Do not, my friends, become addicted to water. It will take hold of you, and you will resent its absence

>women take control
>immediately let all the water flow

uh isnt it gonna run out and then there will be none left after people drink their fill for a day or two??

Why didn't they just loot water bottles?

Not only that but they just drop all the water on the ground. There are much more efficient ways to distribute the water.

You clearly did not understand the movie.
Its a battle between biophilia and necrophilia. When the women try to escape away from necrophilia and to the promised land of biophilia, they find that biophilia has been destroyed. Ruined by the rulings of necrophilia.
Therefore the only correct set of action as seen from the yes of Furiosa, is to kill of necrophilia as well.

They also start letting hoards of people upstairs into the crop stores and milk reserves, they'll be dry in 2 weeks and there'll be nothing left.

why are the labels for the flow controls on the front (facing away from the operator)?

seems pretty useless

Yeah sure but they'll be popular until it runs out and that's what is important, being popular. Boring shit like "long term survival of the species" is dull stuff for other, male, people to worry about.

Attached: 145684567965.jpg (354x503, 34K)

>Joe is stern but just
>everything kinda sucks under his regime but people are surviving
>STRONG WOMYN take over
>immediately waste ALL of their precious water supply to nourish the cripples, mutants and soon-deads
>everything goes to shit the next day due to lack of water and strong government

Women ruin civilizations. Fury Road is redpilled as fuck.

Attached: Jontron close and personal.jpg (334x313, 19K)

Do not, my friends, become addicted to wet cat food.

Attached: immortankeanu.jpg (1024x636, 121K)

Because they're ship's engine controls mounted the wrong way, not water valves, he only needs them for on and off so he doesn't need to see the controls whilst having them mounted like that creates the pleasing visual of him holding out his hands to grant his people water and pulling them back to withdraw it. Showmanship is an important part of being a warlord.

On a ship it'd be mounted the other way so that if you hit something with your hand on the EOT you don't order the engines to full by accident as you're thrown forward.

The paradisical feminist/matriarchal homeland of the Vuvalini has been turned into a toxic wasteland when they drive through it too.

Attached: the_green_place.png (1112x462, 449K)

Almost like they were naive princesses isolated from the world living the high life or something.

That's actually the point, the women wasted all of the water in the citadel and everyone fucking died within a month. But they couldn't make it obvious in the film, especially with a female lead and especially in the year it was made so they left it vague with that ending scene. There's also continued references to the "green place" and how men ruined it but if you pay attention to the film, women ruined that too.

The message of fury road is basically, "women ruin everything"

I love how even the tiniest and most inconsequential of details in this movie can be rationally explained.

It's so satisfying seeing a coherent movie with so little flaws. Even every single of CinemaSin's points was explained away by people in the comments. I love Fury Road. You never knew logical coherency could be so comfy until someone points it out.

Attached: vwmhr6yc.jpg (123x169, 23K)

What is Furiosa's excuse?

This changes that final shot of Max disappearing into the crowd though, he's just going "lol nope" and fucking off rather than get mixed up in the chaos that is about to occur when the water runs out.

>the ending where they just decide to dump all the water on the ground
Wow

MEDIOCRE

>not falling for the aquatic jew
based

based attentive poster

>What is Furiosa's excuse?

She's originally from the all-female tribe. She's been intoxicated with "males = bad" memes.

Attached: 1351223542.jpg (480x480, 22K)

You’re retarded.

And it’s even more great that they got a “feminist writer” to ensure their movie met their feminist standards.

They basically flipped the feminist narrative right under her nose and she didn’t even notice. Lmao

refute anything I said, its precisely why that what I'm saying is right.
Biophilia is huge in feminist circles, and Immortan Joe is a representation of necrophilia.
When they find the biophiliac paradise ruined, Furiosa turns the same against Joe's society. She is not trying to rule it, she is trying to destroy it. Even if it means the death of all.

Women are chaos, men are order.
Women are nature, men are civilization.
Women are night, men are day.

Yeah nah you’re using words in loose ways and defining the themes in really dumb terms. I get what you’re trying to say but there’s much better ways of saying it.

In the feminst theory it is more like this, and keep in mind the imagery of the movie - Joe with his skeletal breathing mask etc.

>Necrophilia or the love of the dead shows itself in sexual perversion or the ‘morbid desire to be in the presence of a dead body’ (Fromm, 1964, p. 39). However, it is more than that. A person with necrophilous tendencies is drawn to everything that is dead or not alive, including corpses, decay, feces, dirt. They prefer to talk about sickness, funerals, death, destruction, the past; they are ‘cold, distant, devotees of law and order’ (p. 40) and like the use of force. Necrophiles like everything that does not grow but which is mechanical. ‘The necrophilous person is driven by the desire to transform the organic into the inorganic, to approach life mechanially, as if all living persons were things. All living processes, feelings, and thoughts are transformed into things’ (p.41). He continues to provide example in a similar vein but I think the picture he draws is emerging.

>The opposite to necrophilia is biophilia, the love of life, the attraction to everything that lives and grows. Preserving life and preventing death is one form of biophilia. Biophilous tendencies can be much more varied and tend to integrate and unite, to fuse with different and opposite entities (this starts on a molecular level but also includes sexual union). This productive orientation expresses itself in curiosity, preference of the new over the old and a functional rather than mechanical approach to life. For biophilia to emerge or be sustained, certain societal conditions need to be in place. Chief among them are the absence of injustice and the presence of freedom to create and innovate.

Define biophilia and necrophilia
Your terms are abstract and you're forcing them without defining yhem

Dude you've got some problems and you really need to work them out. Talk to your mother

Its not my terms by the way, its academic terms and they are used in feminist theory. Keep in mind a feminist wrote the movie and read Fromm's definition here

Look literally one post above you.

That's really interesting and cool but seem like really biased definitions designed to make a false dichotomy

So what theyre saying is female chaos good, male order bad?

Feminist theory isn’t academic.

The point of the duality is that you should take the best of both extremes.

Its an okay duality that has a lot of cool theming to it but I'm not sure about it as a route to mastery over anything

It might be a false dichotomy but it is used in academic circles. Dworkin talked lots of it and has inspired more women.
Yes. In a simple sense, yes. It is the structure of building a society that is the highest form of necrophilia.

