Curt Doolittle

Category: Religion, Myth, and Theology

  • Abrahamism: A disease of the mind, and the Plague: a disease of the body, togeth

    Abrahamism: A disease of the mind, and the Plague: a disease of the body, together are more deadly than any combination of wars in history.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-03 12:55:09 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/859753191793152000

  • Our Medieval Religion as Specialization in a Market for Rule of Classes

    In evaluating our medieval religion, we must separate the term “religion” into the strategy, the philosophy, the mythology, the administration, and the rule. And then we must compare it to the alternatives developed in the ancient world, and our traditional religions prior to their destruction by the ancient world. The christian religion was a source of ignorance by providing a false high context narrative that impeded the advancement of knowledge, and imposing the ability to rule by deceit.

    The church was a source of (weak) administration. The church’s philosophy was adequate for uniting european tribes. But it was not in any way a replacement for greco-roman civilization, or the megalithic-pagan civilization that both so diligently exterminated. The church was not in fact all that hostile to science. The state was an advocate, and investor in technology. The state and the people were more dependent upon law and technology than religion and the church. The church created an informational monopoly then as the academy/media/state monopoly now, tended to produce all the narratives – almost all of which are false histories. The restoration of our ancient civilization provided the restoration of our technological knowledge (low context high precision), but what we struggle with today, is providing the narrative (high context low precision) by which we identify and seize opportunities. Demonstrably, our ancient religion (super-normalism), philosophy (stoicism and epicureanism), epistemology (science, reason, naturalism), cooperation(natural, common, law of torts), and virtues (heroism, truth, goodness and beauty), were superior to the medieval church’s. The church provided government for the underclasses just as the warrior aristocracy provided a government for the aristocratic classes. It was this combination that served our people such that both the warrior aristocracy, the practicality of commercial government, and the rule of the underclasses could for ‘specializations’ in a ‘market for rule’. Demonstrably, they are superior to all other cultural portfolios, in one dimension or the other. Unfortunately, our technology needs a narrative. And the one provided by the cosmopolitans is … to put it bluntly… “Evil”.

  • Our Medieval Religion as Specialization in a Market for Rule of Classes

    In evaluating our medieval religion, we must separate the term “religion” into the strategy, the philosophy, the mythology, the administration, and the rule. And then we must compare it to the alternatives developed in the ancient world, and our traditional religions prior to their destruction by the ancient world. The christian religion was a source of ignorance by providing a false high context narrative that impeded the advancement of knowledge, and imposing the ability to rule by deceit.

    The church was a source of (weak) administration. The church’s philosophy was adequate for uniting european tribes. But it was not in any way a replacement for greco-roman civilization, or the megalithic-pagan civilization that both so diligently exterminated. The church was not in fact all that hostile to science. The state was an advocate, and investor in technology. The state and the people were more dependent upon law and technology than religion and the church. The church created an informational monopoly then as the academy/media/state monopoly now, tended to produce all the narratives – almost all of which are false histories. The restoration of our ancient civilization provided the restoration of our technological knowledge (low context high precision), but what we struggle with today, is providing the narrative (high context low precision) by which we identify and seize opportunities. Demonstrably, our ancient religion (super-normalism), philosophy (stoicism and epicureanism), epistemology (science, reason, naturalism), cooperation(natural, common, law of torts), and virtues (heroism, truth, goodness and beauty), were superior to the medieval church’s. The church provided government for the underclasses just as the warrior aristocracy provided a government for the aristocratic classes. It was this combination that served our people such that both the warrior aristocracy, the practicality of commercial government, and the rule of the underclasses could for ‘specializations’ in a ‘market for rule’. Demonstrably, they are superior to all other cultural portfolios, in one dimension or the other. Unfortunately, our technology needs a narrative. And the one provided by the cosmopolitans is … to put it bluntly… “Evil”.

  • If Christianity is Dead, We Still Have a Problem. But At Least We Know Most of the Answer

    IF CHRISTIANITY IS DEAD, WE STILL HAVE A PROBLEM Christianity as we know it is dead. The rituals are not unique nor terribly effective compared to the alterative major religions. The myths and lessons are suitable to those living at subsistence levels. The priesthoods are populated by those who can console us from the forces of nature, but not those who can educate, advise, lead, and decide, and as such,, form both a local head of community of common interest, and counter to the state. But the philosophy is exceptional as it seems to create trust, ‘openness’, encourage salvation through action, creates commercial prosperity everywhere it goes. This combination of interpersonal optimism and the Aryan predilection for markets, and stoic natural law is nearly as effective as our greco-roman civilization. So assuming the word ‘philosophy‘ means ‘method of decision making’, then of the spectrum of Religion, Political philosophy, Ethical Philosophy, Personal Philosophy, Law, and Science, I would state that transcendence, sovereignty, natural law, male stoicism/female epicureanism, the common empirical law, and Testimonialism are probably the optimum combination for those who wish to LEAD humanity, rather than to be led by others, by some some other strategy.

