October 17th, 20 WHAT ARE YOU MEASURING?FEELS (immediate experience) or REALS (consequences)? [S]elf Delusion feels good to the Faithful. Drugs feel good to the drug user. Stealing feels good to the thief. Murder feels good to the murderer. Just about anything we evolve a moral disposition against feelsgood. That’s why we limit it.
Category: Epistemology and Method
-
WHAT ARE YOU MEASURING? FEELS (immediate experience) or REALS (consequences)? Se
WHAT ARE YOU MEASURING?
FEELS (immediate experience) or REALS (consequences)?
Self Delusion feels good to the Faithful. Drugs feel good to the drug user. Stealing feels good to the thief. Murder feels good to the murderer. Just about anything we evolve a moral disposition against feels good. That’s why we limit it.
Source date (UTC): 2018-10-17 11:47:00 UTC
-
“Existence exists and reality is real. It’s not necessary to mention that until
—“Existence exists and reality is real. It’s not necessary to mention that until someone asserts otherwise.”— Wyatt Storch
nice….
Source date (UTC): 2018-10-16 23:31:04 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1052341182142042112
-
“Existence exists and reality is real. It’s not necessary to mention that until
—“Existence exists and reality is real. It’s not necessary to mention that until someone asserts otherwise.”— Wyatt Storch
nice….
Source date (UTC): 2018-10-16 19:30:00 UTC
-
“MARKETS OF THE VIA-NEGATIVA A.K.A.: “Incremental Suppression.”— Bill Joslin
—“MARKETS OF THE VIA-NEGATIVA
A.K.A.: “Incremental Suppression.”— Bill Joslin
Source date (UTC): 2018-10-16 17:09:00 UTC
-
WHY INTELLECTUALS DEBATE IN TEXT NOT SPEECH —“Let’s schedule a video call, and
WHY INTELLECTUALS DEBATE IN TEXT NOT SPEECH
—“Let’s schedule a video call, and we can exhaust this without the unnecessary social incentives until I find out where I’m wrong, and I’ll leave you guys be in Aryan Propertyland.”—
The Value of Text
1) leaves a record of the evolution of the argument, and the tactics used in pursuing it.
2) Sophisms, Signaling, and Frauds are much harder to get away with in text.
3) The chain of reasoning one can produce in text is more suitable to proof by falsification, whereas verbal reparté is more suitable to analogy and justification (fraud).
4) I do not care whether you continue to argue or depart, because articulate debate only serves to educate the followers – there is no chance that you can win such an argument – you just don’t know that yet. I do. You can only say “Lying is a strategic advantage if you can get enough people to do it without getting them killed in the process.”
5) I am now aware of you, just as you are aware of me. And I don’t practice philosophy but law. And prosecution of those who perpetuate harm against the commons is not only my job, my art but my moral duty.
6) You can use the pejorative ‘aryan’ as if aryan (law) vs semitic (religion) is some sort of dispute over taste rather than a dispute over truth and transcendence, vs lies and dysgenic regression.
You’re reasonably talented but it’s too clear that you are used to confusing the tactic of winning by sophism against the common folk, and not experienced at such debate with professionals with the hard science of it all.
Trying to repeat the past is simply an admissino of the failure to solve the problems of the present. The problem of the present is the same as it has always been: the conflict between the agrarian-metalworkers using law and markets (Male reproductive strategy), and the pastoralists using cults, and separatism (the female reproductive strategy)
Horse+bronze+wheel+sky-worshipping+Militaristic+expansionist vs earth worshipping, pacifist, separatists.
The eternal war between Cain and Able: The Masculine vs the Feminine.
This is the fourth cycle of that war of civilizations.
