Bootstrap wrote: ↑Sun Jun 27, 2021 2:16 pmBuice is twisting Hegel into something Hegel is not, creating a conspiracy theory
1. Whether or not Buice was "twisting Hegel into something he was not" is another issue. You claimed it was a red herring and that article was really about certain people.
That was an assertion which you can't justify other than an appeal to your own suspicions. Hardly giving Buice's words the courtesy you insisted on giving to Beth Moore.
Bootstrap wrote:That's a flat-out lie. This is not at all what a Hegelian Dialectic is.
Now you're calling Buice a liar for saying what I'm sure he sincerely believes. This is hardly an example of extending grace to someone with whom you disagree, which you constantly insist others do when they disagree with people you support.
Bootstrap wrote:the whole purpose of the article is to throw shade on others that he names, people who do not associate themselves with either Critical Race Theory or Marxism or the nonsense in the paragraph I just quoted.
And you call
Buice a conspiracy theorist! This is just the pot calling the kettle black.
Bootstrap wrote:There is no way on earth to take that article seriously as an article about Hegel. And there's no reasonable way to ignore the other things it is trying to do. I mean, seriously, do you believe this is an academic article about Hegel?
You didn't have to rail on him as a liar and a conspiracy theorist to disagree with him, but of course that would require an ability to move past the hatred expressed in your polemics -- exactly why some people can't take your comments about Hegel seriously. You appear blinded by your own hatred.
How about putting your tweezers down long enough to take the beam out of your own eye first, Boot?