By Eli Harman (Curt: “Ghetto Ethics, and Rat Heroism”) In the traditional hero’s journey of Aryan myth and legand, somebody relatable and unassuming faces great challenges and trials, sometimes setbacks and losses, before finally rising to the occasion and triumphing gloriously, and probably getting the girl. Then everyone lives happily ever after (until it’s time to do it again.) But the many possible variations on this simple theme are notably absent from most contemporary media. A good example of the this would be the 2005 version of “War of the Worlds.” There is no glorious triumph. It’s just run, hide, escape, run hide, escape; plus morally ambiguous connundra resolved by choosing self-preservation at all costs. Finally, the protagonists eventually survive just by outlasting the invaders, who are brought down by the filth, disease, and corruption, that Earthlings live amidst, rather than any heroics or agency on their part. It’s not the hero’s journey, so much as the rat’s, because it was not written or directed by Aryans…
Form: Excerpt
-
2005’s War of The Worlds as Non-Aryan Myth
By Eli Harman (Curt: “Ghetto Ethics, and Rat Heroism”) In the traditional hero’s journey of Aryan myth and legand, somebody relatable and unassuming faces great challenges and trials, sometimes setbacks and losses, before finally rising to the occasion and triumphing gloriously, and probably getting the girl. Then everyone lives happily ever after (until it’s time to do it again.) But the many possible variations on this simple theme are notably absent from most contemporary media. A good example of the this would be the 2005 version of “War of the Worlds.” There is no glorious triumph. It’s just run, hide, escape, run hide, escape; plus morally ambiguous connundra resolved by choosing self-preservation at all costs. Finally, the protagonists eventually survive just by outlasting the invaders, who are brought down by the filth, disease, and corruption, that Earthlings live amidst, rather than any heroics or agency on their part. It’s not the hero’s journey, so much as the rat’s, because it was not written or directed by Aryans…
-
An Informational Approach to Stoicism.
by Moritz Bierling from December 2, 2016 (repost) An Informational Approach to Stoicism Stoicism is essentially a software fix to a hardware fact: humans tend to emphasize or experience negative thoughts more strongly by roughly a factor of 2. Daniel Kahneman’s research into what is now codified under the term “behavioral economics” has shown this to be the case. When confronted with loss, whether potential or actual, we react much more strongly than when faced with a gain of equal size. Of course this makes perfect sense from an evolutionary, game-theoretical perspective. In order to be able to lose something, an organism must first have gained it through expenditure of a non-trivial amount of energy. If it were to give up easily on its “property”, conveniently defined here as “that which an organism defends”, it may very well not get another chance to acquire new food or mating partners, and consequently exit the gene pool and thus “the game” entirely. And since we humans are still here, and since we exist as biological creatures the ancestors of which have lived through extremely adverse environmental conditions, we too defend that which we have an interest in maintaining. Stoicism then, properly understood as the practice of mental discipline in the face of adversity, asks one to front-load the negative experiences that will inevitably intrude upon our day, and consequently allows one to prime one’s mental machinery such that tones down its reaction to actual adversity by taking advantage of the involuntary mechanism of comparing present experience to recent memory of similar nature. This practice, if coupled with training automatic responses to imagined adversity, allows one to benefit from the compressed version of a considered response, which tends to incorporate greater amounts of information about consequences and causal relations, and even superior processing of these factors into the outcome it generates. In a very real sense the Stoics were the first scientists. They systematically used greater amounts of information that they “updated” and refactored constantly through daily practice of mental discipline, and applied it to the problems they faced. They committed themselves and their fortune to the empirical study of human nature through constant self examination and continuous experimentation. They were the original “Agile developers” of their own internal software. Of course they didn’t do all of this “just for the fun of it”. Students of the discipline, and especially professors of philosophy – or so-called “intellectual-yet-idiots” – often forget that the whole point of this practice is to actually gain the upside. What use is all of this discipline if the reward is zero? As Taleb points out, Seneca, at the time the wealthiest man in the world, “wanted to keep the upside and not be hurt by the downside.” By choosing to experience extreme loss on a daily basis like the good Stoic he was, he avoided more often than not the actual losses heaped on him by fate. And when he did experience a loss he got right back to work to “transform fear into prudence, pain into transformation, mistakes into initiation, and desire into undertaking.” Because what else is there to do? Notice here that the practicing Stoic, unlike the idle student of Stoicism, assimilates information from the environment in order to use it. He recognizes the nascent value in adopting this way of life and intends, nay! decides to capture it. In effect he, or rather the series of men he will become by constantly killing off a series of lesser versions of himself that attempt to protect unproductive attachments, evolves on the psycho-spiritual rather than genetic level. He uses a never-ending series of ever greater attachments to motivate his psychological and neuromuscular machinery into action that will yield superior strength and optionality, which in turn generates greater vision and broader fields of possible and profitable paths of action. He self-creates. Through the acquisition of greater amounts of information and their integration into his operational machinery (quasi permanent structures on the habitual, neuronal, neuromuscular, physical levels) he gains the ability to put greater amounts of resources (stored in various forms of capital: informational, relationships, tools, etc) to the extant (or “greatest-utility-yielding”) path of action, thereby strengthening his dominion over more parts of nature, including himself. One may even be tempted to say that the most informationally complete or integrated structure, on whatever level, will tend to influence everything around it in outward circles on all levels: sub- and superstrata.May 24, 2018 4:48pm -
An Informational Approach to Stoicism.
