34:17 226040049118
>>226039961

Родился от ебли наташки и турка
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:34:27 226040059119
>>226039961
ОП, отвечай на вопрос.

Чего добился чуркобес в штанах за 2100 по твоему мнению?
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:34:28 226040061120
Рома ЦУМ.png (430Кб, 810x714)
810x714
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:34:36 226040072121
>>226037926
могу, но это не тот случай, это мое мнение
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:34:45 226040083122
>>226040023

так так ага, а достижения какие кроме шмоток ? Ну личные
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:34:51 226040088123
>>226036333 (OP)
Осознаю, что он из семьи воров, дети коррупции, и школа высшего обмана Лондона, это позор его фамильной линии дереволазов которые обосрались при виде первого коммуниста, и срыли в свой лондон, по русски они хуйло неместное, которое пьёт пиво из члена негров бразилии на матче против уругвая.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:35:07 226040106124
>>226036333 (OP)
Мне похуй, я не нпс промытый маркетологами
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:35:14 226040109125
>>226040023
Как с этим сочетаются штаны за 2100?

Или это список достижений?

Отвечай на вопрос.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:35:29 226040130126
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:36:08 226040176127
ПОЧЕМУ У ЧУРКИ С ВИДЕО ШТАНЫ ЗА 2100 И ОН ПОМНИТ ЦЕНУ НОСКОВ???
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:36:09 226040177128
>>226039917
И? Почему мне должно быть не похуй? Я сознательно вывел себя из социума, чтобы не заниматься подобной хуйней. "Добиться чего-то в жизни" что это вообще значит? Нахуя мне чего-то добиваться? Зачем? Мне и без этого хорошо. Сами играйте в свои социальные игры, а меня в покое оставьте.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:36:35 226040205129
>>226040176

Очень интересная у него жизнь
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:36:46 226040217130
>>226040020

Ты не можешь понять одну истину: богатые не охотятся целенаправленно только за дорогими вещами. Они просто берут понравившиеся им вещи. Какие-то из них стоят дорого, какие-то, иногда, - копейки. Это удел нищуков - отбирать вещи не по признаку качества, а по признаку цену. Да, на нём дешёвые шорты, но кто знает, сколько миллионов может стоить весь его гардероб, который находится в доме(-ах)?
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:37:05 226040240131
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:37:33 226040257132
hqdefault.jpg (12Кб, 200x339)
200x339
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:37:43 226040269133
QuasiSmilingFace.png (127Кб, 601x508)
601x508
>>226040088

>Осознаю, что он из семьи воров, дети коррупции, и школа высшего обмана Лондона, это позор его фамильной линии дереволазов которые обосрались при виде первого коммуниста, и срыли в свой лондон, по русски они хуйло неместное, которое пьёт пиво из члена негров бразилии на матче против уругвая.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:37:50 226040275134
>>226040130

Анус рабочий, так и запишем
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:37:51 226040278135
>>226036967
Можно подумать, среди нищуков мало позеров.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:39:06 226040290136
>>226040217
ОЙ, ДА ОН ЖЕ МАНЕВРИРУЕТ.


Какие ДОМА у сына шаурмечника в позорных шортах за 2100???

Ты представляешь Диму Билана в шортах за 2100?

Я нет.

Уноси своего гастарбайтера, обосравшийся.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:39:36 226040319137
>>226040177

>Я сознательно вывел себя из социума, чтобы не заниматься подобной хуйней.

Напиши честно: больно смотреть на цены хороших вещей.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:39:53 226040342138
>>226039877
Завистливый долбоеб, плиз.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:40:36 226040382139
eso1439a.jpg (14011Кб, 4000x3865)
4000x3865
>>226036333 (OP)
Каково это осознавать, что мы живем на малюсеньком камушке или даже скорее ничтожной пылинке где-то в неизведанных бескрайних просторах Вселенной или непонятно вообще чего. И даже не просто существуем на какой-то маленькой территории в пространстве - но еще и во времени: вся наша жизнь, все наши проблемы, как и вообще вся наша цивилизация - это так просто маленький "бульк" в безумном вареве вселенской энтропии.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:41:10 226040422140
>>226040319
Тебе что ли? Я же не потреблядок, мне похуй что и сколько стоит.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:41:40 226040448141
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:42:08 226040467142
>>226040269
Почти...
Это то что осознаю.
А вот спросил бы как я сам к этому отношусь, я ответил бы иначе.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:42:28 226040488143
Свинья2020 - Ал[...].png (223Кб, 347x347)
347x347
>>226040382