Think back to the movie where the older women (the matriarchy to be) tell of the wondrous, green world. And when they find it, it has died - as a result of Immortan Joe's society.
Its used in academic circles none the less of our feelings towards it.

To be honest with you, I wasn't the guy making the big posts. I've just been following this thread half-heartedly and barely paid any attention to anything. I've been dozing off for almost an hour now.

Good night user.

Hoe id it Joe's fault the female society turbed their land into desert and swamp?

If there's no water they won't get addicted to it

Isn't it hinted at that his irrigation of the water system has ruined all surrounding areas from life? Maybe I remember it wrong.

what a load of fluff.

“Academic circles” is a dishonest term. Feminists theory is not academic. And no matter how many female teachers decide to call themselves academics, they don’t make an academic circle either.

Attributing something like the love of life to only the female gender is not scientific or grounded in any logic. There is a great variation among just the gender themselves and one can argue males love life more than females knowing what males have done to protect and plan for it, while females have been known to be tumultuous balls of emotion that have wrecked homes before (classic story of Adam and Eve for example).

None of what you said is in any way academic or grounded in reality. It is simply an opinion and a perspective on a movie using bloated words that carry meaning beyond the scope of what you’re trying to utilize them for. In essence you are trying to fit a square peg into a round hole in the literary sense.

>tfw you realize you've been a necrophile all your life

Attached: 1548291339396.gif (360x270, 1.63M)

iirc he lucked out and found an aqueduct under the citadel

shouldnt you be shilling in a captain marvel thread?

basically it's redpilled vs bluepilled?

I think the point of the mlvoe is rhat both pure patriarchy and pure matriarchy doom society in two different ways. Anyone should have gotten that when the women had both rendered their own land infertile, and then poured the entire society's water supply on the ground just for the satisfaction of not worrying about conserving it

To add: in the esoteric sciences from zodiac astrology to hermeticism, life is actually associated with Will, which is a male trait. Nature, entropy, birth and death, are associated with female traits.

I dont recall that anywhere in the movie

You might be misunderstanding something. I'm not trying to argue that women are better than men. I'm telling you what the writer of Mad Max meant in the movie.
Furiosa is not in the end trying to sustain a society, she is trying to destroy it for everyone.
You are having this discussion as if these are my thoughts, they are not. I'm telling you what is.
Hm. I haven't watched it in a long time. But I distinctly remember that Immortan was responsible for the oasis being dead. That's why they went back to him to destroy his society and him. Maybe false memories.
Hm. I have to do some research.

Feminism is literally a club where people write female propoganda and pretend females own and invented everything good

You are playing the defencive on an offence I haven’t made. Stick to the topic, faggot. I clearly am addressing your words about the movie. They are wrong and shit. Deal with it.

>women are death, men are life
>women birth, men kill

How does that dichotomy work then?

Attached: disgruntled seal.jpg (480x480, 46K)

I love the way this basically says that biophilia can only exist once necrophilia has tamed the savage state of nature - what else creates the - "presence of freedom to create and innovate".
Women, not even once.

In ancient times, the aspects of birth and death were seen as the realms of feminity, whereas everything happening inbetween i.e. the life, the struggle, the fighting, the killing - the active parts of it, were the essence of masculinty.

The point of the movie is that women aren't objects and slaves and they aren't going to take it anymore.
It's a way to channel general dissatisfaction with life into politcal change meant to disenfranchise people in the name of fighting the imaginary oppression of women.

Not him but thats literally the director's intent. He's being very informative and civil, and specifically has said he doesnt consider this message inherently true

I love these things and I wish the movie did more with it.

No it’s not and argument to authority doesn’t change the fact that I am criticizing the words he used and how they are shitty and like child’s play.

>retards call this movie feminist propaganda
>paints women as literal pampered children that make fatal decisions without mens input
>end up dooming some of the only surviv9ng remnants of humanity
>hire a feminist advisor so you can have half naked super models running around all day while being called progressive
Miller was a genius with taking the right steps to make the movie he wanted without making exceptions to appease the vocal sjw idiots.

>women birth men kill
Youre fun

>end of the movie is them letting all the dirty mutants up the lift into the base

Say goodbye to all that food Joe was growing up there. They will eat all the food, drink all the water, and then turn the entire place into a big slum like it was on the ground.

Attached: Immortan Joe.png (1280x720, 1.19M)

Its not an argument of authority its a pointer reference to someone's declared intent. Just like how I can say Mousillini was a fascist without being a fascist myself

It is an argument to authority because you think you can retort my argument that the use of the words “necrophilia” and “biophilia” are bloated and misused with an argument towards the director’s thematic intent for a movie (??). It’s a completely tangential argument at its heart and you not only missed the point but also made a logical fallacy.

Every time I see a shot of Fury Road I smile knowing that Mad Max got the modern adaptation it deserved.
It looks stunning and is just classic in every shot.

So basically, it was nihilistic suicide the whole time.

It's the truth women can't deal with.

Nobody ever disagreed the terms are bloated and useless. We're just saying she themed the movie around these ideas.

The truly redpill, is that Max see the end of the citadel as soon as they arrived and took off.
Rewatch the last scene, after the fatties waste the water you can see a close up and a dissapointed look on Max, just before he leaves.

>just
> but people are surviving
both of these are wrong though

That’s where you’re wrong retard. They did. Then you decided to jump into the convo and act like a retard. Don’t jump into convos if you have no idea what they’re about next time.

It's a bittersweet redpill.
It demonises Joe's regime, but then highlights just why that is so.
Most people left the cinema thinking Joe had had justice against him and that society was left in a better place.
Then you thought about it that night and you realise a dark horrible irony to the ending.

Attached: 1516788534265.jpg (960x960, 42K)

Don't call me a retard you pseudointellectual cunt, fuck you.

No, that was the theme of the dumb feminist writer who had it subverted in the final cut with the actual message of the movie that women bring death and men bring life. The theme of the movie is essentially the opposite of the feminist angle.

Stop crying like a retard and stop wasting thread space

>esoteric
>sciences

please cull yourself

Attached: 1506929982084.jpg (800x800, 163K)

No it's more like she had a small perception and lacked a perception of the bigger picture.
That's great commentary on our current society.

It is so subtle that Hollywood and most feminists would never notice it.

t. water junkie

Maybe you should look up the definition of science.