by Moritz Bierling from December 2, 2016 (repost) An Informational Approach to Stoicism Stoicism is essentially a software fix to a hardware fact: humans tend to emphasize or experience negative thoughts more strongly by roughly a factor of 2. Daniel Kahneman’s research into what is now codified under the term “behavioral economics” has shown this to be the case. When confronted with loss, whether potential or actual, we react much more strongly than when faced with a gain of equal size. Of course this makes perfect sense from an evolutionary, game-theoretical perspective. In order to be able to lose something, an organism must first have gained it through expenditure of a non-trivial amount of energy. If it were to give up easily on its “property”, conveniently defined here as “that which an organism defends”, it may very well not get another chance to acquire new food or mating partners, and consequently exit the gene pool and thus “the game” entirely. And since we humans are still here, and since we exist as biological creatures the ancestors of which have lived through extremely adverse environmental conditions, we too defend that which we have an interest in maintaining. Stoicism then, properly understood as the practice of mental discipline in the face of adversity, asks one to front-load the negative experiences that will inevitably intrude upon our day, and consequently allows one to prime one’s mental machinery such that tones down its reaction to actual adversity by taking advantage of the involuntary mechanism of comparing present experience to recent memory of similar nature. This practice, if coupled with training automatic responses to imagined adversity, allows one to benefit from the compressed version of a considered response, which tends to incorporate greater amounts of information about consequences and causal relations, and even superior processing of these factors into the outcome it generates. In a very real sense the Stoics were the first scientists. They systematically used greater amounts of information that they “updated” and refactored constantly through daily practice of mental discipline, and applied it to the problems they faced. They committed themselves and their fortune to the empirical study of human nature through constant self examination and continuous experimentation. They were the original “Agile developers” of their own internal software. Of course they didn’t do all of this “just for the fun of it”. Students of the discipline, and especially professors of philosophy – or so-called “intellectual-yet-idiots” – often forget that the whole point of this practice is to actually gain the upside. What use is all of this discipline if the reward is zero? As Taleb points out, Seneca, at the time the wealthiest man in the world, “wanted to keep the upside and not be hurt by the downside.” By choosing to experience extreme loss on a daily basis like the good Stoic he was, he avoided more often than not the actual losses heaped on him by fate. And when he did experience a loss he got right back to work to “transform fear into prudence, pain into transformation, mistakes into initiation, and desire into undertaking.” Because what else is there to do? Notice here that the practicing Stoic, unlike the idle student of Stoicism, assimilates information from the environment in order to use it. He recognizes the nascent value in adopting this way of life and intends, nay! decides to capture it. In effect he, or rather the series of men he will become by constantly killing off a series of lesser versions of himself that attempt to protect unproductive attachments, evolves on the psycho-spiritual rather than genetic level. He uses a never-ending series of ever greater attachments to motivate his psychological and neuromuscular machinery into action that will yield superior strength and optionality, which in turn generates greater vision and broader fields of possible and profitable paths of action. He self-creates. Through the acquisition of greater amounts of information and their integration into his operational machinery (quasi permanent structures on the habitual, neuronal, neuromuscular, physical levels) he gains the ability to put greater amounts of resources (stored in various forms of capital: informational, relationships, tools, etc) to the extant (or “greatest-utility-yielding”) path of action, thereby strengthening his dominion over more parts of nature, including himself. One may even be tempted to say that the most informationally complete or integrated structure, on whatever level, will tend to influence everything around it in outward circles on all levels: sub- and superstrata.May 24, 2018 4:48pm -
AN INFORMATIONAL APPROACH TO STOICISM. by Moritz Bierling from December 2, 2016
AN INFORMATIONAL APPROACH TO STOICISM.
by Moritz Bierling from December 2, 2016
(repost)
An Informational Approach to Stoicism
Stoicism is essentially a software fix to a hardware fact: humans tend to emphasize or experience negative thoughts more strongly by roughly a factor of 2. Daniel Kahneman’s research into what is now codified under the term “behavioral economics” has shown this to be the case. When confronted with loss, whether potential or actual, we react much more strongly than when faced with a gain of equal size.
Of course this makes perfect sense from an evolutionary, game-theoretical perspective. In order to be able to lose something, an organism must first have gained it through expenditure of a non-trivial amount of energy. If it were to give up easily on its “property”, conveniently defined here as “that which an organism defends”, it may very well not get another chance to acquire new food or mating partners, and consequently exit the gene pool and thus “the game” entirely. And since we humans are still here, and since we exist as biological creatures the ancestors of which have lived through extremely adverse environmental conditions, we too defend that which we have an interest in maintaining.