>Каково это осознавать, что мы живем на малюсеньком камушке или даже скорее ничтожной пылинке где-то в неизведанных бескрайних просторах Вселенной или непонятно вообще чего. И даже не просто существуем на какой-то маленькой территории в пространстве - но еще и во времени: вся наша жизнь, все наши проблемы, как и вообще вся наша цивилизация - это так просто маленький "бульк" в безумном вареве вселенской энтропии.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:42:55 226040516144
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:43:36 226040550145
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:44:23 226040595146
>>226040278
я никоим образом не превышал нищуков, при чем тут это сравнение, ты глупый
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:45:30 226040663147
>>226040448
Ещё раз.
Как сочетаются шорты за 2100 и ботинки за 80 тыр?
Ты можешь представить богатого человека, одетого так?
Я нет.
По крайней мере богатого человека, следящего за модой.

Отвечать будешь на вопрос?
Какие конкретно личные достижения у человека, который помнит цену носков и в штанах за 2100 мне необходимо подразумевать?
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:46:50 226040741148
ОП, уноси нищеброда с видео или давай другое.
Тут ты немного подобрался.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:47:43 226040793149
>>226040663
У них на Украине штаны за 2100 это дорого.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:49:35 226040900150
>>226040663

Он просто покупает, что ему нравится, без оглядки на цену. Вчера купил кроссовочки за 80, сегодня - шортики за 2, завтра купит бейсболку за 100. Просто беззаботная жизнь. Ему, кстати, как раз больше похуй на бренды и цены, чем тебе, нищенке с Двачей.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:49:58 226040922151
>>226040550
Я бегал бы колометров 500 каждый день и думал бы как мне пробежать ещё 500, лишь бы не говорить что я о нём думаю... как то так... :)
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:50:20 226040946152
>>226040793
Ещё предполагаю, что ОП пидоран продавец с ПРИБЫЛЬЮ 25 тысяч рублей в месяц. Простые ботинки за тысячу долларов и штаны за 40 баксов его шокируют.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:51:20 226041012153
>>226040900
Почему он помнит ЦЕНЫ?
Понимаешь, у меня даже зарплата не ахти какая, до 300к даже не дотягивает.
Но я цену носков хоть убей не вспомню.


ПОЧЕМУ ОН ПОМНИТ ЦЕНЫ?
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:51:25 226041020154
UkrainianPig.png (114Кб, 350x350)
350x350
>>226040946

>Ещё предполагаю, что ОП пидоран продавец с ПРИБЫЛЬЮ 25 тысяч рублей в месяц. Простые ботинки за тысячу долларов и штаны за 40 баксов его шокируют.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:52:01 226041063155
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:52:23 226041083156
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:52:37 226041095157
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:53:28 226041159158
>>226041095
Не клеится как то покупать что хочешь и не париться и ПОМНИТЬ ЦЕНУ НОСКОВ.

Обосрался уже, признай наконец-то.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:54:22 226041209159
>>226041095
Бля, какой же ты НИЩЕБРОД, боже. Даже не видишь логическое несоответствие.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:54:28 226041215160
>>226041159

Почему нищий ты, а обсираются другие?
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:54:34 226041222161
>>226041095
Было бы так дохуя денег у него, даже бы на ценники не смотрел.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:55:13 226041265162
>>226041222

Краем глаза всё равно видишь, что за хуйня там на этикетке нарисована.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:56:00 226041308163
15963118193941.jpg (81Кб, 602x441)
602x441
Блять! Я не понимаю! Насколько надо быть ущербным, чтобы запоминать названия шмоток?!?!
СУУУУУУУУУУУУУУУКААААААААААААААА!!!
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:56:01 226041310164
>>226036991
За 5к даже в скупке бы с трудом взяли.
03/08/20 Пнд 18:56:25 226041335165
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
03/08/20 Пнд 18:57:01 226041375166
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:58:01 226041441167
>>226041083

