THEISTS AND THEIR PERMANENT TOTALITARIANISM by @Goran Dahl [T]here is one word that theists and occultists in general hate above all other words in the entire world, and that word is “evidence”. When they see this word, they are appalled and provoked. How can someone not believe in their religion or the esoteric? How can someone read their religious texts and not take their word for it? Before you know it, they let out a resounding shriek: “Fedora!”, soon to be followed by “Scientism!” – as if they knew what that meant. They are all predictable; not one of them differs from the other in the least. Theists will never be pleased with you until you subscribe to their ways unconditionally. Nobody in the so-called alt-right is even remotely as dangerous as the theists, because if they could, they would relegate us back to the Middle Ages and beyond.
Category: Religion, Myth, and Theology
-
Theists and Their Permanent Totalitarianism
THEISTS AND THEIR PERMANENT TOTALITARIANISM by @Goran Dahl [T]here is one word that theists and occultists in general hate above all other words in the entire world, and that word is “evidence”. When they see this word, they are appalled and provoked. How can someone not believe in their religion or the esoteric? How can someone read their religious texts and not take their word for it? Before you know it, they let out a resounding shriek: “Fedora!”, soon to be followed by “Scientism!” – as if they knew what that meant. They are all predictable; not one of them differs from the other in the least. Theists will never be pleased with you until you subscribe to their ways unconditionally. Nobody in the so-called alt-right is even remotely as dangerous as the theists, because if they could, they would relegate us back to the Middle Ages and beyond.
-
Halloween = Samhain (SAH-winn)
October 30th, 2018 8:25 PM HALLOWEEN <- ALL HALLOWS EVE <- SAMHAIN (SAH’-winn) [S]amhain is believed to have Celtic pagan origins and there is evidence it has been an important date since ancient times. Some Neolithic passage tombs in Ireland are aligned with the sunrise around the time of Samhain. It is mentioned in some of the earliest Irish literature and many important events in Irish mythology happen or begin on Samhain. It was the time when cattle were brought back down from the summer pastures and when livestock were slaughtered for the winter. As at Bealtaine, special bonfires were lit. These were deemed to have protective and cleansing powers and there were rituals involving them. Like Bealtaine, Samhain was seen as a liminal time, when the boundary between this world and the Otherworld could more easily be crossed. This meant the Aos SÃ, the ‘spirits’ or ‘fairies’, could more easily come into our world. Most scholars see the Aos SÃ as remnants of the pagan gods and nature spirits. At Samhain, it was believed that the Aos SÃ needed to be propitiated to ensure that the people and their livestock survived the winter. Offerings of food and drink were left outside for them. The souls of the dead were also thought to revisit their homes seeking hospitality. Feasts were had, at which the souls of dead kin were beckoned to attend and a place set at the table for them. Mumming and guising were part of the festival, and involved people going door-to-door in costume (or in disguise), often reciting verses in exchange for food. The costumes may have been a way of imitating, and disguising oneself from, the Aos SÃ. Divination rituals and games were also a big part of the festival and often involved nuts and apples. In the late 19th century, Sir John Rhys and Sir James Frazer suggested that it was the “Celtic New Year”, and this view has been repeated by some other scholars.
-
Halloween = Samhain (SAH-winn)
October 30th, 2018 8:25 PM HALLOWEEN <- ALL HALLOWS EVE <- SAMHAIN (SAH’-winn) [S]amhain is believed to have Celtic pagan origins and there is evidence it has been an important date since ancient times. Some Neolithic passage tombs in Ireland are aligned with the sunrise around the time of Samhain. It is mentioned in some of the earliest Irish literature and many important events in Irish mythology happen or begin on Samhain. It was the time when cattle were brought back down from the summer pastures and when livestock were slaughtered for the winter. As at Bealtaine, special bonfires were lit. These were deemed to have protective and cleansing powers and there were rituals involving them. Like Bealtaine, Samhain was seen as a liminal time, when the boundary between this world and the Otherworld could more easily be crossed. This meant the Aos SÃ, the ‘spirits’ or ‘fairies’, could more easily come into our world. Most scholars see the Aos SÃ as remnants of the pagan gods and nature spirits. At Samhain, it was believed that the Aos SÃ needed to be propitiated to ensure that the people and their livestock survived the winter. Offerings of food and drink were left outside for them. The souls of the dead were also thought to revisit their homes seeking hospitality. Feasts were had, at which the souls of dead kin were beckoned to attend and a place set at the table for them. Mumming and guising were part of the festival, and involved people going door-to-door in costume (or in disguise), often reciting verses in exchange for food. The costumes may have been a way of imitating, and disguising oneself from, the Aos SÃ. Divination rituals and games were also a big part of the festival and often involved nuts and apples. In the late 19th century, Sir John Rhys and Sir James Frazer suggested that it was the “Celtic New Year”, and this view has been repeated by some other scholars.