It can be. Determining the value of the feminine makes a lot of sense in certain contexts (the interactions between the feminine and masculine are a big part of the push and pull between Confucian and Taoist schools of thought, for example, and it's a necessary part of the conversation whenever you compare those philosophies). Variation exists within a gender, but the roles that women and men are trained to fill affect on the traits they develop and how the gender as a whole is oriented. It's a generalization, but it's not unjustified, and discussing those ideas doesn't necessarily have to be the bloated buzzword garbage you think of when you think about modern feminist theory.
Based illiterate

So basically, the movie was saying that the biophillia was a delusion that lead them to being a worse of necrophiliac?

Attached: 1545961913755.jpg (255x278, 37K)

>I think the point of the mlvoe is rhat both pure patriarchy and pure matriarchy doom society in two different ways.
That's not the point at all.
It clearly showed a living patriarchal society and a doomed, dead matriarchal society.

And you’re arguing with someone that knows this (me) and sees the inherent wrong not only in the interpretation of the movie but also in the “feminist academia” which purpotrutes an entirely broken and unrealistic theorem. Religions and esotericists have a better grasp on the genders than the so called academic circles.

Attached: 1451012606009.jpg (213x250, 11K)

>absence of injustice
women are literal children

Attached: i bet.png (500x771, 206K)

Science is inherently esoteric.

Should I ?

I do voronoi tesselation simulations of hydrostatic flows in convective shells of main sequence stars.

Should I consider that I am involved in the same activity as....horoscopists ? Alchemists ? Homeopaths ? Cold readers ? Card illusionists ?
Are spell/canon masters on Harry Potter forums also scientists ?

please cull yourself

Attached: 1507284067840.jpg (352x395, 45K)

Nice blogpost faggot. So much for trying to sound smart this isn’t a blog retard.

>Alchemists
Isaac Newton wants to talk to you.

No, it isn't.

t. junior researcher

Attached: cmb.png (1200x600, 1.12M)

Wow so you play around with simulation tools good job retard. Get a real job instead. And also maybe learn the definition of science and also esotericism while you’re at it.

Shut the fuck up, science priest.

Esoteric - define it.
>very unusual and understood or liked by only a small number of people, especially those with special knowledge
That is exactly what science does, it specialises into branches and becomes esoteric. It is inherently esoteric to those that understand the concepts being tested.

Fuck off retard I read the conversation and you're the one who got all pissy thinking someone reporting on an idea discussed in feminists classrooms as being feminist academics. It literally is academics. Doesnt mean its right or intellectual or progressive or true, it just literally means they teach those concepts in feminist academies. The only reason you falsely believe he thinks the ideas are true (which he explicitly stated he was not saying) was your own reverence for the word 'academic' as meaning 'smart and true' and not just 'something in an academy'.

They literally teach this in feminist academia, thats a true statement. It is feminist academics, as a definition. That has nothing to do with if its right

I bet you’re the type that wears a shirt that says “Science!” on it and you believe science is some kind of label for just your field of study and that science isn’t a grander term for the system of observing and deducing things

Oh god its this furry fucking faggot again.

Nazbol gang rise up

If you actually read convo you would know that my first post was “feminist theory is not academic”. That statement applies here, you major retard. Try not to jump in any more convos that don’t include you. You only spread your retardation in doing so.

That wasnt me. You're the only retard who thinks people are saying shit they didn't say because you're hung up on the word 'academic' as meaning 'true' which it doesnt

>feminist writer
The entire movie was storyboarded by two men with zero (0) dialogue at first, who brought in one well-known feminist speaker to teach the women how those who've been raped (really raped, not Amerilard college raped) act to get it right. The dialogue was inserted after the fact. The movie simply isn't feminist writing, it's a storyboard with words.

The scientific method (methodological naturalism ) only exists for 150 years or so.
Can't really call Newton a scientists in the modern sense.

The smartest person I know, head of our department, is a devout Christian who also believes in Yeti and Loch Ness myths. Who knows what psychological damage and misdevelopment caused her to be unreasonable in many other areas of his life and worldview.

Science is an activity, not a personality trait, nor does it ever account for the entire cognitive profile of someone.

Attached: 1510165132514.jpg (320x240, 64K)

I don’t care who you are. Way too many retards thinking they are special and jumping in these convos.

Yeah I know. Nowhere was it implied she was the only writer. It’s common knowledge movies take multiple writers. Who do you think you’re clarifying for?

Yes, I satisfy my curiosity instead of making products like a good goy.

yetis are real tho

t. Brainlet

Imagine thinking you’re smart and being this dumb in practice lmao

I think everybody here agrees in the weakness of feminist studies, but the female writers literally are using an idea proliferated in feminist classrooms in the movie

Finally, something the two of us agree on.

> isn’t a grander term for the system of observing and deducing things

It's not grander, it's smaller in scope and more precise than what plebs think.
Can't observe or deduce anything esoterically since there are no phenomena that could be described as ''esoteric''

Some of us not only satisfy our cutiosities but also make a living and challenge ourselves throughput. No wonder you’re such.l a brainlet, you’re still dragged down by your fears and childish insecurities of the outside world. Get a job you loser.

He was trying to say that Coca Cola is better than water. I love drinking Mountain Dew and coke

And my points on this are twofold (and explained numerous times in this thread, so retards read this once and for all):
1. Feminist academia is wrong
2. The female perspective for Mad Max was subverted by its actual message of females bringing death.

Therefore feminist theory shitters in this thread are wrong about their foundations and their thematic representations. End of story.

You don't have to be smart for science.
You have to be curious and conscientious.
People in general are just not curious.

Attached: The-Heart-Rippers-Were-Persistent-2.jpg (418x289, 47K)

You're not special, fag, and you're not in charge of the conversations here like you think. There are feminist classrooms and they share this idea there and someone put it in this movie. If you want to disparage feminist academics you should do it with an entertaining quip or by adding to the conversation instead of policing a literally correct post for not already having your quip in it

>What is symbolism

I've never had to work a day in my life and I don't intend to work on anything deliberately which doesn't satisfy my higher needs.