Ты можешь понять, что крестик, на который тебе копить три зарплаты, ему просто ПОДАРИЛИ? Просто взяли и просто подарили, как на ебало тебе харкнули? Ты понимаешь, в каком кругу вращается этот чувачок?
03/08/20 Пнд 18:58:10 226041451168
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
03/08/20 Пнд 18:58:48 226041482169
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:59:12 226041505170
1596470352839.jpg (78Кб, 500x827)
500x827
>>226036333 (OP)
Каково это осознавать что из тебя воспитали зависливой тупой потреблядью?
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:59:30 226041526171
>>226041265
Краем глаза ага.
Маневры то пошли
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:59:41 226041541172
>>226036333 (OP)
Фу бомж, позорище, в каком-то треде сифозная шлюха, учится в рашке и то дороже шмотки.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:59:54 226041555173
>>226041441
Я правильно понимаю, ты обосрался и начал вейпать?
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 18:59:58 226041558174
QuasiPokerFace.png (209Кб, 800x675)
800x675
>>226041505

>Каково это осознавать что из тебя воспитали зависливой тупой потреблядью?
03/08/20 Пнд 18:59:59 226041559175
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:00:19 226041583176
Похуй вообще.
Я понимаю там богатые могли бы не спать, не срать, не есть. Какие-то реальные профиты иметь, а не хуйню из тряпки.
03/08/20 Пнд 19:00:24 226041585177
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:00:39 226041597178
QuasiPokerFace.png (209Кб, 800x675)
800x675
>>226041541

>Фу бомж, позорище, в каком-то треде сифозная шлюха, учится в рашке и то дороже шмотки.
03/08/20 Пнд 19:00:40 226041599179
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
03/08/20 Пнд 19:01:02 226041618180
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
03/08/20 Пнд 19:01:25 226041643181
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:01:30 226041650182
QuasiPokerFace.png (209Кб, 800x675)
800x675
>>226041583

>Похуй вообще.
>Я понимаю там богатые могли бы не спать, не срать, не есть. Какие-то реальные профиты иметь, а не хуйню из тряпки.
03/08/20 Пнд 19:01:52 226041673183
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:02:03 226041686184
03/08/20 Пнд 19:02:10 226041695185
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:02:14 226041699186
03/08/20 Пнд 19:02:38 226041727187

"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:02:44 226041732188
03/08/20 Пнд 19:02:55 226041749189
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
03/08/20 Пнд 19:03:04 226041759190
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:03:26 226041780191
15964686581460.png (174Кб, 800x675)
800x675
>>226036333 (OP)
>Каково это осознавать, что ты нищая пидараха из бедной семьи, которая одевается в тряпки с рынка? Каково осознавать, что семнадцатилетний обсос с видеорил одет на миллион и учится в Лондоне? Жду ваших оправданий.
03/08/20 Пнд 19:03:30 226041786192
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:03:42 226041801193
QuasiPokerFace.png (209Кб, 800x675)
800x675
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:03:44 226041803194
>>226036333 (OP)
Зачем ты создал тред с бомжом?
Всё ты сдулся, это сажа.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:03:50 226041814195
>>226041732
У меня никак претензий нет в отличие от тебя куколда со стокгольмским синдромом.
03/08/20 Пнд 19:03:52 226041815196
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:03:57 226041818197
ОП ОБОСРАЛСЯ И НАЧАЛ ВЕЙПАТЬ, СПЕШИТЕ ВИДЕТЬ
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:04:11 226041841198
>>226036333 (OP)
А мне та че, я чужие бабки как пидораха не считаю
03/08/20 Пнд 19:04:18 226041849199
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:04:26 226041861200
QuasiPokerFace.png (209Кб, 800x675)
800x675
>>226041803

>Зачем ты создал тред с бомжом?
03/08/20 Пнд 19:04:51 226041886201
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:04:56 226041892202
Смех200Сжатие.mp4 (315Кб, 360x202, 00:00:06)
360x202
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:04:58 226041896203
>>226036333 (OP)
>Пук-мук, ну я оп, и у м-м-м-меня д-деняг много, а ты н-нищенка. А тебе п-пора? Ну ладно...
03/08/20 Пнд 19:05:09 226041907204
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:05:20 226041921205
QuasiPokerFace.png (209Кб, 800x675)
800x675
>>226041841

