Which is not convenient at all, for I would love to substantiate my hypothesis that way.
You do. All the time.
No, retard. Experimental results are not the only way to prove a theory is incorrect.
Actually yes. Humanity is going to wait around some indefinite period of time. If the next world war doesn't make it go extinct, that is.
Absolutely not.
The clock of history doesn't describe circles, it only goes forward: once the hour of communism has come, it won't go back to capitalism.
That's where you come in with examples. Are you asking me to fulfil your burden of proof when you're the claimant? I said that it could be, it couldn't be. People who say it will never, ever happen are incorrect because they lack evidence for future events which have not happened. People who say that it is inevitable are wrong for the same reason.
Nope, I dispute people asserting inevitability with no evidence. Pointing out the lack of evidence for communism being the next emergent system doesn't mean capitalism will last forever.
I am not going to let you deflect from the question I asked. Some user said it would 'emerge from capitalism'. I ask for the fourth time: do you have any examples of the claim that was made in the posts above?
Feudalism lasted a good thousand years before capitalism. See you then. In the meantime: gtfo.
It is entirely convenient if you want to be irrational. That's what I mean when I said it was convenient: it's convenient to create indefinite time periods for yourself if you want to be make claims that will rely on proof "some day".
When have I done this? Please quote me. I have not purported any hypothesis without evidence, I have not even put forward a single hypothesis ITT.
That is the only way to prove a theory correct. If you lack evidence, either empirically or otherwise, then the 'theory' lacks any predictive power and is just a coincidence, which is why I said a broken clock is right twice a day. Did you mean empirical results instead of experimental? I would agree with you then, empirical evidence is not 'the only' type of evidence. I am waiting for a single shred of evidence, any type, demonstrating the 'inevitability of the emergence of communism from capitalism'.
So there is not even a possibility wherein the waiting period would be for something else. This is pure confirmation bias that cannot accept anything contrary to the worldview. Sad.
Then you enter the realm of post-factual talking points. Predictions with open-ended time periods are unfalsifiable. If you just tell the other guy to 'wait' for some arbitrary time period, the evidence that comes forth is just a coincidence. If I asked you to wait until some time in the future for it to rain, then the fact that it rains is not related to my guess because I did not predict anything, I just guessed and it, coincidentally, happened to rain. Get this through your illogical head: a broken clock is still right twice a day. That doesn't mean that the wild predictions it makes all the time are indicative of anything BUT a guessing mind.
It isn't literally meant to describe circles. See: en.wiktionary.org
Again, present a shred of evidence demonstrating this to be true.
Do you have any example of a Big Crunch ?
So what's your alternative again?
Moron, learn 2 read.
I ask again: do you have any examples of the claim that was made in the posts above (inevitability of the emergence of communism from capitalism)?
The difference is that it admits to being speculative and NOT inevitable/'the only way'. It admits to the absence of knowledge to lead to claims of certainty. Asserting that communism will inevitably emerge from capitalism with certainty but without proof is not admitting to its own absence of evidence. Now, that doesn't mean that it is evidence of absence, which is not what I am asserting: I am simply asking for the evidence that, at the very least, admits to being speculative, at best. Nobody ITT has done that, they've all been making positive assertions with full degrees of certainty, using phrases like 'inevitable emergence'.
You asked to set a time period. I did. Why are you still here?
Can you demonstrate how the workers owned the means of production in those examples (so as to become socialist) beyond one image? And then tell me how this relates to the inevitable emergence of communism if all those instances are no longer around. If it was so inevitable, it would always pop back up.
A time period for a prediction does not mean examining what has already occurred. Time is linear.