>ywn serve a warlord like Immortan Joe
forever mediocre lads ;_;

Nobody here is a feminist shitter
That's what youre not getting
Someone reported on an idea proliferated in feminists classrooms
Thats not feminist or an endorsement of feminism
Just like me saying Muslims occupied Spain doesnt make me a Muslim

I think youre being a smartass about what are higher needs

You don’t know the meaning of the word esoteric. Please look it up,

Esotericism connotes the study of things that are still unknown. Science is in itself a tool that is esoteric.

Esoteric as an epistemological category ? Yes, totally valid concept.

But in the real, non-academic world, the word just means pseudoscience. Period.

>*thumbs up*

Loch Ness monster is real too, it was a plesiosaur that became trapped when land masses shifted and could no longer return to flowing water. What people have seen over the years are cousins of the original loch ness monster, which obviously died many years ago

What is it about my posts that are riling up the brainlets. I don’t want to spend this thread replying to retards.

We have feminist theorists, blog writers, and NEET wannabe 3D artists who suddenly think their opinion matters all directed at me. Just fuck off and go read a book you retarded.

If you can’t handle the use of words in their technical sense, don’t jump into convos about them. You’re too mentally weak to handle it.

proofs ?

Attached: 1541033075078.png (500x522, 90K)

I am leaving this thread before more brainlet zoomers spin their gears round and round over the same mental gripes they gave that they can’t resolve on their own.

Feminism is not academic. Mad Max subverts the feminist themes at its core, and research assistant is an embarrassing occupation.

I can, the general population can't.
Literally your main examples of esoteric activity are obscurantist pseudoscience for simpletons - like zodiac.

The zodiac is based on the movements of the sun and is the precursor to our calendar. You should learn about things before speaking about them.

You don't need proof when you have instinct.

Some visual aid for the brainlets

Attached: 7BD18C1D-D9B3-49E3-A960-D417D5401A7E.jpg (960x540, 102K)

enjoy having schizophrenia.

Look you just really seem to not understand that someone can name an idea eithout havjng to believe in it, and now you're being all pissy playing the victim because people told you you misread his post
Because he literally said he was just reporting in the source of a writer's idea, and wasnt explaining his belief in that idea
Now go write your story about how Yea Forums changed and you're so oppressed and are the only one who gets it. You still missed how he said he's not saying its true

you realize saying this doesn't add to your argument right? Unless you can prove it no one will believe you and for all anyone knows you can google things to make yourself appear smart. I figured you would have already known this by now since you're so smart.

Also
>furfag

Now definitely no one cares.

I should learn a thing or two about astronomy, you mean, my degree ? Yep, I really should. I'm trying.
I've met so many horoscope believers in my academic endeavors. There's so many of them in astrophysics departments especially ! It's an active area of research !

When my spectroscope fills up an emissions graph or after we spend cold hard cash for FTS astronomical data...the Zodiac signs are all there, clear in the data. How can so many people miss it ?

Attached: 1526924681286.jpg (1200x1000, 190K)

>he

I like how you are still pretending you’re not the same guy that got BTFO

I literally have no idea what you're talking about

How can a person past puberty (i assume you're over 13) say something to that magnitude of retardation ?

Attached: 1510307626064.gif (600x400, 1.02M)

Academic doesnt mean what you think it does. It doesnt mean smart true and right, it means something you study at a school

You’re the one that thought the zodiac meant horoscopes, retard. So much for learning the right things in your degree, clearly you’re just being brainwashed over there. The zodiac is a scientific basis for our modern knowledge in astronomy. If you can’t understand the wisdom of the ancients you can’t understand the shit that you espouse. You’re like a girl who studies really hard for an exam and aces it, but when asked about what she learned and what it means you just get an airheaded “uuuuum”. Embarassing.

You never did, since you’re a brainlet.

I'm literally not him
Enjoy clutching your small little pearl, too bad you have to stretch definitions and lie about the contents of posts to do it

My age is not relevant to this conversation right now, so that's none of your business

Youre a tryhard psued with no point but smelling your own farts

Not in its root sense. Academia and Academics related to theoretical knowledge of the world and its ability to define the world. Something that did not have a logical or observed ground in reality is not considered academic.

>he thinks this is what being smart looks like
Lol

That’s actually you Mr. “I write blogposts about how I play with the space engine and that makes me totally a scientist”

There's a level of pseud-ness after which it becomes hard to talk to even for entertainment purposes.

>tfw addicted to dubs

Then feel free to stop replying like a retard by all means.

>pseud

Go back to plebbit, zoomers

yes, but it's a movie so they can just roll credits and not deal with the consequences. too bad it doesn't work like that irl.

I've already refuted all of your fact based arguments. Give me something else or admit that I win, its that simple.

Congratulations on being a retard.
Retard

The poster you were arguing with used academic to mean 'taught at an academy'. Furthermore, postulated theories that fail to apply are still academic, because academic means a discussion of fheory. Same way a failed hypothesis is still science

How can you refute anything when you’ve shown you don’t even know the meaning of the words you’re using? You’ve been routinely BTFO and all you can do is write blogs about your space engine and lack of a job.

I mever did such a thing. Youre the one who brings you zodiac definitions as a tangent to muster up irrelevant and faulty intelligentsia authority

Just because you didn’t understand my point doesn’t mean I have to keep arguing about your shitty perspective. I don’t consider argument to authority legitimate. That’s why I don’t care about the definition of academia as you see it. I see it’s definition as something more intrinsic and that’s what I was arguing about. You simply could not keep up.

Astronomy is a field for all the failed nerds who didn't make the cut for real&practical fields. Literally an adult daycare for unsociable retards with uppity attitude.

Attached: 1242860415403.png (680x640, 124K)

Actually I just mentioned the zodiac once as an example of other perspectives on gender. You’re the one that got hung up on it and needed it explained to you because you clearly didn’t understand what it was. You can just say you don’t know, you know. You don’t have to lie to impress us.

I've already refuted all of your fact based arguments, give me something else.

This is a repetition of your previous post. Are you angry about something and unable to formulate new sentences?

I've already refuted all of your fact based arguments, give me something else.

I've already refuted all of your fact based arguments, give me something else.

Haha he mad. How come no one ever believes you when you say you refute things? Could it be because you don’t even know the meaning of refute? Lmao

Based esotericism and fuck feminist academia poster here. Reminder that I won this thread. Behold all my glory. I urge everyone to read my posts and to marvel at the repercussions of them.