Stoicism then, properly understood as the practice of mental discipline in the face of adversity, asks one to front-load the negative experiences that will inevitably intrude upon our day, and consequently allows one to prime one’s mental machinery such that tones down its reaction to actual adversity by taking advantage of the involuntary mechanism of comparing present experience to recent memory of similar nature. This practice, if coupled with training automatic responses to imagined adversity, allows one to benefit from the compressed version of a considered response, which tends to incorporate greater amounts of information about consequences and causal relations, and even superior processing of these factors into the outcome it generates.
In a very real sense the Stoics were the first scientists. They systematically used greater amounts of information that they “updated” and refactored constantly through daily practice of mental discipline, and applied it to the problems they faced. They committed themselves and their fortune to the empirical study of human nature through constant self examination and continuous experimentation. They were the original “Agile developers” of their own internal software.
Of course they didn’t do all of this “just for the fun of it”. Students of the discipline, and especially professors of philosophy – or so-called “intellectual-yet-idiots” – often forget that the whole point of this practice is to actually gain the upside. What use is all of this discipline if the reward is zero? As Taleb points out, Seneca, at the time the wealthiest man in the world, “wanted to keep the upside and not be hurt by the downside.” By choosing to experience extreme loss on a daily basis like the good Stoic he was, he avoided more often than not the actual losses heaped on him by fate. And when he did experience a loss he got right back to work to “transform fear into prudence, pain into transformation, mistakes into initiation, and desire into undertaking.”
Because what else is there to do?
Notice here that the practicing Stoic, unlike the idle student of Stoicism, assimilates information from the environment in order to use it. He recognizes the nascent value in adopting this way of life and intends, nay! decides to capture it. In effect he, or rather the series of men he will become by constantly killing off a series of lesser versions of himself that attempt to protect unproductive attachments, evolves on the psycho-spiritual rather than genetic level. He uses a never-ending series of ever greater attachments to motivate his psychological and neuromuscular machinery into action that will yield superior strength and optionality, which in turn generates greater vision and broader fields of possible and profitable paths of action.
He self-creates.
Through the acquisition of greater amounts of information and their integration into his operational machinery (quasi permanent structures on the habitual, neuronal, neuromuscular, physical levels) he gains the ability to put greater amounts of resources (stored in various forms of capital: informational, relationships, tools, etc) to the extant (or “greatest-utility-yielding”) path of action, thereby strengthening his dominion over more parts of nature, including himself.
One may even be tempted to say that the most informationally complete or integrated structure, on whatever level, will tend to influence everything around it in outward circles on all levels: sub- and superstrata.
Source date (UTC): 2018-05-24 16:48:00 UTC
-
RT @jeffreyatucker: Why Unhealthy Food Is Cheap and Plentiful via @aier
RT @jeffreyatucker: Why Unhealthy Food Is Cheap and Plentiful https://www.aier.org/article/why-unhealthy-food-cheap-and-plentiful#.WwLWi9Kwze8.twitter via @aier
Source date (UTC): 2018-05-21 14:25:34 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/998570502443687938
-
RT @Steve_Sailer: Here are demographics of “The Atlantic’s” 2009 Atlantic 50 lis
RT @Steve_Sailer: Here are demographics of “The Atlantic’s” 2009 Atlantic 50 list of the 50 most influential pundits. I found backgrounds o…
Source date (UTC): 2018-05-21 14:16:43 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/998568275339612160
-
Retweeted Outsideness (@Outsideness): The concept of the Cathedral hit the spot
Retweeted Outsideness (@Outsideness):
The concept of the Cathedral hit the spot because it recognized that what was being promoted as the rule book was in fact enemy scripture.
Source date (UTC): 2018-05-21 13:13:00 UTC
-
The ghastly crimes the Jews had been committing against Ukrainians under the guise of ‘Bolshevism’.
—“The Ukrainians started rounding up Jews and killing hundreds, probably thousands, of Jews by clubbing them to death in the streets really the minute the Germans entered their lands. Not because of ‘irrational hate’, but because of the ghastly crimes the Jews had been committing against them under the guise of ‘Bolshevism’. The ‘holocaust’ saga was later invented to 1)hide the crimes of the Jews against the slavs under Bolshevism and 2) to whitewash the post war genocidal revenge against the Germans. 3) sell Zionism. “— Anthony Migchels
-
The ghastly crimes the Jews had been committing against Ukrainians under the guise of ‘Bolshevism’.
—“The Ukrainians started rounding up Jews and killing hundreds, probably thousands, of Jews by clubbing them to death in the streets really the minute the Germans entered their lands. Not because of ‘irrational hate’, but because of the ghastly crimes the Jews had been committing against them under the guise of ‘Bolshevism’. The ‘holocaust’ saga was later invented to 1)hide the crimes of the Jews against the slavs under Bolshevism and 2) to whitewash the post war genocidal revenge against the Germans. 3) sell Zionism. “— Anthony Migchels