    But natural law is skeptical, and incomplete without christian optimism. In other words, christian optimism tells us that if enough of us invest in trust, and tolerate minor losses, we will produce it, and produce outsized gains. The problem we face, is we need a binding narrative, and we need better binding rituals and we need better local teachers, advisors, leaders. To create the mythos we must distill it from our many authors into our own ‘bible’. Because we learn from loose general principle, to more specific general rule, to more precise rules of science. And without the binding narrative it appears to be very difficult to bind general literary rules and precise rules of science into a portfolio of decisions across the entire possible spectrum in which we must make decisions in modernity. I have been struggling with this problem for two years now and while I have my ups and downs, the problem remains the same: without an effort equal to the council of nicea, or the first american constitutional convention, or a frankfurt school, it will be difficult to produce a ‘bible’ of western civilization – a ‘book’ that beyond which no man nor state may tread.  It is necessary to restore teaching, advising, and leadership, and community. But also as a means of defense against the semitic technologies of deception that arose from the innovation of abrahamic deceit. And a ritual that is costly so that men defend the law in that book against all attacks.

  • If Christianity is Dead, We Still Have a Problem. But At Least We Know Most of the Answer

    IF CHRISTIANITY IS DEAD, WE STILL HAVE A PROBLEM Christianity as we know it is dead. The rituals are not unique nor terribly effective compared to the alterative major religions. The myths and lessons are suitable to those living at subsistence levels. The priesthoods are populated by those who can console us from the forces of nature, but not those who can educate, advise, lead, and decide, and as such,, form both a local head of community of common interest, and counter to the state. But the philosophy is exceptional as it seems to create trust, ‘openness’, encourage salvation through action, creates commercial prosperity everywhere it goes. This combination of interpersonal optimism and the Aryan predilection for markets, and stoic natural law is nearly as effective as our greco-roman civilization. So assuming the word ‘philosophy‘ means ‘method of decision making’, then of the spectrum of Religion, Political philosophy, Ethical Philosophy, Personal Philosophy, Law, and Science, I would state that transcendence, sovereignty, natural law, male stoicism/female epicureanism, the common empirical law, and Testimonialism are probably the optimum combination for those who wish to LEAD humanity, rather than to be led by others, by some some other strategy.

    But natural law is skeptical, and incomplete without christian optimism. In other words, christian optimism tells us that if enough of us invest in trust, and tolerate minor losses, we will produce it, and produce outsized gains. The problem we face, is we need a binding narrative, and we need better binding rituals and we need better local teachers, advisors, leaders. To create the mythos we must distill it from our many authors into our own ‘bible’. Because we learn from loose general principle, to more specific general rule, to more precise rules of science. And without the binding narrative it appears to be very difficult to bind general literary rules and precise rules of science into a portfolio of decisions across the entire possible spectrum in which we must make decisions in modernity. I have been struggling with this problem for two years now and while I have my ups and downs, the problem remains the same: without an effort equal to the council of nicea, or the first american constitutional convention, or a frankfurt school, it will be difficult to produce a ‘bible’ of western civilization – a ‘book’ that beyond which no man nor state may tread.  It is necessary to restore teaching, advising, and leadership, and community. But also as a means of defense against the semitic technologies of deception that arose from the innovation of abrahamic deceit. And a ritual that is costly so that men defend the law in that book against all attacks.

  • On the Interpretation of Art, Literature, and Myth

    ON THE INTERPRETATION OF ART, LITERATURE AND MYTH. (My formal training is in art criticism, and my first philosophical work was on aesthetics – and I can criticize all art from all cultures at every single period in human history in detail that is so painful you can’t imagine. If you think I’m annoyingly precise about economics, law, and logic do you think I am less so about Aesthetics? To say one cannot obtain value from something, or one can obtain value from something, is very different from saying that all values one obtains are good, or that objectively better art and literature objectively contain better collections of objects, relations, and values. And that is to say that the consumption of inferior art, literature, and myth, represents a loss of opportunity to consume superior art, literature, and myth, and therefore superior objects, relations, and values.
    Chinese art demonstrates a hatred of man and the human form. Japanese are attempts to circumvent the effeminacy of asian forms. All thier costuming is an attempt to make excuses for their lack and depth of masculine maturity. I mean their is a reason we use half naked super warriors and they use giant robot armor, or dolled-up clothing to make themselves look more substantive. Compare it to German art where everyone has a bloody wound in him, or greek, roman, and european art that lionize the human form, the human mind, and human achievements. The fact that we no longer produce a Howard (who was gay), a Heinlein, Johnny Quest or the first year of Star Trek, or even very good science fiction, is in fact because of the Jewish censorship in hollywood. Sure. (Whether Intentional or cultural or genetic). We still seem to be able to get away with horror although the jewish cultural mafia is working against that also. But the answer is what it is. I do not err. I am not ignorant. And I consider all but the certain portions of Akira and GITM unwatchable. )

