I mean to be fair, the post where you said "you were done" came in before I hit "post" I have other things to do than just argue with you.
Your points are not valid. but lol okay, just use ad hominems cuz that makes you correct :^)
I never said absolutes don't exist but they need to be objective, and the structure is a lot more sound than creating absolutes without logical reasoning. Also I'm thinking more Socrates and Plato than Marx.
It's the only school of thought that lets you think for your self and to determine what is and isn't correct using facts and validity, determining what is sound and cogent, and what isn't. Which is why I think you don't want to argue points directly, because you'd see the holes in your logic, have it shatter your world view and feel that "Terror Management" set in. Either that or you're trolling.
It's invalid because it doesn't discuss the topic nor specify any claim, and anything closely related is a faulty analogy, further discrediting your validity. I never said philosophy in and of itself is invalid, don't put words in my mouth. However, the way you are using it in response to a critical argument is invalid. All you do is espouse esoteric doctrine, and to apply it so broadly the only conclusion you will draw is conjecture, at best.
But that all is to say: So... No, you don't actually have a valid claim. Good to know. Everything you said can be safely dismissed by any logical rational thinker here.
Going "Objective rational thought is Evil, and anything that tries to make me question what is right and wrong is even more evil" is the most profound Evil there is, as it's a detriment to our species.
If you can't point to why something is wrong and only keep quoting that "just because you're desensitized doesn't mean it's okay." Then you have lost the point, and failed to even make an assertion of "what is okay" and then support why it is so in the first place... and for that, you lose.
/gg no re.