>А мне та че, я чужие бабки как пидораха не считаю
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:05:21 226041923206
ОП ОБОСРАЛСЯ И НАЧАЛ ВЕЙПАТЬ, СПЕШИТЕ ВИДЕТЬ
03/08/20 Пнд 19:05:38 226041939207
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
03/08/20 Пнд 19:06:08 226041977208
В этом треде все аноны нассали ОПу хую в рот, пойду в другой тред, этот всё
03/08/20 Пнд 19:06:15 226041987209
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:06:16 226041989210
Бамп
03/08/20 Пнд 19:06:46 226042022211
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:06:52 226042030212
QuasiPokerFace.png (209Кб, 800x675)
800x675
>>226041977

>В этом треде все аноны нассали ОПу хую в рот, пойду в другой тред, этот всё
03/08/20 Пнд 19:07:20 226042054213
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
03/08/20 Пнд 19:07:49 226042089214
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
03/08/20 Пнд 19:08:28 226042127215
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:08:32 226042132216
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:08:42 226042138217
QuasiPokerFace.png (209Кб, 800x675)
800x675
>>226041841

>А мне та че, я чужие бабки как пидораха не считаю
03/08/20 Пнд 19:08:54 226042147218
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
03/08/20 Пнд 19:09:20 226042174219
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:09:26 226042179220
QuasiPokerFace.png (209Кб, 800x675)
800x675
>>226042132

>Это обычные тряпки, вообще похуй
03/08/20 Пнд 19:09:48 226042198221
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:10:02 226042213222
>>226037672
Красиво сказал. Двачую.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:10:53 226042262223
03/08/20 Пнд 19:11:04 226042273224
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:11:40 226042310225
15962758918310.webm (5108Кб, 480x360, 00:01:38)
480x360
03/08/20 Пнд 19:11:45 226042315226
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:11:52 226042325227
03/08/20 Пнд 19:12:20 226042353228
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:12:26 226042355229
QuasiPokerFace.png (209Кб, 800x675)
800x675
>>226042325

>Репортим как спам, флейм. Такое и бот может высерать.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:12:36 226042371230
>>226036333 (OP)
Нихуя, это же ходячий джекпот для гопников
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:12:54 226042392231
>>226042310
Аллаху акбар , смерть неверным!
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:13:31 226042420232
>>226036333 (OP)
У кого-то есть деньги. У кого-то нет. В чём проблема?
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:13:59 226042445233
QuasiPokerFace.png (209Кб, 800x675)
800x675
>>226042371

>Нихуя, это же ходячий джекпот для гопников
03/08/20 Пнд 19:14:18 226042469234
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:14:19 226042470235
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:14:23 226042473236
QuasiPokerFace.png (209Кб, 800x675)
800x675
>>226042420

>У кого-то есть деньги. У кого-то нет. В чём проблема?
03/08/20 Пнд 19:14:50 226042502237
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:14:54 226042507238
>>226036333 (OP)
В таком плане как описано в оп-посте - похуй. В более широком плане это отдельная тема. А так, что я смертный что он смертный, так что мы обо по умолчанию попущенные и сдохнем. А если смерть неизбежна то не имеет значение как провел жизнь.
03/08/20 Пнд 19:15:26 226042541239
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:15:33 226042550240
QuasiPokerFace.png (209Кб, 800x675)
800x675
>>226042507

>В таком плане как описано в оп-посте - похуй. В более широком плане это отдельная тема. А так, что я смертный что он смертный, так что мы обо по умолчанию попущенные и сдохнем. А если смерть неизбежна то не имеет значение как провел жизнь.
03/08/20 Пнд 19:15:57 226042567241
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:16:01 226042573242
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:16:17 226042584243
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:16:22 226042595244
03/08/20 Пнд 19:16:24 226042598245
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
03/08/20 Пнд 19:16:53 226042627246
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:16:59 226042639247
QuasiPokerFace.png (209Кб, 800x675)
800x675
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:17:28 226042668248
>>226036333 (OP)
Зачем ты хочешь взорвать торговый центр, тебе так нужны эта одежда? Подумай о детях, или твои родите в полиции работают.
03/08/20 Пнд 19:18:27 226042725249
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:18:40 226042737250
>>226042595
Да и украина нищая, слава бандитам, таким как оп, разворовавшим страну.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:18:42 226042740251
Бамп
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:19:07 226042759252
>>226036333 (OP)
Скоро они попляшут, суки не патриотичные, такие вот против путина и вякают
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:19:31 226042782253
03/08/20 Пнд 19:19:55 226042799254
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:19:59 226042805255
UkrainianPig.png (114Кб, 350x350)
350x350
>>226042759
>>226042782