-
PROTESTANTISM AGAINST CENTRAL GOVT, TODAY AGAINST CENTRAL GOVT. THE SAME THEN AN
PROTESTANTISM AGAINST CENTRAL GOVT, TODAY AGAINST CENTRAL GOVT. THE SAME THEN AND NOW.
Protestantism wasn’t a reaction to the bible, it was a reaction to the corruption of the church, the taxation by the church, and the church as a vehicle for foreign rule, just like washington DC and Brussels today.
The church conflated rule, government, and education into a monopoly and used it to entrench costly corrupt bureaucrats, extractive rents, and impose ignorance, in a time of literacy, economic growth, and the expansion of trade in the north, and decline of trade in the south, due to venetian decline as the navy of the byzantines.
The church was a very corrupt parasitic government and the people rebelled against it and restored local government.
This broke the church’s taxation. Broke the church’s corruption. Let loose the dead capital held by the corrupt church (50% of the capital in europe), and broke the church monopoly on literacy, thereby combining literacy, available capital, expanding trade routes, into a great leap forward in european life and standards of living.
Christianity consist of four(or five) rules. That’s it. Four rules you can teach a child. Protestantism ended church tyranny, corruption, impoverishment, and enforced ignorance. Faith was the MORAL language that they described it in, just as we describe today’s economic language in today’s moral prose.
Washington is an unnecessary corrupt parasitic power. Brussels is the same. The church was the same. And people have chosen to localize rule, governance, and choice. Why? Because they can.
Ask why the orthodox church HASN’T failed instead. Ask why the protestant evangelical churches (church of jesus not god) continues to grow. Ask why the catholic church and the protestant churches of GOD fail.
There is no god. There never was a god. There was just a lot of ignorant undomesticated humans who could be exploited by those who possessed literacy.
With literacy, the restoration of aristotelian reason, an the empirical demands of trade, all ‘god’ religions are dying EXCEPT Islam and Orthodoxy.
Source date (UTC): 2018-10-30 18:17:00 UTC
-
THEISTS AND THEIR PERMANENT TOTALITARIANISM by @Göran Dahl There is one word tha
THEISTS AND THEIR PERMANENT TOTALITARIANISM
by @Göran Dahl
There is one word that theists and occultists in general hate above all other words in the entire world, and that word is “evidence”.
When they see this word, they are appalled and provoked. How can someone not believe in their religion or the esoteric? How can someone read their religious texts and not take their word for it?
Before you know it, they let out a resounding shriek: “Fedora!”, soon to be followed by “Scientism!” – as if they knew what that meant.
They are all predictable; not one of them differs from the other in the least.
Theists will never be pleased with you until you subscribe to their ways unconditionally. Nobody in the so-called alt-right is even remotely as dangerous as the theists, because if they could, they would relegate us back to the Middle Ages and beyond.
Source date (UTC): 2018-10-30 09:00:00 UTC
-
Steven: That is because nietzsche put a stake in the vampire heart of the abraha
Steven: That is because nietzsche put a stake in the vampire heart of the abrahamic religions, but failed to find an alternative. His failure was to create relativism, rather than restoring Aristocracy (truth, beauty, and sovereignty). This created the opening for Relativists.
Source date (UTC): 2018-10-29 21:18:57 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1057018979565424640
Reply addressees: @sapinker
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1056946094008164358
IN REPLY TO:
@sapinker
Often surprised by what’s most controversial in my books. Enlght Now says Nietzsche ain’t pietzsche: this un-humanist inspired the Nazis, Fascists, Bolsheviks, & Alt-Right. Yet many intellectuals adore the guy, & were offended by the discussion https://t.co/GpT1nAOgdn
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1056946094008164358
-
YOU CAN’T REALLY ARGUE WITH A THEIST. All inferences and deductions are dependen
YOU CAN’T REALLY ARGUE WITH A THEIST.