  • On the Interpretation of Art, Literature, and Myth

    ON THE INTERPRETATION OF ART, LITERATURE AND MYTH. (My formal training is in art criticism, and my first philosophical work was on aesthetics – and I can criticize all art from all cultures at every single period in human history in detail that is so painful you can’t imagine. If you think I’m annoyingly precise about economics, law, and logic do you think I am less so about Aesthetics? To say one cannot obtain value from something, or one can obtain value from something, is very different from saying that all values one obtains are good, or that objectively better art and literature objectively contain better collections of objects, relations, and values. And that is to say that the consumption of inferior art, literature, and myth, represents a loss of opportunity to consume superior art, literature, and myth, and therefore superior objects, relations, and values.
    Chinese art demonstrates a hatred of man and the human form. Japanese are attempts to circumvent the effeminacy of asian forms. All thier costuming is an attempt to make excuses for their lack and depth of masculine maturity. I mean their is a reason we use half naked super warriors and they use giant robot armor, or dolled-up clothing to make themselves look more substantive. Compare it to German art where everyone has a bloody wound in him, or greek, roman, and european art that lionize the human form, the human mind, and human achievements. The fact that we no longer produce a Howard (who was gay), a Heinlein, Johnny Quest or the first year of Star Trek, or even very good science fiction, is in fact because of the Jewish censorship in hollywood. Sure. (Whether Intentional or cultural or genetic). We still seem to be able to get away with horror although the jewish cultural mafia is working against that also. But the answer is what it is. I do not err. I am not ignorant. And I consider all but the certain portions of Akira and GITM unwatchable. )

  • Religion Via-Negativa

    RELIGION VIA NEGATIVA So, when you say ‘religion’, we all need the services provided by ‘religion’ whether or not we consume them directly or indirectly through others. The question is whether we need supernaturalism, fictionalism, and outright falsehood. The answer is demonstrably no.

    On the other hand – more precisely – it means those of us with a great deal of agency do not need it, but desire it’s consequences. It means that those with the pretense of agency – the ‘atheists’ need a substitute for it, and have chosen pseudo-rationalism and pseudoscience. It means that some of us mouth pretense to it because we understand the value of religion but find the superstition, supernaturalism, fictionalism, and outright falsehood merely an absurd cost of obtaining the good produced by the rituals and discipline. And it means that those without the ability to trust those with more agency than they, need the superstition to sate their emotions, the supernaturalism to grant authority to the fictionalism, and the outright falsehood as a means of insulating themselves from suggestion by those who would sway them from the strategies embodied in all of the above. There is no reason we cannot cause the production of truthful religion by the suppression of fictional religion. History replaces myth. Fiction fictionalism. Science superstition. And the natural law of men, resistance against suggestion, deception, and predation. Curt Doolittle

  • Religion Via-Negativa

    RELIGION VIA NEGATIVA So, when you say ‘religion’, we all need the services provided by ‘religion’ whether or not we consume them directly or indirectly through others. The question is whether we need supernaturalism, fictionalism, and outright falsehood. The answer is demonstrably no.

    On the other hand – more precisely – it means those of us with a great deal of agency do not need it, but desire it’s consequences. It means that those with the pretense of agency – the ‘atheists’ need a substitute for it, and have chosen pseudo-rationalism and pseudoscience. It means that some of us mouth pretense to it because we understand the value of religion but find the superstition, supernaturalism, fictionalism, and outright falsehood merely an absurd cost of obtaining the good produced by the rituals and discipline. And it means that those without the ability to trust those with more agency than they, need the superstition to sate their emotions, the supernaturalism to grant authority to the fictionalism, and the outright falsehood as a means of insulating themselves from suggestion by those who would sway them from the strategies embodied in all of the above. There is no reason we cannot cause the production of truthful religion by the suppression of fictional religion. History replaces myth. Fiction fictionalism. Science superstition. And the natural law of men, resistance against suggestion, deception, and predation. Curt Doolittle

  • RELIGION VIA NEGATIVA So, when you say ‘religion’, we all need the services prov

    RELIGION VIA NEGATIVA

    So, when you say ‘religion’, we all need the services provided by ‘religion’ whether or not we consume them directly or indirectly through others.

    The question is whether we need supernaturalism, fictionalism, and outright falsehood. The answer is demonstrably no.

    On the other hand – more precisely – it means those of us with a great deal of agency do not need it, but desire it’s consequences.

    It means that those with the pretense of agency – the ‘atheists’ need a substitute for it, and have chosen pseudo-rationalism and pseudoscience.

    It means that some of us mouth pretense to it because we understand the value of religion but find the superstition, supernaturalism, fictionalism, and outright falsehood merely an absurd cost of obtaining the good produced by the rituals and discipline.

    And it means that those without the ability to trust those with more agency than they, need the superstition to sate their emotions, the supernaturalism to grant authority to the fictionalism, and the outright falsehood as a means of insulating themselves from suggestion by those who would sway them from the strategies embodied in all of the above.

    There is no reason we cannot cause the production of truthful religion by the suppression of fictional religion. History replaces myth. Fiction fictionalism. Science superstition. And the natural law of men, resistance against suggestion, deception, and predation.

    Curt Doolittle

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-29 18:51:00 UTC