>Скоро они попляшут, суки не патриотичные, такие вот против путина и вякают
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:19:59 226042806256
>>226036333 (OP)
Бля, как же я ненавижу двач, раньше мне было похуй, теперь благодаря сосачу я стал закомплексованным пиздец, когда вижу богатых, уверенных, успешных или красивых пиздец зубы скрипят и агрессия какая-то внутренняя.
03/08/20 Пнд 19:20:27 226042830257
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:20:32 226042837258
RealCrying.png (285Кб, 860x714)
860x714
>>226042806

>Бля, как же я ненавижу двач, раньше мне было похуй, теперь благодаря сосачу я стал закомплексованным пиздец, когда вижу богатых, уверенных, успешных или красивых пиздец зубы скрипят и агрессия какая-то внутренняя.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:20:38 226042847259
>>226042740
Зачем ты хочешь убить себя?
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:20:41 226042850260
03/08/20 Пнд 19:21:13 226042882261
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:21:17 226042887262
03/08/20 Пнд 19:21:33 226042904263
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
03/08/20 Пнд 19:22:11 226042934264
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:22:23 226042945265
Бамп
03/08/20 Пнд 19:22:34 226042960266
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:22:43 226042974267
03/08/20 Пнд 19:22:51 226042977268
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
03/08/20 Пнд 19:23:08 226042992269
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:23:24 226043013270
QuasiPokerFace.png (209Кб, 800x675)
800x675
>>226042974

>Репортим как спам, флейм. Такое и бот может высерать.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:23:37 226043030271
03/08/20 Пнд 19:23:43 226043034272
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:23:51 226043045273
QuasiPokerFace.png (209Кб, 800x675)
800x675
>>226043030

>Репортим как спам, флейм. Такое и бот может высерать.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:23:55 226043048274
03/08/20 Пнд 19:24:09 226043062275
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:24:19 226043075276
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:24:25 226043080277
QuasiPokerFace.png (209Кб, 800x675)
800x675
>>226043048

>Репортим как спам, флейм. Такое и бот может высерать.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:24:41 226043094278
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:24:54 226043106279
>>226043075

>Репортим как спам, флейм. Такое и бот может высерать.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:24:58 226043111280
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:25:13 226043129281
QuasiSmilingFace.png (127Кб, 601x508)
601x508
>>226043094

>Репортим как спам, флейм. Такое и бот может высерать.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:25:14 226043131282
03/08/20 Пнд 19:25:22 226043140283
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:25:32 226043149284
AlcoPig.jpg (142Кб, 350x350)
350x350
>>226043111

>Репортим как спам, флейм. Такое и бот может высерать.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:25:43 226043164285
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:25:47 226043167286
>>226038678
>одеваются по простому
>кроссовки за 800 евро
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:25:50 226043172287
>>226037963
Кольца неудобные. Нахуя мне часы за 999999к если есть олдовые часы за 8к? Ничего такого что могут они часы дорогие не делают
Часам уже 12 лет если что, достались от бати.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:25:55 226043183288
Свинья2020 - Ал[...].png (223Кб, 347x347)
347x347
>>226043131

>Репортим как спам, флейм. Такое и бот может высерать.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:26:03 226043190289
03/08/20 Пнд 19:26:20 226043204290
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:26:25 226043205291
QuasiPokerFace.png (209Кб, 800x675)
800x675
>>226043172

>Кольца неудобные. Нахуя мне часы за 999999к если есть олдовые часы за 8к? Ничего такого что могут они часы дорогие не делают
>Часам уже 12 лет если что, достались от бати.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:26:55 226043238292
AlcoPig.jpg (140Кб, 350x350)
350x350
>>226043190