All inferences and deductions are dependent (contingent) upon the premises. Ergo, one does not argue with the faithful. One sets limits on them, as we do children, domesticated animals, and the incompetent. If the faithful offer one another wisdom that is one thing. If the faithful argue with their faith they de facto confuse wisdom with truth – and engage in fraud.
—“[Curt Doolittle], you’re the fuckin troll. you use the exact same methods they do and try to get legitimacy behind an impenetrable vernacular. except no one cares what you say and everyone likes me and thinks you’re a bloviating pseudo-intellectual poseur. you claim to know natural law but there is but one natural law and that is Santana Dharma – you are nothing but a heretic”—Jennifer Scharf
… and ….
—“Curt won’t debate me because he is a charlatan, so sadly, I must confront him. It’s my duty to my devotees to do that because it is a sin to purport as a master of natural law when you aren’t one.”—Jennifer Scharf
—“You want to debate Curt Doolittle, right?”— Bryan Nova Brey
—“ya i’ll debate anyone but it has to be on a livestream.”— Jennifer Scharf
1 – Debates must be in writing, since it is much, much, harder to engage in…
(a) disapproval (disapproval, rejection, shaming, ridicule, rallying, gossiping and reputation destruction)
-OR-
(b) avoidance (obscurantism, fraud, and deceit) ,
-BY-
non-argument (disapproval, avoidance),
-VERSUS-
(c) argument (measurements, decidability),
… in writing
2 – However, as far as I know Jennifer is just a heterodox cultist and her argument will deflate into truth, decidability, and measurement vs utility, choice, reasonableness.
3 – All wisdom literature has pedagogical value. Like nursery rhymes, parables, fairy tales, myths, and legends have pedagogica value. That pedagogy may provide dysgenic, devolutionary, static, development, eugenic results. They help us seek opportunities, and collectively to seek the same opportunities, and largely to pay for them in differences of opportunity costs ‘contributing the remainder’ in favor of our developmental direction, rather than requiring direct costs of time, effort, and resources.
4 – All sciences provide value of decidability in matters of dispute when others engage in Disapproval or Avoidance, versus argument – where argument would expose their deception, fraud, free riding, and parasitism.
5 – So we can produce via-positiva (opportunity) wisdom literature by fiction and analogy (to assist in wide searches for opportunity). Or we can produce via-negativa (cost reduction) wisdom literature by description and decidability (to assist in suppressing parasitism under pretense of opportunity) or simply error.
Truth is truth, wisdom is wisdom, fraud is fraud, and falsehood is simply false – and never shall any of them meet.
(The vedas are a mythology – a wisdom literature, and her brahmins practice their own Pilpul (Sophism) as all justificationists must.)
I don’t make mistakes (in my arguments). It’s my job. Sorry.
Source date (UTC): 2018-10-29 18:41:00 UTC
-
You Can’t Really Argue with A Theist.
October 29th, 2018 6:41 PM YOU CAN’T REALLY ARGUE WITH A THEIST. [A]ll inferences and deductions are dependent (contingent) upon the premises. Ergo, one does not argue with the faithful. One sets limits on them, as we do children, domesticated animals, and the incompetent. If the faithful offer one another wisdom that is one thing. If the faithful argue with their faith they de facto confuse wisdom with truth – and engage in fraud.
—“[Curt Doolittle], you’re the fuckin troll. you use the exact same methods they do and try to get legitimacy behind an impenetrable vernacular. except no one cares what you say and everyone likes me and thinks you’re a bloviating pseudo-intellectual poseur. you claim to know natural law but there is but one natural law and that is Santana Dharma – you are nothing but a heretic”—Jennifer Scharf
… and ….
