Curt Doolittle

Category: Religion, Myth, and Theology

  • WE DON”T NEED EVERYONE —“We’ll be fine as long as a few men don’t fall prey to

    WE DON”T NEED EVERYONE

    —“We’ll be fine as long as a few men don’t fall prey to their stupidity. Or maybe God pits our stupidity against one another in order to concoct His masterpiece.”— Megan K. Usui

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-15 10:02:00 UTC

  • “New Testament is all about miserabilism. Old Testament (Judaism) is something e

    –“New Testament is all about miserabilism. Old Testament (Judaism) is something else.”– Daniel Gurpide

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-15 09:40:00 UTC

  • THE REAL POLITICAL INNOVATION OF CHRISTIANITY by Daniel Gurpide I think that the

    THE REAL POLITICAL INNOVATION OF CHRISTIANITY

    by Daniel Gurpide

    I think that the real political innovation of Christianity, as opposed to Judaism, was the invention of Communism (private property is theft and commerce, its instrument), unifying three groups of people -who had been dispersed till then- by promising that the last shall be the first- 1/the idiots (“Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven”)+ 2/ the poor (“blessed are those who hunger and thirst…”) + 3/the criminal (“blessed are those who are persecuted…”) and offering them a charismatic leadership (the Messiah who will bring the Kingdom of Heaven).

    This formula has been re-enacted since then whenever there has been prosperity to be coveted (Roman Empire, Renaissance, Industrial Revolution) and a powerful instrument to transmit the message has been literature: imagine the damage done by the novels of Charles Dickens or Victor Hugo. Les Misérables has been one of the biggest successes of popular culture, its author became rich by inventing a story based on falsehood, exaggeration, distortion, and sentimentalism.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-15 09:32:00 UTC

  • RT @ahaspel: God, it is true, is conceived as omnipotent, but omnicompetence is

    RT @ahaspel: God, it is true, is conceived as omnipotent, but omnicompetence is not specified.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-14 12:45:59 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/885842813082107912

  • Retweeted Aaron Haspel (@ahaspel): God, it is true, is conceived as omnipotent,

    Retweeted Aaron Haspel (@ahaspel):

    God, it is true, is conceived as omnipotent, but omnicompetence is not specified.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-14 08:45:00 UTC

  • Retweeted Aaron Haspel (@ahaspel): If you separate Church and State, the State b

    Retweeted Aaron Haspel (@ahaspel):

    If you separate Church and State, the State becomes the Church.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-14 08:39:00 UTC

  • PILPUL: ONE ENGAGES IN THE ART OF FICTIONALISM: LYING —“Pilpul is the Talmudic

    PILPUL: ONE ENGAGES IN THE ART OF FICTIONALISM: LYING

    —“Pilpul is the Talmudic term used to describe a rhetorical process that the Sages used to formulate their legal decisions. The word is used as a verb: one engages in the process of pilpul in order to formulate a legal point. It marks the process of understanding legal ideas, texts, and interpretations.”—

    The purpose of pilpul is to find what is not there, or to place there what is not.

    Pilpul is the origin of the art of lying.

    The introduction of pilpul into anglo law was the means by which our constitution of natural law was destroyed.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-12 12:13:00 UTC

  • WE KEEP RETRYING TO RESTATE MONOPOLY CHRISTIANITY – WHEN THAT’s THE PROBLEM IN A

    WE KEEP RETRYING TO RESTATE MONOPOLY CHRISTIANITY – WHEN THAT’s THE PROBLEM IN AND OF ITSELF

    I see is an attempt to state the via-negativa of natural law as a via-positiva moral norm. Which is important, as incentives, because we all like to feel good about ourselves, and congratulate ourselves on moral actions, and create a cycle of positive reinforcement for doing so. So it’s nice to have a via-positiva method of pedagogy because learning the negative (what not to do) does not inspire us with options (opportunities) and it is opportunities for action that we all seek. It is only judges that seek opportunities to prevent and resolve conflicts. Hence science and law on the via-negativa, and history, literature, myth, religion, occult, and pseudoscience and god knows what else on the other end.

    The only thing I know how to do is work back from transcendence and create room for many via-positivas for each ‘class’ of ability or each ‘age’ of maturity, while preserving the via negativa so that every narrative contains a competition. I think this is the problem between modern moral systems of thought and the ancient: being in competition with the gods demons is a good thing. Monopoly via-positiva, no matter how comforting seems to lead to universal disaster no matter where it is applied.

    The only reason china isn’t still superior to the west is that the mongols hit them at just the wrong time. But you can’t say that about any other group in the world. only two got it right. And europeans and chinese both got it right.

    But the ancients got it most right. We are just now, despite our near defeat by the second abrahamiazation of the west under jewish marxism and french postmodernism, restoring the intellectual condition Rome was in in 100AD – without our sciences and technology.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-10 12:07:00 UTC

  • Of course gods are immortal. Of course demigods are immortal. I mean, otherwise

    Of course gods are immortal. Of course demigods are immortal. I mean, otherwise we would have to create a new mythos for every generation. Don’t be ridiculous.

    I mean, there are myths and fairy tales, and then there is just the practical problem of storytelling across generations.

    I mean, what’s the value of myth if not intergenerational transfer?

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-09 13:09:00 UTC

  • SUBMISSION OR SOVEREIGNTY? You see, Kant was restating Abrahamism: rebellion aga

    SUBMISSION OR SOVEREIGNTY?

    You see, Kant was restating Abrahamism: rebellion against the aristocracy.

    Now let’s look at the Genghis Khan reasoning:

    The only way I will let you live is if it is more profitable than killing you.

    The only way I will ally with you rather than fight you or preying upon you is if it is more profitable than not allying with you.

    The only way we can profit together most, is by conquest, rule, and tax.

    The best way to conquer rule and tax is to force everyone into productive labor.

    The best way to force everyone into exclusively productive labor is to impose a law of non imposition.

    This monopolizes the extractions for us at the cost of all other attempts to extract rents.

    The side effect is that we have discounted all local transaction costs, and increased trust among the peoples who were previously mistrustful and rent seeking, and parasitic upon one another. So that we have them maximized our returns by minimizing our inefficiencies.

    SUBMISSION VS SOVEREIGNTY

    What are the consequences of ‘submission’ rather than empirical evidence of the superiority of outcomes?

    **What would be the consequence of maximizing the categorical imperative vs maximizing the returns on investment?**

    Do you see where that leads?

    You see, this is the origin of order.

    The King’s Peace. The king’s peace was enforced. Markets were MADE – by force: by denying people the shorter term opportunity for profiting from the labor of others.

    Kant was just making an excuse for it by claiming we have a choice, and we should choose the kings peace. He assumes the majority prefer the kings peace.

    When what we see in reality is that this is a consequence of kinship. Whereas, in heterogeneous areas, it’s been impossible to construct a kantian imperative, because it’s evolutionarily contrary to demand.

    The chinese did it right. not because they are an empire. But because like us (originally) they are a family, not a state, or federation, or an empire.

    Hence my … uncomfortable with the ‘equality’ nonsense. it’s a rebellion and a degenerative one.

    People didn’t CHOOSE to work in greater numbers.

    People were FORCED to work in greater numbers.

    And they were forced to, because it meant giving up rents.

    Everything from near-universal-common-property on up.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-05 08:54:00 UTC