We've been arguing about a political test based on Dungeons and Dragons. Note the implication: libertarians are "chaotic evil" and Reaganites are "lawful evil".
We've been arguing about a political test based on Dungeons and Dragons. Note the implication: libertarians are "chaotic evil" and Reaganites are "lawful evil".
If the plots are just superimposed, Reaganites end up neutral evil, Nazis end up lawful good, and commies are the ultimate good. Of course both of these schemes have purely arbitrary "definitions" of the terms they use. I know that Lakoff's objective is to destroy the established meaning of words. His purpose is to force communication in terms of feelings, and at the same time abolish rational thought. The same probably goes for deconstructionists like Derrida.
Here's a quote from bozo Lakoff, "The institute offers its expertise and research on a nonpartisan basis to help progressives understand how best to get their messages across." Now the "institute" is Rockridge inst., formed in 2000, by UC Davis and Bezerkly leftists(progressives). The word "nonpartisan" is in there for the touchy feely effect. Since they're disseminating info, that part of the comm needs to be rational and portray truth, like his literary contract. Like gay marriage, they need to destroy the meaning of words and replace it with feelings/emotions. This link contains Lakoff elaborating on the importance of BS. The man is a professor of con, the art of fraud and lies.
"Anarchy, State, Utopia by Robert Nozick"
Yes, that was written in response to Rawl's Theory of Justice. I haven't read it.