We must give him medicine

Nor can it be addressed by prayer

take that religious fokheds

Similarly, one cannot help the wicked, the poor, the lame, and the abused, by merely talking them into sanity

Altho what do you people say about placebo effects?

I think this is an easy excuse though when your ideas are not good enough or you haven't found the right way to communicate

I argue that placebo effects are misunderstandings in changes in material effects

then you just say "oh we were right and all the material conditions werent right yet"

Hence, why they arent consistent

Ok, well there is no objective "good idea"

There are ideas which society deems as "good" or "bad"

This a topic in sociology

Which is directly shaped by psychology

which is directly shaped by biology

The success of an idea is dependent on the material conditions that the idea arose from.

It is not by chance that countries don't revert back to feudalism intentionally or slavery for that matter

Would the case of Lenin introducing NEP a good sample for this?

but ideas are not temporally after this chain of science- each idea is directly biology, chemistry, physics

If I have an idea of nationalism, for example, that idea is just a relation in my brain which is firing on certain receptors

It has to do with the media I consume, which is also a material relation. cyberspace seems ephemeral but all media are material objectsa

all signs are written in matter, all ideas are gotten across that way and are present on the physical hardware of the brain (and the brain is the most complex and significant physical object there is)

To me idealism can mean 1) you think everything is ideas, or 2) you imagine that the world should conform to your ideas.

When I get called an idealist by marxists, I guess I think they mean #1

To me, I think what everything is made of is simply a mystery. I don't claim to know it is ideas, but when you say everything is matter, well, what is matter exactly? we don't know

so it's just like saying "everything is made of the stuff that everything is made of"

so the matter inside the matter is not a gurantee that it exists as only a matter itself?

In nutshell?

And that there could be a 4th party involved?

What I'm saying has more to do with the physics- we don't know what the particles are made of

yeh

even staying within materialism, we just don't know what the stuff "really" is, that's all

so in a way matter remains a concept, an idea, within materialism. Hence I think it is simply a silly debate. But I don't insist on a positive position, i.e. that I "know" what everything is. Hence I don't think I'm an idealist

I am very interested in the controversy about monism in the soviet union I wish I knew more about that

Well what you proposed doesn't even have a narrow interpretation that necessarily aligns itself with ideas

i don't get it

And since the matter is the issue at hand in its composition

What I'm saying is, I don't find any of your sentences to be worth being accused of being an idealist.

oh word

Was the Marxists that attributed you an idealist here in the server?

Well when I bring up Baudrillard on leftypol that's just the immediate reaction. Sorry for venting

Or someplace else?