most "arguments" that compare "civilizations" end up being simple restatements of the premise in a tautologically circular kind of way. and so it is not surprising that here the o.p. repeats itself in a tautological and circular way as well because of the way in which the premises are the same as the conclusions and they are said twice, once with the abstraction "utilitarian realism" which reduces to "crude utilitarianism" and again in the restatement of the abstraction in the form of some "demonstration" and so the circular tautology of premise being repeated in the definition/demonstration is repeated.
like this:
Quote:
|
Materialistic prosperity isn’t gained by sniffing flowers or watching the clouds.
|
is presu,ably a restatement of whatever "utilitarian realism" is this week.
i've noticed the tendency of graduate students looking to differentiate their version of the same thing from previous versions of the same thing to throw around the word "realism" lately. just saying.