DJP
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
jondwhite wrote:If a non member turned up to branch and offered to make the tea would your first thought be they are trying to poison you?
That's not an ananalogous situation…
moderator1 wrote:You are definitely wrong. Most of the debates held in Swansea are chaired by a non-member. Its down to the Branch to decide who chairs their debates.OK. Shows how many meetings I go to. But surely this is different for business meetings?
SocialistPunk wrote:I thought I heard that the SPGB used to invite audience members to take the chair at physical debates.Don't think so. Could be wrong though..
SocialistPunk wrote:May I ask if the SPGB invite non-party members to chair physical debates that they host?No, of course not.
rodmanlewis wrote:If you have a religion that you wear, if not on your sleeve but on other parts of your body, then you should be prepared to stand by it. Otherwise it makes you a fairweather religioso.Well, 17 percent of Anglican clergy do not believe in a personal god so go figure…
LBird wrote:The simplest explanation, alan, is that Marx's 'value' is qualitative (relational), whereas his bourgeois detractors regard science as quantitative (countable).This isn't an explanation of Marx's value theory at at all… Ignore.
alanjjohnstone wrote:Heard of this debate ..the transformation problem and prices versus value but never really understood its importance. Its the significance of it that i'm puzzled by.If there's a "transformation problem" (i.e if "value" (the socialy neceassary labour time necessary to reproduce a commodity) can't be converted into "price" (i.e pounds, dollars etc) without causing contradictions) then Marx's theory of value is wrong because it is internally inconsistent. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformation_problem
Vin wrote:Statistical Probability? About the same as winning the lottery? Winning it a thousand times? Remarkable coincidence if nothing else.Wonder why the account was suspended?There's nothing remarkable about it at all. Because of the vast amount of events happening the chances of an improbable event happening are quite high. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Improbable_things_happenAt a guess the account was banned because it was a random message generating bot and not a real person.Either that or there's a conspiracy to block the tweets of time travellers.
Vin wrote:A twitter account describing the Paris attacks in a tweet on 11/11/15 before they occured has been suspended. It is being described on twitter as 'weird'The account was @pzbooksFire enough shots at random and a few of them will hit home by chance…http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/30803/did-this-twitter-bot-predict-the-paris-shootings-2-days-before-it-happened
It's not a question of "more likely" they *already have* been used as a pretext against free speech…
At a guess this poster hasn't read a single article on this website and is just spamming every forum she can find with this trite…
Vin wrote:Thanks for that but it still doesn't address the question.It does. Because if someone asks that question they're coming from a reformist mindset.
Vin wrote:Hopefully there are other interested people on here.