I've already refuted all of your fact based arguments, give me something else.

I've already refuted all of your fact based arguments, give me something else.

Nobody ever made an argument for authority, thats what we're saying

>it’s academic because it’s taught in schools and has formed “academic circles”!
>therefore this opinion holds weight because the it fits the narrow and meaningless definition of “academic” as I see it (even though it’s dishonest to the pursuit of truth)!

Based. And I spent the thread fighting off communist merfolk, they try to hide but I can see through their posts

Nobody said it holds weight
We said it was taught in classrooms
We said it had no weight

Lmao based esotericism and fuck feminist academia poster here again. Please take note that one of the guys who got mad and started to spam got banned.

Chalk up another win for me lol. I hope you’re reading this and seething bannedboi

>nobody said it holds weight but we are all arguing like it does
Just stop posting retard. I don’t care about your semantics or your backpedaling. You and your kin got BTFO. Run away from the thread now.

This entire thread is George R. R. Martin tier nitpicking about 'What would Furiosa's water tax policy be?'
Fuck off, it's a fairytale ending.

Honestly winning a thread on Yea Forums is more impressive than being a research assistant ever could.

This. Thank you based relativity judge.

You posted this originally:
>in the esoteric sciences from zodiac astrology to hermeticism
The poster didn't express disdain for the chartering of the stars that ancient people did, but rather with the metaphysical significance they thought the position of the celestial bodies held.
You then strawmanned him and he took the bait and you spend the next ten posts insulting each other.

The argument is about the definitions of gender you retard. Not about astronomy. The metaphysical significance of these systems is what helps us to understand gender better. You’re the retard that thinks this is an argument about the stars or physics. Fuck off you retard you clearly don’t understand the context.

its academic regardless of your view of academia.
there are people that have written dissertations and have occupations within academia that teaches these things. if we think thats bollocks and want academia to be something else, doesn't change the fact of the world we inhabit.
learning the language helps overcoming them instead of sitting on your ass and refusing to even acknowledge that the world has changed.

Yes it is academic in the sense that it denotes something taught in an academic institution.

Is it academic in the classic definition of academia? No it is not. Hence my posts, and hence your retarded hamsterwheel spinning of nonrelevance.

It doesn't help you understand anything. It's just a prentetious moniker you added to give your fluffy statement some weight.

''practical'' fields are for codemonkeys who never made the cut for theoretical science. That's how it works in physics.

We have enough Chinks and Indians to make products. I actually use my imagination and creativity in the process of discovery,.

Attached: 1511367196250.jpg (1018x1024, 100K)

I will keep BTFOing you feminist academia faggots until the end of time or until you crack and start spamming like the other retard and get banned. I am ok with both outcomes.

It doesn’t help you because you know nothing about it. But if you actually understood it, and combined it with other aspects from hermeticism, it provides a great understanding of the genders that feminist academia has no hope to ever achieve.

That ain't me man. My last post before 220 a few seconds ago is this I find the feminism discussion interesting but I'm here just to correct the retarded pseud who thinks Zodiac signs are scientific.

Science makes unusual things understood, and therefore usual
Science is literally about testing something over and over again until you understand it completely with all variables

You have a point where the number of people in science is dwarfed by the number of people not in science
But in general, plenty of people understand scientific principles enough to say they know a little about science
they know what condensation is, how gravity works, etc etc

Not only that, but if people were interested in science, they could pretty easily learn about it because the internet exists and its done more for the spread of knowledge than any other concept that has ever existed ever

So you're effectively wrong on all counts

based mentally ill poster

Are you evading bans? Uh oh that’s not good!

Spannusbogen: The self-imposed delay between when one begins to desire something and when one attempts to achieve or acquire it

>scientific method (methodological naturalism )
So it requires a method it DEFINED concepts interpreted by the user, that is, he understood the concept thanks to his esoteric understanding of it?
Also, you do know that education is esoteric in nature too right?

Attached: 1540776521690.png (728x689, 534K)

Cry more you sniveling rat. Go be dishonest some more in the hopes that you can confuse the topic enough that no one will see how embarrassingly stupid your posts are.

That’s so the audience can see it

as you make clear in this post, it's just a coping mechanism to make you feel superior to other people.

I got a warning, someone itt is a tattletale :)

And as you have made clear in ALL your posts, you are tragically undereducated

Maybe don’t spam like a retard because you’re losing the argument next time ;)

I'm just some random fuck, you sound all worked up, friend

>You have a point where the number of people in science is dwarfed by the number of people not in science
But science is merely a basket of esoterically studied subjects. You're implying that people know every part about science when you say "people know science".
People assume they know things about these specialised subjects. The fact is, they don't truly understand it at the same level as a specialist. Only the specialist knows the esoteric language of the subject truly.

Hence science is esoteric in nature.

oh wow you really were worked up lmao. Taking this internet thing a little seriously huh bud?

>NOOOOOO STOP BTFOING ME
>ITS NOT FAIR THAT YOU HAVE MORE ENERGY AND TACT THAN ME NOOOOO YOU HAVE TO BE ON MY SHITTY LEVEL

Based man relying on instincts

the only reason you prefer "medieval science" to modern science is that modern science is too competetive, so it can't help you cope with your feelings of insecurity as well as your self-perceived expertise in "medieval science" and mystery games.

Somebody stop this madman before he loses it and takes it out on someone irl, he's having a mental breakdown

I dont know why you’re calling it a medieval science when it’s simply a system of logic and observation that is part of our scientific method.

It’s like saying knowing about the atoms is “medieval science” because we are now a conglomeration of them. Nice brainlet logic.

Why don’t you try not posting anymore since you’ve completely stopped arguing about anything on topic and simply wish to insult other posters? It’s obvious you’ve lost so just leave with some dignity.

If the universe is fundamentally discrete, someday someone or something will live an existence free of esoteric gaps. God, please...

youtube.com/watch?v=3E98C5BcXnE

Attached: pillars_of_creation.jpg (1366x1425, 2.23M)

You don’t seem to understand the meaning of esoteric. Esoteric=/=supernatural

>modern science is too competetive
Modern science certainly is PERSUASIVE.
But I hardly call it "competitive" or "more perfected".

One would argue that it is an obscene abomination of bias.
But that's where you start to go mad and pretend you never thought what you thought.