>Репортим как спам, флейм. Такое и бот может высерать.
03/08/20 Пнд 19:26:55 226043239293
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:26:57 226043241294
ОП хуй бот, репорт за спам.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:27:03 226043246295
>>226036333 (OP)
Одеваюсь как он, но стоит все 4к, могу выйти за мажора?
>Русский и турок
Хохол?
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:27:07 226043253296
>>226038325
Вот именно, много ручной работы=большая вероятность брака.
03/08/20 Пнд 19:27:39 226043282297
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:27:39 226043283298
ОП хуй бот, репорт за спам.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:27:43 226043291299
QuasiPokerFace.png (209Кб, 800x675)
800x675
>>226043246

>Одеваюсь как он, но стоит все 4к
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:28:15 226043318300
ОП хуй бот, репорт за спам.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:28:20 226043325301
03/08/20 Пнд 19:28:24 226043330302
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:28:38 226043343303
ОП хуй бот, репорт за спам.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:29:29 226043393304
ОП хуй бот, репорт за спам.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:30:07 226043443305
>>226038058
Ты богатый, но не можешь за себя заплатить в баре?
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:30:07 226043444306
>>226037537
Ок, чем отличаются условные кросы адидас за 10к и какие нить баленсиага за over999к долларов?
И там и там ткань одна. И там и там проклейка норм, а подошва продуманна. И нахуя кросы за дохуя нужны?
Как говорил кто то великий-
богат не тот у кого много денег, а тот кто доволен тем что имеет
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:30:08 226043446307
Свинья2020 - Ал[...].png (223Кб, 347x347)
347x347

>>226043393

>ОП хуй бот, репорт за спам.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:30:29 226043472308
image.png (380Кб, 341x606)
341x606
03/08/20 Пнд 19:30:56 226043495309
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:30:56 226043496310
>>226036333 (OP)
Даже если бы я не был нищуком, я бы всё равно одевался примерно в одно и то же, так что nothing of value is lost.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:31:08 226043506311
image.png (380Кб, 341x606)
341x606
03/08/20 Пнд 19:31:15 226043512312
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:31:37 226043532313
>>226043444

>Ок, чем отличаются условные кросы адидас за 10к и какие нить баленсиага за over999к долларов?
>И там и там ткань одна. И там и там проклейка норм, а подошва продуманна. И нахуя кросы за дохуя нужны?

Нет-нет-нет, не виляй тут жопой. Ткани абсолютно разные, подход к производству - тоже. Дорогие ботинки часто включают в себя ручную работу.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:32:03 226043560314
>>226043325
Аргументируй, лол. Что надежнее- точно выверенная автоматика и идеальный подбор материала, или корявые человеческие руки, которые 2 движений то не могут одинаковых с первого раза сделать?
03/08/20 Пнд 19:32:28 226043580315
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:32:35 226043587316
QuasiPokerFace.png (209Кб, 800x675)
800x675
>>226043444

>Как говорил кто то великий-
>богат не тот у кого много денег, а тот кто доволен тем что имеет
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:32:38 226043594317
Test
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:33:17 226043628318
>>226037335
Привет любителям саса, ага. Ну а вообще верная логика, чем больше бабла и цацок-тем страшнее что тебя ебнут за твой крестик за 700к.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:33:32 226043640319
>>226043594

Нет, тут ни свиней, ни масок не будет. Ты обосрался.
03/08/20 Пнд 19:34:59 226043718320
03/08/20 Пнд 19:35:00 226043720321
image.png (380Кб, 341x606)
341x606
03/08/20 Пнд 19:35:07 226043723322
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:36:16 226043736323
test
03/08/20 Пнд 19:36:26 226043748324
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
03/08/20 Пнд 19:36:31 226043760325
image.png (51Кб, 596x718)
596x718
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:36:33 226043768326
GayPig.jpg (103Кб, 350x350)
350x350
>>226043628

>Ну а вообще верная логика, чем больше бабла и цацок-тем страшнее что тебя ебнут за твой крестик за 700к.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:37:05 226043802327
x`hyst kt,tlm.webm (17486Кб, 1034x480, 00:02:37)
1034x480
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:37:20 226043826328
image.png (1273Кб, 1280x720)
1280x720
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:37:25 226043833329
>>226038325
Откуда ты знаешь что они чем то отличаются ? Лично на заводе был?) Что та хуета шьется китайскими детьми на станках, что и эта, разница минимальная.
03/08/20 Пнд 19:37:47 226043852330
image.png (380Кб, 341x606)
341x606
03/08/20 Пнд 19:38:02 226043864331
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:38:15 226043880332
QuasiPokerFace.png (209Кб, 800x675)
800x675
>>226043833

