Interesting.

    • a_blanqui_slate [none/use name, any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Looks, I’ve integrated far, far too many dynamical systems on Cartesian meshes to take you seriously there. Classical mechanics (by you’ll never guess who) undergirds a huge number of modern sciences.

                • a_blanqui_slate [none/use name, any]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Explaining myself? You’re talking right past me. I say Marx is an offshoot of Hegelianism and you say “Marx isn’t Hegelianism”, addressing an entirely different question. I say many branches of current science still make explicit use of Newton’s laws and formalism, and your response is not “oh in what ways?” its “no they don’t” without further explanation like you’re doing a bad homage to the Monty Python argument clinic sketch.

                  Looking at this from my side, it absolutely looks like you’re trying to pick an argument that no one was trying to have for some reason, and will now contradict me on pretty much anything no matter how ridiculous that makes you sound. If that’s not what you’re trying to do, I’m all ears for a different explanation.

                  • Pluto [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.netOP
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    “I say Marx is an offshoot of Hegelianism”

                    It isn’t.

                    “addressing an entirely different question.”

                    Obviously, I wasn’t.

                    “it absolutely looks like you’re trying to pick an argument that no one was trying to have for some reason,”

                    All I did was reply.