Attached: 1506031421090.png (473x571, 273K)

because it is speculation by scholars in the middle ages who didn't have access to modern knowledge, and so most of what they thought turned out t be wrong.

If you're seriously that mad, why don't you just run to big daddy janny and report me again? Maybe this time I'll actually get a ban for interfering with your riveting intellectual conversation.

What gives you that idea based on what I said ? I wasn't even disagreeing with you.

I'm starting to get convinced science is esoteric, but I do really despise the connotations of the term.

Sure you do, special boy. Sure you do.

>If the universe is fundamentally discrete, someday someone or something will live an existence free of esoteric gaps.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evil_demon
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laplace's_demon

But here lies the problem..

It is competetive as a function of it actually being useful in industry. You'll be competing against the smartest and most diciplined people from all over the world. Or you can just read some old manuscripts and pretend like you've gained access to superior ancient knowledge.

It’s not. Learn the things you talk about. They’re still utilized today at the core of the scientific method and in our modern philosophies.

He was trying to teach them to not waste water and conserve it for long term use.
The women only think short term and waste it as soon as they took over at the end.
Thats why max left at the end, he knew that the limited food supply and the water that will eventually run out will cause chaos and death. He wanted no part of that

>this is the gay shit I have to deal with in this thread

Fuck feminist academia. Fuck SCIENCE! wannabe nerds, and especially fuck zoomers

Attached: 7A8F6C86-2C14-47B4-B1B8-6B683AEB878D.jpg (745x968, 489K)

>It is competetive as a function of it actually being useful in industry.
But that's only subjective to it's usefulness in an industry, it itself a modern development of science.

Attached: 1529261033107_.gif (500x357, 639K)

Youre beinging in so much irrelevant shit to the conversation and saying its about shit it was never about, just because you saw someone reference the existence of feminism. Absolutely Nobody in this thread ever ever argued against esotericism, we are all in complete agreement that the esoteric themes prevail in Fury Road despite a writer's attempt to include very shaky feminism

What does the alchemical symbols of planets have to do with epistemology.

It’s relevant as shit and your ignorance of the subject matter is not proof of irrelevance. Go be a brainlet elsewhere.

Not only that but the fuel and ammo sites lost their leaders and stuff and will probably fall to succession wars too. The whole area will be a hellhole inside the general hellhole of mad max world.

The director could have merely produced this result by accident, what matters is the result, not the intention.

I don’t know. Why don’t you tell me since you’re the one assuming the concepts of the zodiac is only about that?

Manifacture is a lot older than science.

>get btfo
>run to janny for help
Is there anything more sad than ratting to the jannies? Imagine being a ratboy on 4channel

>spam a thread because you lose an argument
>get surprised when you get deleted

Stop spazzing out retard

So the "sex" or "gender" of concepts like life or will, do that have something to do with epistemology?

Imagine being so mad that you screencap your (you)s and then post it in the same thread. Literally and unironically seething.

I don’t know you tell me Mr. Words from a Hat

I'm switching sides, back when based retard esotericism poster was misreading posts and insisting any statement of feminist curriculum is inherently an endorsement of it, he was a retard slamming against his own brain cage, worthy of ridicule. But then some retard comes in and calls all awareness and application of classic science 'insecurity', while flatly defending the superiority of completely abstract terms, and now based espteric poster is right, there are retards in the thread needing schooling now

RENT FREE

This whole thread is (yous) to me by the biggest of brainless like yourself. I posted the screenshot because any outside observer will see just how shit these responses are and how you retards seem to like to swarm en masse

Reminds me of the one kid in middle school that would snitch on kids for smoking cigarettes that everyone hated. Hell, it probably is that kid all grown up now and still a little snitch.

Stop lying to people. You are Mr Words from a Hat and you’re just as big of a retard as the others who jumped into this convo without knowing what it was about or what the words meant.

One would consider it in a permanent development relationship with science and it's ancestors.
But people in this thread are denying those ancestors even relate to it in any way.

Attached: 1540877941377.jpg (800x450, 84K)

And everyone laughed at you instead for being a snitch and for running to jannies to fight your battles, so it backfired completely and simultaneously made you look like a bitch too. Good going nancy.

Makes sense. Your own birth and death are passive activies that you have no control over. Everything else is active.

>what matters is the result not the intent
Nah. Intent is a discrete concept that can be observed and understood. Its relation to the result indicates the value of that intent. A feminist intent organically giving way to esotericism that refutes it indicates the invalidity of the feminist intent

It is what you brought up in the original post that I quoted before:
>in the esoteric sciences from zodiac astrology to hermeticism, life is actually associated with Will, which is a male trait. Nature, entropy, birth and death, are associated with female traits.
What does any of that have to do with epistemology.

joe=trump
IT'S TRUMPS!!!

Attached: trumpwater.jpg (955x500, 333K)

science is not technology.

You tell me because you’re the one setting up the premise around epistemology, not me

It's not really mutually exclusive either.

Why are you playing intellectual king of the hill? Your message is now comppetely warranted now that people are here explicitly trying to damn esotericism with their posts.

The scientific metho is based on epistemology. It's not based on people assigning a male gender to mars and a female one to venus.

Reminder that feminist theory isn’t academic and hermeticism is part of the scientific method. Another reminder that the gender definitions of hermeticism and other esoteric subjects have a better grasp on reality than actual gender studies groups.

all really besides the point.

>The scientific metho is based on epistemology
No it's based on who can shill the most.
In fact that is fundamentally the illusion science has.

What makes you think I never got it? You started this thread by trying to kill the messenger and insist he was a feminist loyalist

Epistemology is the theory of knowledge and deducing it. It is not a new field of science born out of some newfound knowledge. It is simply the word we use for the various methods we utilize to gain knowledge. You seem to have confused yourself.

We know! We always knew!

the idea of peer reviewing maybe, but not the scientific method.

I wasn't the one going autistic about "durr it's not esoteric".
Language is never simply communicated between people without a degree of miscommunication.

I didn’t start this thread, nor did I kill any messenger. I simply told someone espousing feminist academia as the source of their interpretation for the movie that feminist theory is not academic (I also made mention that the core of the movie’s message is inherently anti feminist theory and in fact a hermetic perspective on it lets you see it’s true theme about females leading to death vs makes)

try reading some philosophy of science. science is 100% based on epistemology.

