The weird thing about Frank Furedi is that his current employer is Hungary's PM Viktor Orbán's regime - he talks about Western tradition of inquiry etc etc but then he is totally silent about Orbán kicking out of Hungary the Central European University and the direct ideological control by Orbán's Fidesz Party over the other Hungarian educational universities and institutions. He literally paid to be in Hungary's 'Ivory Towers' (Mathias Corvinus Collegium) but he is silent about the violations of academic freedom there.

very sharp - great work :) "Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the past."

I think the difference between an idiology and what is actually on the ground that was alive and died, there is a huge difference as we don't play wotb Death and Life by brushing then off.

The individual/Institutions&groups. Groups and institutions have dogmas that persist, while individuals can change their minds based on reality.

abstractions galore

9:48 Part of the problem is tribal behavior. Social selection. This simply means find a group affiliation (commonality) in order to establish a majority. Almost illiterate stone age behavior. It reveals the immaturity of the human species in the fase it still is in. Somehow technological advancement does not parallel consciousness development. Or put in other words: when circumstances become confusing, the brain reduces complexity by simplification to simple surviving techniques.

What is OTTHELLO?

How is it there is 沃尔@

13;26 Somehow it reminds me of the Nazi's forbidding certain art forms, artists and burning books. Based on some ideology. Or it could simply be an expression of anti patriarchy, by refusing what it classically imposed on its new people. Then there are other elements at play limiting a desired freedom of expression. It is true there are virtually no elements present in the expression of their culture in art (films, music, fashion) these days. As opposed to the past. But you don't fill the gap by forbidding things.

To prove that quarks (subatomic particles) are more real while protons and neutrons (atomic particles) are less real, we need to establish a clear definition of what we mean by "real" and then provide evidence or logical arguments that support this claim. Let's approach this step by step. Definition of "real": For the purpose of this proof, we will define "real" as being more fundamental, indivisible, and closer to the underlying nature of reality. Proof: 1. Quarks are the fundamental building blocks of matter: - Protons and neutrons are composed of quarks. Protons consist of two up quarks and one down quark, while neutrons consist of one up quark and two down quarks. - Quarks are not known to have any substructure; they are considered to be elementary particles. - Therefore, quarks are more fundamental than protons and neutrons. 2. Quarks are indivisible: - Protons and neutrons can be divided into their constituent quarks through high-energy particle collisions. - However, there is no known way to divide quarks into smaller components. They are believed to be indivisible. - Therefore, quarks are indivisible, while protons and neutrons are divisible. 3. Quarks are closer to the underlying nature of reality: - The Standard Model of particle physics, which is our most comprehensive theory of the fundamental particles and forces, describes quarks as elementary particles that interact through the strong, weak, and electromagnetic forces. - Protons and neutrons, on the other hand, are composite particles that emerge from the interactions of quarks. - Therefore, quarks are closer to the underlying nature of reality as described by our most fundamental scientific theories. 4. Quarks exhibit more fundamental properties: - Quarks have intrinsic properties such as color charge, flavor, and spin, which determine how they interact with each other and with other particles. - Protons and neutrons derive their properties from the collective behavior of their constituent quarks. - Therefore, the properties of quarks are more fundamental than those of protons and neutrons. 5. Quarks are necessary for the existence of protons and neutrons: - Without quarks, protons and neutrons would not exist, as they are composed entirely of quarks. - However, quarks can exist independently of protons and neutrons, as demonstrated by the existence of other hadrons such as mesons, which are composed of one quark and one antiquark. - Therefore, quarks are necessary for the existence of protons and neutrons, but not vice versa. Conclusion: Based on the above arguments, we can conclude that quarks are more real than protons and neutrons. Quarks are more fundamental, indivisible, and closer to the underlying nature of reality as described by our most advanced scientific theories. They exhibit intrinsic properties that determine the behavior of composite particles like protons and neutrons, and they are necessary for the existence of these atomic particles. It is important to note that this proof relies on our current scientific understanding of particle physics and the nature of matter. As our knowledge advances, our understanding of what is "real" may evolve. However, based on the current evidence and theories, the argument for the greater reality of quarks compared to protons and neutrons is strong.

Brilliant by Frank as ever

@ericschambion6838

29 күн бұрын

The guy is a moron, an ignoramus supreme !

You lost me at Orban. Just because you think certain terms are "zombie categories" doesn't make it true or that anyone should take you seriously.