—“Curt won’t debate me because he is a charlatan, so sadly, I must confront him. It’s my duty to my devotees to do that because it is a sin to purport as a master of natural law when you aren’t one.”—Jennifer Scharf —“You want to debate Curt Doolittle, right?”— Bryan Nova Brey —“ya i’ll debate anyone but it has to be on a livestream.”— Jennifer Scharf
1 – Debates must be in writing, since it is much, much, harder to engage in… (a) disapproval (disapproval, rejection, shaming, ridicule, rallying, gossiping and reputation destruction) -OR- (b) avoidance (obscurantism, fraud, and deceit) , -BY- non-argument (disapproval, avoidance), -VERSUS- (c) argument (measurements, decidability), … in writing 2 – However, as far as I know Jennifer is just a heterodox cultist and her argument will deflate into truth, decidability, and measurement vs utility, choice, reasonableness. 3 – All wisdom literature has pedagogical value. Like nursery rhymes, parables, fairy tales, myths, and legends have pedagogica value. That pedagogy may provide dysgenic, devolutionary, static, development, eugenic results. They help us seek opportunities, and collectively to seek the same opportunities, and largely to pay for them in differences of opportunity costs ‘contributing the remainder’ in favor of our developmental direction, rather than requiring direct costs of time, effort, and resources. 4 – All sciences provide value of decidability in matters of dispute when others engage in Disapproval or Avoidance, versus argument – where argument would expose their deception, fraud, free riding, and parasitism. 5 – So we can produce via-positiva (opportunity) wisdom literature by fiction and analogy (to assist in wide searches for opportunity). Or we can produce via-negativa (cost reduction) wisdom literature by description and decidability (to assist in suppressing parasitism under pretense of opportunity) or simply error. Truth is truth, wisdom is wisdom, fraud is fraud, and falsehood is simply false – and never shall any of them meet. (The vedas are a mythology – a wisdom literature, and her brahmins practice their own Pilpul (Sophism) as all justificationists must.) I don’t make mistakes (in my arguments). It’s my job. Sorry.
-
You Can’t Really Argue with A Theist.
October 29th, 2018 6:41 PM YOU CAN’T REALLY ARGUE WITH A THEIST. [A]ll inferences and deductions are dependent (contingent) upon the premises. Ergo, one does not argue with the faithful. One sets limits on them, as we do children, domesticated animals, and the incompetent. If the faithful offer one another wisdom that is one thing. If the faithful argue with their faith they de facto confuse wisdom with truth – and engage in fraud.
—“[Curt Doolittle], you’re the fuckin troll. you use the exact same methods they do and try to get legitimacy behind an impenetrable vernacular. except no one cares what you say and everyone likes me and thinks you’re a bloviating pseudo-intellectual poseur. you claim to know natural law but there is but one natural law and that is Santana Dharma – you are nothing but a heretic”—Jennifer Scharf
… and ….
—“Curt won’t debate me because he is a charlatan, so sadly, I must confront him. It’s my duty to my devotees to do that because it is a sin to purport as a master of natural law when you aren’t one.”—Jennifer Scharf —“You want to debate Curt Doolittle, right?”— Bryan Nova Brey —“ya i’ll debate anyone but it has to be on a livestream.”— Jennifer Scharf
1 – Debates must be in writing, since it is much, much, harder to engage in… (a) disapproval (disapproval, rejection, shaming, ridicule, rallying, gossiping and reputation destruction) -OR- (b) avoidance (obscurantism, fraud, and deceit) , -BY- non-argument (disapproval, avoidance), -VERSUS- (c) argument (measurements, decidability), … in writing 2 – However, as far as I know Jennifer is just a heterodox cultist and her argument will deflate into truth, decidability, and measurement vs utility, choice, reasonableness. 3 – All wisdom literature has pedagogical value. Like nursery rhymes, parables, fairy tales, myths, and legends have pedagogica value. That pedagogy may provide dysgenic, devolutionary, static, development, eugenic results. They help us seek opportunities, and collectively to seek the same opportunities, and largely to pay for them in differences of opportunity costs ‘contributing the remainder’ in favor of our developmental direction, rather than requiring direct costs of time, effort, and resources. 4 – All sciences provide value of decidability in matters of dispute when others engage in Disapproval or Avoidance, versus argument – where argument would expose their deception, fraud, free riding, and parasitism. 5 – So we can produce via-positiva (opportunity) wisdom literature by fiction and analogy (to assist in wide searches for opportunity). Or we can produce via-negativa (cost reduction) wisdom literature by description and decidability (to assist in suppressing parasitism under pretense of opportunity) or simply error. Truth is truth, wisdom is wisdom, fraud is fraud, and falsehood is simply false – and never shall any of them meet. (The vedas are a mythology – a wisdom literature, and her brahmins practice their own Pilpul (Sophism) as all justificationists must.) I don’t make mistakes (in my arguments). It’s my job. Sorry.