POSTMODERNISM IS JUST LYING. HERE IS WHY. Well, we differ in tolerance for lying. I have none. You not only tolerate it, but seek to employ it at every opportunity you can get away with. So, I solve for truth. You solve for reasonableness. I use the word ‘true’ meaning decidable independent of preference. You use the word true meaning ‘preferable’ because you conflate the true with the ‘reasonable’ (preferable) – and you can get away with it. You do this because you can’t help yourself. You can’t help yourself for a combination of genetic and cultural reasons. Your ethic is ‘what can I get away with’, the aristocratic (and my) ethic is ‘what is true regardless of the consequences’. Postmodernism holds “what can I get away with normatively and therefore escape stratification and punishment for it, and what can I get away with claiming is ‘true’ and still escape ostracization and punishment for it. So yes, it says get rid of European (‘aryan’) morals, get rid of christian morals (germanized christian), and let loose female, french, and jewish non-morality (whatever I can get away with).. Why? Because Nietzsche was looking for a positive morality when in fact, as the aryans, europeans, romans, and germanics understood, there is no such thing. Morality is a negative (prohibition), and as such we have negative LAW, rather than positive philosophy and positive religion, and positive cults. You can see this in the major works of the civilizations, where the primitive civilizations of the semitic region imposed authoritarian positivism, the indian positive rulership, the chinese collective duty, and the europeans negative law – leaving a LOT of philosophers to propose CHOICES within that law. Rather than ONE SOLUTION CONFLATED with RULE. The Europeans/Romans/Germanics (Aryans) stated there was no positive morality, only a negative morality of reciprocity, leaving the MARKET for positive moralities to adapt to the needs of niches (classes). The only people to grasp this are the english and the americans – and even they failed to maintain indoctrination into it because they did not fully understand it (which is my job – to make it fully understood). But the jews, the french, and white anglo women, have all adopted the female strategy, of ‘what can I get away with’ rather than ‘what can i do without getting away with anything’. All positivas are choice. The only TRUTH AND MORALITY IS NEGATIVE. Everything else is just choice. Like I said. You only have to open your mouth for us to identify whether you are a positivist and parasite, or a negativist and producer.
Category: Epistemology and Method
-
What Demand Does Postmodern Thought Satisfy?
WHAT DEMAND DOES POSTMODERN THOUGHT SATISFY? What Demand does Postmodern thought satisfy? (FYI: Definition: A “Grammar”: rules of continuous, recursive, disambiguation, within a given set of semantic limitations.”) We produce arguments in their constituent …
- Paradigms,
- Frames, and ..
- Ontologies,
… using …
- Names,
- Relations,
- Values,
- Methods (operations) and their
- cumulative imaginary (forecast) models (worlds)
… to satisfy demand. We have little control over that demand as far as I know. But whether or not we do, we generate demand. But what demand do the various degrees of correspondence (and non-correspondence) with our three:
- Physical-Sensory -> or;
- Emotional-Intuitive ->, or;
- Intellectual-Rational
… faculties provide? And under what …
- Geographic -> ,
- Economic -> ,
- Demographic -> ,
- Political -> ,
- Social
… conditions? We have demonstrated an ability to speak in various grammars: using the …
- Real-Pseudoscientific-Magical ->
- Historical-Literary-Mythical ->
- Ideal-Pseudorational-Sophistic -> and;
- Supernatural-Theological-Occult,
… meaning, in the …
- Deflated (math, logic, algorithm, protocol, process) ->
- Descriptive, (testimony) ->
- Narrated, (story) ->
- Inflated, ( fiction ) -> and;
- Conflated,
… models of comparison. Why do we choose the grammars (paradigms of communication)?
Why do …- Abrahamists (theological) -> ,
- Marxists (pseudoscientific) -> ,
- Postmoderns ( pseudorational) -> ,
- Feminists (mythical)
… choose those grammars. And why do …
- mathematicians and logicians (ideal) -> ,
- scientists (real and historical) -> ,
- jurists (real and historical) -> ,
- and writers (literary)
…choose their grammars? The answer is not the first series that will occur to you. Curt Doolittle
The Philosophy of Aristocracy
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukraine -
Nassim: idea: Solving for reasonableness (reverse justification) rather than sol
Nassim: idea: Solving for reasonableness (reverse justification) rather than solving for decidability (truth: surviving construction and falseification)
Source date (UTC): 2018-11-06 18:44:41 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1059879258120687616
Reply addressees: @nntaleb @SamHarrisOrg
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1009872629673717760
IN REPLY TO:
@nntaleb
The other problem with Charlatan @SamHarrisOrg is that he talks about “rationality” without even remotely knowing what it means.
Charlatan.
https://t.co/0WwJtmeeGuOriginal post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1009872629673717760
-
photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/45567018_10156760640957264_962323843
photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/45567018_10156760640957264_96232384399147008_o_10156760640947264.jpg OPERATIONALIZE MEANS ANTI-IDEALIZEOPERATIONALIZE MEANS ANTI-IDEALIZE

Source date (UTC): 2018-11-06 16:59:00 UTC
-
RATIONALITY REQUIRES THE COMMONS (core concept) —“I think, on one hand, people
RATIONALITY REQUIRES THE COMMONS
(core concept)
—“I think, on one hand, people cannot become rational without a quality commons (education, exposure to ideas, enriched environment etc.) On the other, it’s very difficult to create quality commons without rational people.”— Bill Joslin
(genius)
Source date (UTC): 2018-11-06 15:39:00 UTC
-
CLOSING THE PATHWAY FOR THEIR LIES —“Wherever there’s a pathway left to be exp
CLOSING THE PATHWAY FOR THEIR LIES
—“Wherever there’s a pathway left to be explored, there is also an incentive/evolutionary pressure (same thing, really) to do so. Our goal is to close this particular pathway because it doesn’t benefit us and, for that matter, mankind as a whole.”—Martin Štěpán
Source date (UTC): 2018-11-06 15:21:00 UTC
-
INTELLECTUAL CATASTROPHE OF SPECIALIZATION (and the import of a universal langua
https://propertarianism.com/2016/10/04/the-intellectual-catastrophe-of-specialization-and-the-cure-for-it-in-education/THE INTELLECTUAL CATASTROPHE OF SPECIALIZATION
(and the import of a universal language of testimony)
Source date (UTC): 2018-11-06 09:01:00 UTC
-
“Literacy: means ‘capable of reading and writing’. Being “Illiterate’ means inca
“Literacy: means ‘capable of reading and writing’.
Being “Illiterate’ means incapable of reading and writing.
Being “Literate” means ‘Well Read’ OR ‘he can read and write’.
This is another one of those terms where we need a demarcation to prevent conflation.
illiterate “can’t read” > literate – “can read” > “literate – well read”.
Source date (UTC): 2018-11-06 08:55:00 UTC
-
Closing the Pathway for Their Lies
(FB 1541535709 Timestamp) CLOSING THE PATHWAY FOR THEIR LIES —“Wherever there’s a pathway left to be explored, there is also an incentive/evolutionary pressure (same thing, really) to do so. Our goal is to close this particular pathway because it doesn’t benefit us and, for that matter, mankind as a whole.”—Martin Å tÄpán
-
Rationality Requires the Commons
(FB 1541536782 Timestamp) RATIONALITY REQUIRES THE COMMONS
(core concept) —“I think, on one hand, people cannot become rational without a quality commons (education, exposure to ideas, enriched environment etc.) On the other, it’s very difficult to create quality commons without rational people.”— Bill Joslin (genius)