|Online:||1 Month Ago||Name:||Comrade Spinelli|
|Updated:||7 Months Ago||Gender:||Male|
|Joined:||4 Years Ago||Birthday:||- Private -|
|President:||Not Saying||Email:||- Private -|
|Party:||Not Saying||Ethnicity:||Not Saying|
|Relationship:||Not Saying||Income:||Not Saying|
|Interested:||in Men||Occupation:||Not Saying|
|Quotes:||"For many of us as young intellectuals, an interest in Nietzsche or Bataille didn"t represent a way of distancing oneself from Marxism or communism. Rather, it was almost the only path leading to what we, of course, thought could be expected of communism. This need for the total rejection of the world in which we found ourselves was certainly not satisfied by Hegelian philosophy. On the other hand, one was searching for intellectual paths to get to where something totally different seemed to be taking shape or already existed, that is, communism.|
Thus it was without knowing Marx very well, refusing Hegelianism, and feeling dissatisfied with the limitations of existentialism, I decided to join the French Communist Party. That was in 1950. A Nietzschean Communist! Something really on the edge of "liveability." And, if you like (I too knew it) something a bit ridiculous, perhaps."
This is for R1 of SPinko's ELO Tournament. The resolution will cover the soundness of the modal ontological argument. Pro will defend while Con will seek to refute.Modal ontological argument-(P1) It is possible that God exists. (P2) God is not a contingent being, i.e., either it is not possible that God exists, or it is necessary that God exists. (C1) Hence, it is necessary that God exists. (C2) Hence, God exists.God for all intensive purposes is defined as a being which is necessarily existent...
Resolution: Dualism is likely true.Dualism:the theory that the mental and the physical—or mind and body or mind and brain—are, in some sense, radically different kinds of thing Substance: a bearer of properties capable of undergoing change(Thanks to popculturepooka) BOP is shared, with the Negative/Con arguing for Physicalism.No semantic arguments.No intentionally fallacious arguments. ...
===Resolution===The resolution for this debate will deal with anarchism and whether it would have a legitimate possibility of effectively and qualitatively providing various social services which are generally recognized as necessary for the existence of civil society.In this debate, Pro is tasked with establishing a general framework for the effective production of these services (as well as their plausibility, just saying it's possible that everyone would get along is insufficient) while also...
Thank you for tuning in to the second of possibly more presidential debates among some of the most well known fictional people in history who are running for President of the United States of America...... Tonight we have Peter Griffin vs Eric Cartman, who each represent the two major political parties in the race. My name is Tim Tebow, I will be tonights moderator because im still riding the bench on the New York Jets and had nothing else to do tonight.... Glory be to God!..... I will ask each...
According to the preamble of the Constitution, the Constitution was established to secure the blessings of liberty to our posterity. Killing an unborn person in the womb is directly contrary to this idea. All people have equal rights under the Constitution, including unborn persons....
|Statistics based on completed debates.|
Updated 2 Years Ago
Updated 2 Years Ago
Updated 3 Years Ago
This list identifies where socialpinko stands on popular issues. The choices are limited to the following:
- N/O - No Opinion
- N/S - Not Saying
- Und - Undecided
- Con - Against
- Pro - In Favor
You can also click each issue to find other members that agree with socialpinko's position on the issue.