Came in expecting a Mad Max thread. What the fuck is all this

>but not the scientific method
The method has the biggest illusion of legitimacy. You're just assuming the method has legitimacy because you agree with everyone else that it's more legitimate.
Where the fuck is this thread going.

Why couldn't you have expanded on the importance of the classics and esotericism without calling the guy who correctly referenced a writer's intent an enemy?

Try reading my post again

are you high?

This thread has been derailed by the wannabe nerd ground who screams “SCIENCE!” after watching an episode of mythbusters and nodding in acknowledgement to TED talks videos.

I don't know anymore.

I was assuming you were the guy posting earlier about that. Were you just another user that came into the conversation?

Attached: mindblown.gif (220x220, 1.69M)

*wannabe nerd crowd

Sure but the writer who tried and failed to make it a feminist work was using ideas shared in feminist classrooms

>nodding in acknowledgement to TED talks videos
kek

Attached: Neco Arc Bubbles nod.gif (234x240, 627K)

it's not about agreeing with people it's about whether you agree with the epistemological reasoning behind it.
I will suggest again that you take a course in philosophy of science or atleast read a bit about it before you try to discuss it.

I don’t care because I was never arguing about her inspirational source or the fact that it existed.

I think we've gine too far in assuming who's who, and telling people not to get involved in the conversation just so we can each continue yelling at our individual boogeyman

>it's not about agreeing with people it's about whether you agree with the epistemological reasoning behind it
>it's not about agreeing with people, it's about agreeing with people

Attached: 4bfe45db50ec588fe7b6691c06dd269b0aff13d99729a8e872350e49bd5efdec.jpg (261x212, 13K)

Are we talking about Mad Max still?

again you display your mental illness by categorizing everyone who disagrees with you as being part of an imaginary group of people you don't like.

Yes but esoterically

I just ride the wave user.. just to see where I land.

But you insisted that reference to ideas found in feminist classrooms is inherently an appeal to authority even when he said he doesnt believe its right

Haha found the wannabe nerd. What’s your favourite TED talks my Bazingabro?

you don't have to consider the person to judge what is being said.

No, why would you think that?

There's a pretty big ontological gap between an object and its subject, don't you agree?

This thread is garbage.

WITNESS ME!

Attached: maxresdefault.jpg (1280x720, 68K)

*tips fedora*
well memed fellow green piller.

Seize this madness at once.

Attached: hardcore shitposting.jpg (1024x768, 54K)

You must be retarded. Here let me explain it to you in simple words:
1. user says his thematic interpretation is from feminist academia
2. I mention feminist theory is not academic
3. user says it is academic because there are academic circles that talk about it

That’s the appeal to authority. Within the context of this conversation. Not the movie itself, retard.

You do have to consider something said by a person though...

I think you've needlessly divorced the flesh from the speaker. When someone says something true, I'm agreeing with their correct self-expression.

>3. user says it is academic because there are academic circles that talk about it
If only you know how bad things are.

So what are you saying here?
>You're just assuming the method has legitimacy because you agree with everyone else that it's more legitimate.
I am assuming something is reasonable because I think it is reasonable?

>hurr durr you need water to survived

I havent drank water in five years, the only thing i drink is Coke, Sprite, Orange Juice, and Milk.

are you originally high?

If only you knew that I made it clear this was in regards to the classical definition of academic and not true fact of whether it was being discussed in an academy. I covered my bases very well and there’s no escape from it.

Attached: 0cd219ebf1c26095c7da26da00b6da45095385c603383c48243412b56dda1ed8.jpg (306x165, 17K)

This is an entirely semantic discussion about the meaning of 'academic'. You can still be a student of bad ideas, go to an academy that teaches bullshit, and be a scholar of lies

No it’s not. I made my working definition clear to avoid the semantic goalpost shifting.

We made ourselves clear too, that he was merely stati g its ecistence in feminist curricula, but you still clutched your pearl and called us stupid for saying so

But no one cares that you made your retardation ever more clear for us. It was clear form the get go.

Do you really think the collective humanity knows everything?
I wasn't talking about reasonableness. That's subjective to the collective as an entity.
What I was talking about was the legitimacy in relation to everything. Whether it was a fundamental truth.

He meant that they should rein them in and take what they need instead of overindulging.

Man impregnates, woman aborts unless oppressed by man. Therefore he is life, like she is dirt from which the flower blooms.

Attached: My-600-Lb-Life-Justin-McSwain-Update-News.jpg (1200x677, 53K)

Is it really non-academic and ascholastic to study or read up on a recent experimental idea?

Bane bailed and Nucks died in the crash. Who honestly cares

>this entire thread

Attached: 1273352383831.gif (152x168, 1.12M)

I don't believe a collective can know anything, nor do I think it is possible to know everything. I am having trouble deciphering your post as it is mostly fluff.

I think it's all derailed from the content of the thread - the fact that Mad Max : Fury Road basically criticises the feminist delusion with regards to how to improve their world.

Attached: romulus and remus.jpg (500x338, 30K)

>I am having trouble deciphering your post as it is mostly fluff.
That's because the entire thread is full of anons farting out crap and seeing which stinks the most.

The problem is that feminist curriculum shitters believed that their interpretation of the movie was the one and only because they argued it was the intent of the director and the feminist writer to show feminist theory from feminist academia. This was obviously dismantled quickly, as we have shown one could easily interpret the movie to show females as bringing death and destruction rather than males. Now how could such a different set of perspectives come from something that was supppsed to be rooted in academia? If feminist theory was indeed as academic as it likes to label itself due to the gaggle of “circles” that form around it, then there would be no room for alternate interpretations because the themes would be too scientifically and “epistemologically” unrefutable.

But the fact that one can refute the so called feminist theme of the movie with a more grounded - dare I say “esoteric” - perspective shows us indeed that feminist academia is not academic at all.

I hope this clarifies it for all of you brainlets who have decided to be vocal about your stupidity in this thread.

It's confirmation bias really.

>then there would be no room for alternate interpretations
Academia inherently has debate and dissonance.

Academia does but to be academic is to be in pursuit of the ultimate truth. Learn the definition of the words first please. Scroll up and read them and don’t waste people’s time anymore.

It also shows the men delusion over how they think they are improving the world.

Delusion to you, learning to live with the hands you are dealt to others.