>Откуда ты знаешь что они чем то отличаются ? Лично на заводе был?) Что та хуета шьется китайскими детьми на станках, что и эта, разница минимальная.
03/08/20 Пнд 19:38:25 226043890333
image.png (380Кб, 341x606)
341x606
03/08/20 Пнд 19:38:56 226043923334
image.png (380Кб, 341x606)
341x606
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:39:02 226043929335
>>226043880
Ну давай, ответь мне на вопрос, мне интересно самому.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:39:30 226043962336
>>226038678
там материалы качественные, а не полиэстр 100% и шбют под размеры конкретного челика.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:39:36 226043970337
image.png (413Кб, 640x448)
640x448
image.png (370Кб, 640x448)
640x448
image.png (1094Кб, 1280x720)
1280x720
image.png (1057Кб, 1440x900)
1440x900
03/08/20 Пнд 19:39:46 226043983338
>Мам, я придумал тральный тред, использую боевые картиночки.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:40:02 226043997339
>>226043720
Осознал что в мире существует "человек" хранящий у себя на компьютере этот и подобные ему изображения и стало очень лестно на душе, продолжай в том же духе.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:40:30 226044026340
QuasiPokerFace.png (209Кб, 800x675)
800x675
>>226043929

>Ну давай, ответь мне на вопрос, мне интересно самому.
03/08/20 Пнд 19:41:37 226044091341
QuasiPokerFace.png (174Кб, 800x675)
800x675
>>226043997
>Осознал что в мире существует "человек" хранящий у себя на компьютере этот и подобные ему изображения и стало очень лестно на душе, продолжай в том же духе.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:41:41 226044095342
image.png (314Кб, 650x430)
650x430
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:42:02 226044115343
>>226043983

Но ведь это реально работает. Ещё позавчера заметил, как эта картинка с маской в подобных тредах рвёт пукера. Я и сегодня, и завтра ещё вернусь - надо только видео нарезать и в WebM сконвертировать.
03/08/20 Пнд 19:42:13 226044129344
image.png (380Кб, 341x606)
341x606
03/08/20 Пнд 19:42:42 226044151345
QuasiPokerFace.png (174Кб, 800x675)
800x675
>Но ведь это реально работает. Ещё позавчера заметил, как эта картинка с маской в подобных тредах рвёт пукера. Я и сегодня, и завтра ещё вернусь - надо только видео нарезать и в WebM сконвертировать.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:43:20 226044194346
video-13-560x372.jpg (24Кб, 560x372)
560x372
>>226044115
>Но ведь это реально работает. Ещё позавчера заметил, как эта картинка с маской в подобных тредах рвёт пукера.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:43:29 226044206347
>>226044151

Я так не играю. Постить эту картиночку - моя прерогатива.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:44:14 226044249348
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:44:52 226044284349
image.png (1011Кб, 859x1000)
859x1000
>>226044206
>Я так не играю. Постить эту картиночку - моя прерогатива.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:44:56 226044290350
image.png (463Кб, 1280x720)
1280x720
03/08/20 Пнд 19:45:16 226044307351
>>226044115
Дурачок, причем тут маска, аноны ожидают диалог, а ты тупой и трусливы, что даже не можешь опровергнуть их точку зрения, или изъявить свою.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:45:17 226044309352
03/08/20 Пнд 19:45:37 226044336353
>>226036333 (OP)
Никак. Мне плевать, чо как там у кого - меня интересует только моя жизнь и жизни близких мне людей. Остальные просто нпц для меня. Да и я как бы не маленький и в курсе, что мир очень очень несправедливый. Кому-то везёт в жизни намного больше, да.
03/08/20 Пнд 19:45:53 226044360354
QuasiPokerFace.png (174Кб, 800x675)
800x675
>>226044206
>>226044249
>Я так не играю. Постить эту картиночку - моя прерогатива.
>Куда интереснее свиней, кстати.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:46:09 226044377355
>>226044307

Я уже всё написал про кручение нити и качество ткани, но нищуки никак не могут выйти из своего манямирка и копротивляются.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:46:29 226044408356
QuasiPokerFace.png (209Кб, 800x675)
800x675
>>226044336

