Booklets BTFO. How can you even debate this classic /v/ comic that utterly D E S T R O Y S your SJW meme trash?

But isn't privilege a meta-narrative?

I do agree with a lot of this. People ascribe a certain level of magic to human behavior and don't want to view us as animals at all.

Having said that there's nothing wrong with believing that our biology isn't something that we have to completely and utterly adhere to or be controlled by. Even from an evolutionary perspective it isn't inherently good to follow your programming if your environment doesn't call for it. People do have to accept we have innate animal tendencies first though I suppose.

> It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent that survives. It is the one that is most adaptable to change.

>People do have to accept we have innate animal tendencies first though I suppose.

That's what I meant by rejection of sociobiology. Human are just more complex than most animals but not above them.

Because our understanding of animal behavior and relationships is imperfect, mostly because we don't actually give enough of a fuck about them to know their little nitty-gritty individual aspects and know pretty much any animal that isn't a personal pet as a collection of generalities. Also animals are, in most respects, far psychologically simpler than humans with less capacity for reason. The biological reason behind THAT is only humans have the level of frontal-lobe development to support that.

I'm not going to deny some leftists deny or ignore science when it is inconvenient. The "everything is a social construct" trend is unfortunately common, where the reality rests somewhere in the middle between that and bio-determinist reasoning.

Just remember than anything to do with behavior is based on trends that can be defied by outliers and not hard laws of the universe. It's more complicated than a black-and-white perspective advocated by some, but not even by that much.

>Complexity
This is really the god that people invoke when they can't explain the obvious qualitative differences. Eventually if you take all the complexities into account it's really the same thing! yeah right.
There's every reason to think that the deontological and reflexive or normative level is itself independent of its physiological support.

I dont support any kind of SJW.

You have a whole load of fake presuppositions before even considering any examples. Incredibly unscientific way of thinking, sounds like you're just trying to explain away things. Outliers, trends?
Cats tend to meow, wow, very smart of you.

>everything which isn't vulgar materialism is 'magic'

And other scientistic blackmails...

As if the subjective and sociosymbolic are totally unscientific phenomena.

a certain level of =/= everything

no, cats tend to meow because they're biologically determined to.

humans tend to fuck because they're also biologically determined to, but the rules for doing so are determined by culture and society, so these rules are considered "social constructs".

lol at marxists who insist everything is a social construct

society is a biological construct

lol at people who think they're different things.

>society is a biological construct
okay, fine
But the rules and conducts a society creates and enforces are not exactly biological nor entirely rational. These are born of metaphysics.

You can be as deterministic as you want, but by the simple fact that you're using language to express yourself means you have to acknowledge metaphysics.

>doesn't understand something he could have just googled
>has to create imaginary people to argue with just so he can win
how dumb can you be while still believing you're a bastion of knowledge and rational thought
this is pure delusion

BTW. When did the right, the side of "evolution and climate change aren't real" decide that they were the bastion and gatekeepers of scientific integrity?

By actually quoting postmodernist texts.