All the arguments i hear (a) rely on justificationism (excuse making), not falsi

All the arguments i hear (a) rely on justificationism (excuse making), not falsificationism (warranty of due diligence), (b) seek to preserve investments in conflation – just as all religions do, (c) confuse the resolution of disputes in matters of conflict (truth) with the communication and ideation and cooperation ( meaning ).

I”m in the same place as the men of the scientific enlightenment – right through darwin: instead of a church of excuse making mystics, an academy of excuse making rationalists. Neither grasps that they are just making excuses in order to rally people with meaning, in pursuit of power which they cannot construct through either force or productivity. They sell lies. The academy like the church profits from lies. There may be some truth amidst the lies, but this does mean the lies are not more harmful than the truth is beneficial.

I think humans have been lied to so often that they cannot imagine a world via-negativa (resolving differences, deciding, truth) and via positiva (organizing, teaching, meaning). They cannot imagine a perfect law and a perfect literature would lead to a perfect, transcendent man.

As imperfect, they cannot. Or rather, with such perfection, those who have lesser talents could not rally on truth, force, and remuneration. And so lies are the way that they comensate for inadequacy in their attempts to inspire themsevles in the face of evidence of inferiority, and rally others in the face of their inferiority.

So yes. Maybe truth is for transcendent man, aristocracy and gods, and maybe the half-man requires conflation and lies – he is not transcendent enough yet – still a human animal. Domesticated. Perhaps a freeman. But not able to join the aristocracy.

unable to join the gods.

( did ‘ya see what I did there? truth, myth, and literature. )