No one in Mad Max thinks they are improving the world.

And that's the issue

Something has to be refutable for it be considered scientific.

>pursuit of the ultimate truth
So you could say pursuit of the ultimate truth is an expedition over a sea of dissonance or discord between islands of enlightenment or agreeance.

I disagree, men are the world.

But our objective is not just to be scientific but also to utilize the scientific method to find the ultimate unrefutable truth. You are stopping half way on the journey here.

But we didnt thi k that and we didnt say it. One guy stated one writers intent and you assumed we all trusted the authprity of feminist academia. We don't, we just believe in the factual accuracy that one of the writers sourced a feminist idea in trying to make this film. Everyone very quickly agreed that writer failed and the

I don’t even think I’ve argued with you. You sound like a bigger brainlet than all of them so far though.

Textbook Dunning-Kruger. You're absolutely retarded and your interpretation is idiotic.

This. I am esoteric anti feminist guy who won the thread multiple times and I approve this message.

Right, and feminists think they're improving the world and end up destroying it.
Meanwhile, men want to prevent it's destruction.

That's the point. Females are self destructive in their ignorance and bliss.

Scientific knowledge can never be certain.

>men want to prevent it's destruction
Not really, if anything they are helping it decay.

Are you certain about that?

Failed in a way that endorses esotericism*, like you said

That's not the point of the movie. You are going to quite a great length to defend this movie.

That is the point of the movie, regardless of your arguments to authority (be they writers, directors, or feminist academia).

Yes. It follows from the meaning of science, knowlegde and certain.

Ah so what you have shown everyone here is that some knowledge can indeed be certain. Thanks for demonstrating it.

The point of the movie is that immortan joe is oppressing the women and using a made up scarcity to put himself into a position of authority.
You are not supposed to think the water is going to run out.

In what way?
At the end of the day this is just calling females passive and having nothing to do with anything (to call them neutral good) and insisting only men ever had achoice or any control so all bad things must be them.
Which fails to take into account the organic female influence, and the equal natural right of anyone to take control.
Pretending females were actually put in the phantom zone and have nothing to do with humanity is disingenuous

Yes, but not scientific knowledge.

Which is funny because scarcity is real

That’s YOUR perspective which is flawed on many levels including a realistic level. The realistic perspective is that the women of Fury Road brought more death and destruction than the men.

See Furiosa, Vulvania’s Green Place, and the loss of water from the citadel

But scientific knowledge is not the only knowledge we can attain as you have shown.

I know your mistake, you assumed when I said we utilize the scientific method for answers that that’s the only method we would use. Rookie mistake ;)

Not only you're a brainlet you're also reddit tier in bants. Jesus Christ user have some decency.

Stay upset low IQ loser.

If the movie is flatly feminist then there is absolutely no reason for the female-ruled land to be barren and ruined by the ladies

physics physicalist again

That does hinge on the assumption that the Miller's actual intentions with the ending are subversive of feminism, collectivism and maybe postmodernism at large - and that it would even e the only canon interpretation. That it's 100% part of the movie ''message'' that the continuation of the story follows a disaster due to resources being wasted. Based, and based on everything shown on screen and how cleanly and logically that world works in this movie, it's a fair assumption.

Still, at first glance it's portrayed as something good for the people. The way visually in the ending, and throughout the plot that underpins it, punishing Joe's family and his power structure takes precedence over any supposed ''saving of people'' noble goals.
Either way, the Vuvalini are 100% also perpetrators of the cycle violence, division and material scarcity everyone wallows in - even in the ''standard'' surface interpretation.
A bit parallel to this, last shots : notice the hint that people like Max would be the best leaders through times like that, besides their tragic unwillingness.

Attached: 1508111291851.jpg (367x411, 26K)

Yes, your interpretation where the antagonists are really the good guys is perfect and totally not a post hoc rationalization to alleviate your guilt for liking this movie.

Also this. Feminist shitters BTFO. Subtext FTW

Realistic the planet can't turn into a giant desert, Joe having a water monopoly makes zero sense when you look at it from a realistic perspective.

>helping it decay
>by preventing it from dying

>meanwhile the feminists kill the fucking thing
herpa derpderp.

Attached: 1365639749568.gif (215x219, 500K)

My perspective is based on the reality of things. I.E in a world of scarcity and responsibilities.

Compare Immortan Joe’s lush green citadel with flowing water vs the female utopia of The Green Place.

That is enough to show you just how right my perspective is in comparison to yours.

>defend this movie
I was talking about the theme.
What is this about defending it?
Who from?
About what?

Attached: 1540608802556.png (374x343, 190K)

>planet can’t turn into a giant desert

That’s a really dumb and wrong assumption you stupid loser

You can't use the scientific method at all for your goal, because all the knowledge you gain from it is uncertain.
No amount of scientific advancement would add anything to the teachings of Buddha, Jesus or Lao Tzu.

There are better ways to say feminist studies are ungrounded than correcting someone for using a word that means 'what they teach in schools'.

Nowhere did I say I would use it all the way. We must utilize all the ways on our journey. You can stop replying and admit you are wrong and got absolutely used by me to prove my point. It’s ok. At least you’ve served a purpose unlike others.

>You are not supposed to think the water is going to run out.

Like I said above, it really does hinge on that. I'm not convinced but as far as motifs go, it would just be insane to overlook that thematic pattern.

Everything takes place in a desert. Why aren't I supposed to think it will run out ? And if I'm supposed to think that, then Mad Max may be slightly subversive of feminism

it would also certify this as a good thread.

They aren't preventing it
Then perhaps you can answer where did all the water go?

You mean the citadel run by a caste of grotesquely pale mutant children? Who keep people around to milk them and drain their blood?

Actually what I said was perfectly clear. It’s brainlets like you who victimized themselves instantly in the face of a dissonant opinion that have to divert attention away from how they are wrong.

But the rightness of your idea is reinforced by the truth that a feminist tried and failed to make this a feminist fairy tale

You can't use it even a little bit. Any conclusion based on uncertainty is itself uncertain.

The water dried up and only deep ground deposits were left. Immortal Joe’s citadel pumped it up and gave it to people. There was a cost of human life but there was still a good result.

Compare it to Vulvania’s Green Place that not only costed life, but also has nothing to show for it. Feminists BTFO