Source date (UTC): 2018-10-16 13:36:00 UTC
-
The Sophism of Critique Applied to Mind
October 15th, 2018 9:21 AM IN SIMPLE TERMS, POSTMODERNISM CONSISTS OF THE SOPHISM OF CRITIQUE APPLIED TO MIND RATHER THAN HISTORY, ECONOMY, POLITICS AND NORMS. [T]he grammar of postmodernism is sophist overloading and straw manning, making constant relations impossible. It is the hollow verbalism of the solipsistic mind. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/postmodernism/
-
The Sophism of Critique Applied to Mind
October 15th, 2018 9:21 AM IN SIMPLE TERMS, POSTMODERNISM CONSISTS OF THE SOPHISM OF CRITIQUE APPLIED TO MIND RATHER THAN HISTORY, ECONOMY, POLITICS AND NORMS. [T]he grammar of postmodernism is sophist overloading and straw manning, making constant relations impossible. It is the hollow verbalism of the solipsistic mind. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/postmodernism/
-
Why Intellectuals Debate in Text Not Speech
October 16th, 2018 1:36 PM WHY INTELLECTUALS DEBATE IN TEXT NOT SPEECH
—“Let’s schedule a video call, and we can exhaust this without the unnecessary social incentives until I find out where I’m wrong, and I’ll leave you guys be in Aryan Propertyland.”—
The Value of Text 1) leaves a record of the evolution of the argument, and the tactics used in pursuing it. 2) Sophisms, Signaling, and Frauds are much harder to get away with in text. 3) The chain of reasoning one can produce in text is more suitable to proof by falsification, whereas verbal reparté is more suitable to analogy and justification (fraud). 4) I do not care whether you continue to argue or depart, because articulate debate only serves to educate the followers – there is no chance that you can win such an argument – you just don’t know that yet. I do. You can only say “Lying is a strategic advantage if you can get enough people to do it without getting them killed in the process.” 5) I am now aware of you, just as you are aware of me. And I don’t practice philosophy but law. And prosecution of those who perpetuate harm against the commons is not only my job, my art but my moral duty. 6) You can use the pejorative ‘aryan’ as if aryan (law) vs semitic (religion) is some sort of dispute over taste rather than a dispute over truth and transcendence, vs lies and dysgenic regression. You’re reasonably talented but it’s too clear that you are used to confusing the tactic of winning by sophism against the common folk, and not experienced at such debate with professionals with the hard science of it all. Trying to repeat the past is simply an admission of the failure to solve the problems of the present. The problem of the present is the same as it has always been: the conflict between the agrarian-metalworkers using law and markets (Male reproductive strategy), and the pastoralists using cults, and separatism (the female reproductive strategy) Horse+bronze+wheel+sky-worshipping+Militaristic+expansionist vs earth worshipping, pacifist, separatists.The eternal war between Cain and Able: The Masculine vs the Feminine. This is the fourth cycle of that war of civilizations.
-
Why Intellectuals Debate in Text Not Speech
October 16th, 2018 1:36 PM WHY INTELLECTUALS DEBATE IN TEXT NOT SPEECH
—“Let’s schedule a video call, and we can exhaust this without the unnecessary social incentives until I find out where I’m wrong, and I’ll leave you guys be in Aryan Propertyland.”—
The Value of Text 1) leaves a record of the evolution of the argument, and the tactics used in pursuing it. 2) Sophisms, Signaling, and Frauds are much harder to get away with in text. 3) The chain of reasoning one can produce in text is more suitable to proof by falsification, whereas verbal reparté is more suitable to analogy and justification (fraud). 4) I do not care whether you continue to argue or depart, because articulate debate only serves to educate the followers – there is no chance that you can win such an argument – you just don’t know that yet. I do. You can only say “Lying is a strategic advantage if you can get enough people to do it without getting them killed in the process.” 5) I am now aware of you, just as you are aware of me. And I don’t practice philosophy but law. And prosecution of those who perpetuate harm against the commons is not only my job, my art but my moral duty. 6) You can use the pejorative ‘aryan’ as if aryan (law) vs semitic (religion) is some sort of dispute over taste rather than a dispute over truth and transcendence, vs lies and dysgenic regression. You’re reasonably talented but it’s too clear that you are used to confusing the tactic of winning by sophism against the common folk, and not experienced at such debate with professionals with the hard science of it all. Trying to repeat the past is simply an admission of the failure to solve the problems of the present. The problem of the present is the same as it has always been: the conflict between the agrarian-metalworkers using law and markets (Male reproductive strategy), and the pastoralists using cults, and separatism (the female reproductive strategy) Horse+bronze+wheel+sky-worshipping+Militaristic+expansionist vs earth worshipping, pacifist, separatists.The eternal war between Cain and Able: The Masculine vs the Feminine. This is the fourth cycle of that war of civilizations.