• Any and all textual works can be decried as “lacking exigence”, no matter their content.

  • Make vague references to “the canon”. Do not explain what canon you’re talking about.

  • Employ words like “ethic (singular)”, “schema”, “polity”. It doesn’t matter if you use them correctly, just use them.

  • Pick a noun or an adjective to use as a verb. Just give it your own definition and let the audience figure it out.

  • Use obtuse definitions of philosophical frameworks, like “it’s about bodies moving through space”. Do not elaborate or make it easier to tell what the fuck that’s supposed to mean.

  • If someone is making a good argument that you don’t like, say it’s “reinforcing teleological norms” and refuse to engage with it any more.

  • And, of course, the classic: Anything you don’t like is “deeply unserious”.

thank u for coming to my ted talk

  • CarbonScored [any]@hexbear.netEnglish
    7·
    2 months ago
    • Whenever you think you’ve made a good point, end it with “QED” (or “quod erat demonstrandum” to sound smarter).
    • If you feel overwhelmed or confused by any counterargument, be sure to dismiss it as “an argument in semantics”.
    • Heraclitus stated “No man ever steps in the same river twice, for it’s not the same river and he’s not the same man.”, this phrase can be deployed for almost all topics.
    • All treats you subjectively hate can be marginalised by labelling it low-brow, meaningless “bread and circuses” slop (or “panem et circenses” for extra points).

    I fear I do these and your tips more than I care to realise blob-no-thoughts

    • PM_ME_YOUR_FOUCAULTS [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.netEnglish
      7·
      2 months ago

      Heraclitus stated “No man ever steps in the same river twice, for it’s not the same river and he’s not the same man.”, this phrase can be deployed for almost all topics.

      Common misconception. Heraclitus actually said you can never suck off the same man twice.