>Никак. Мне плевать, чо как там у кого - меня интересует только моя жизнь и жизни близких мне людей. Остальные просто нпц для меня. Да и я как бы не маленький и в курсе, что мир очень очень несправедливый. Кому-то везёт в жизни намного больше, да.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:47:22 226044456357
image.png (226Кб, 450x337)
450x337
>>226043826
Интересно, пацан одет во все черное. Он себе уважение holmes поднимает?
03/08/20 Пнд 19:47:30 226044466358
QuasiPokerFace.png (174Кб, 800x675)
800x675
>>226044377
>Я уже всё написал про кручение нити и качество ткани, но нищуки никак не могут выйти из своего манямирка и копротивляются.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:47:59 226044499359
image.png (168Кб, 480x360)
480x360
>>226044377
>Я уже всё написал про кручение нити и качество ткани, но нищуки никак не могут выйти из своего манямирка и копротивляются.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:48:22 226044528360
image.png (98Кб, 570x250)
570x250
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:48:33 226044544361
03/08/20 Пнд 19:49:05 226044572362
"Bullshit" is commonly used to describe statements made by people more concerned with the response of the audience than in truth and accuracy, such as goal-oriented statements made in the field of politics or advertising. On one prominent occasion, the word itself was part of a controversial advertisement. During the 1980 U.S. presidential campaign, the Citizens Party candidate Barry Commoner ran a radio advertisement that began with an actor exclaiming: "Bullshit! Carter, Reagan and Anderson, it's all bullshit!" NBC refused to run the advertisement because of its use of the expletive, but Commoner's campaign successfully appealed to the Federal Communications Commission to allow the advertisement to run unedited.[7]

Harry Frankfurt's concept
In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Several political commentators have seen that Frankfurt's concept of bullshit provides insights into political campaigns.[9] Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to show that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".

David Graeber's theory of bullshit work in the modern economy
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:49:07 226044578363
>>226044377
А ты не думал что это ты построил манямирок вокруг себя с этими кручеными нитями и пиздатыми тканями ?
03/08/20 Пнд 19:49:20 226044600364
QuasiPokerFace.png (174Кб, 800x675)
800x675
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:50:33 226044666365
QuasiPokerFace.png (209Кб, 800x675)
800x675
>>226044578

>А ты не думал что это ты построил манямирок вокруг себя с этими кручеными нитями и пиздатыми тканями ?
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:51:51 226044746366
image.png (248Кб, 800x675)
800x675
03/08/20 Пнд 19:51:55 226044749367
QuasiPokerFace.png (174Кб, 800x675)
800x675
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:52:55 226044820368
Свинья2020 - Ал[...].png (223Кб, 347x347)
347x347
03/08/20 Пнд 19:53:09 226044831369
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:53:40 226044873370
Ладно, пойду крутить нити, шить из них трусы и продавать опу за 100 к.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:54:29 226044928371
>>226044873

Я тоже пойду. Сейчас анончики возвращаются с работы и им просто не до моего треда. Часика через два-три вернусь.
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:55:55 226045028372
15629061896800.png (931Кб, 666x800)
666x800
15629301046470.png (329Кб, 480x581)
480x581
Как же двач любит общаться с бототредами.
03/08/20 Пнд 19:56:07 226045041373
QuasiPokerFace.png (174Кб, 800x675)
800x675
image.png (380Кб, 341x606)
341x606
Аноним 03/08/20 Пнд 19:56:39 226045083374
AlcoPig.jpg (142Кб, 350x350)
350x350
>>226045028

>Как же двач любит общаться с бототредами.
03/08/20 Пнд 19:58:30 226045202375
image.png (380Кб, 341x606)
341x606
03/08/20 Пнд 20:00:06 226045314376
oekaki.png (227Кб, 350x350)
350x350
>>226045083
>За плутина будем жить в говне.
03/08/20 Пнд 20:03:33 226045556377
oekaki.png (224Кб, 347x347)
347x347
Настройки X
Ответить в тред X
15000 [S]
Макс объем: 20Mб, макс кол-во файлов: 4
Кликни/брось файл/ctrl-v
X
Ваш шидевор X
Стикеры X
Избранное / Топ тредов