I love christian manners: “god bless you” et all. I am equally happy with ‘the gods’ instead of ‘god’, and equally unhappy and hostile to the other semitic gods. I love christian ethics. and I love christian behavior. And I love the church experience. And i love it’s role in birth, adulthood, marriage, care-taking, suffering, and death. I wish it still retained juris over the matters of the family. And My experience with education by the church was far superior to that of the state – by orders of magnitude. Personally I would prefer a military experience more suitable to males. And I know some would value sports, or arts, or commercial experiences. And I know I would prefer to find old gods, heroes, artists, scientists, and saints in my Church with Jesus but one among them. And I would find prayer to them more valuable than to those I find feminine. And yes I would prefer the stoic method of discipline rather than submission to a semitic god. I would prefer we celebrate love our heathen(nature) and pagan(masculine) as well as christian (feminine) holidays. But that said, while there are many good social and personal consequences of the religion, christianity failed us politically – it had to – the church could not survive the restoration of aristotelianism and its consequences no matter how hard the theologians tried. And worse, the church failed to reform. And the catholic church’s pope has now our declared the church our enemy. Orthodoxy is too weak in the west. Protestantism thankfully has evolved into a folk religion, especially with the advent of American evangelicals. I think I understand where this will lead and it is beautiful. But first we must solve real problems that are unavoidable: ending another conquest by hostile alien political systems masquerading as religions. Ending the destruction of our civilization by the second attempt at undermining us using the abrahamic methods of deceit – this time in secular prose, as well as fundamentalist semitic prose. And second we must solve the failure of our religion to merge the aristotelian-legal, moral-rational-political, masculine religion, and feminine religion.
Form: Mini Essay
-
While There Are Many Good Social and Personal Consequences of The Religion, Christianity Failed Us Politically
I love christian manners: “god bless you” et all. I am equally happy with ‘the gods’ instead of ‘god’, and equally unhappy and hostile to the other semitic gods. I love christian ethics. and I love christian behavior. And I love the church experience. And i love it’s role in birth, adulthood, marriage, care-taking, suffering, and death. I wish it still retained juris over the matters of the family. And My experience with education by the church was far superior to that of the state – by orders of magnitude. Personally I would prefer a military experience more suitable to males. And I know some would value sports, or arts, or commercial experiences. And I know I would prefer to find old gods, heroes, artists, scientists, and saints in my Church with Jesus but one among them. And I would find prayer to them more valuable than to those I find feminine. And yes I would prefer the stoic method of discipline rather than submission to a semitic god. I would prefer we celebrate love our heathen(nature) and pagan(masculine) as well as christian (feminine) holidays. But that said, while there are many good social and personal consequences of the religion, christianity failed us politically – it had to – the church could not survive the restoration of aristotelianism and its consequences no matter how hard the theologians tried. And worse, the church failed to reform. And the catholic church’s pope has now our declared the church our enemy. Orthodoxy is too weak in the west. Protestantism thankfully has evolved into a folk religion, especially with the advent of American evangelicals. I think I understand where this will lead and it is beautiful. But first we must solve real problems that are unavoidable: ending another conquest by hostile alien political systems masquerading as religions. Ending the destruction of our civilization by the second attempt at undermining us using the abrahamic methods of deceit – this time in secular prose, as well as fundamentalist semitic prose. And second we must solve the failure of our religion to merge the aristotelian-legal, moral-rational-political, masculine religion, and feminine religion.
-
Witch Trials. Why?
Oct 24, 2019, 9:41 AM AFAIK the increase in witch trials was an extension of the inquisition, then the reformation, as a means of creating examples by suppressing newly enabled social dissent under the decline of the influence of the church and the personalization of the religious experience by disintermediation from the priesthood. There isn’t really a consensus on it, but my rough understanding is that as wealth increased and local agency increased we saw the the protestant reformation put more control in the local hands at all levels – including religious. About 80% of prosecutions were of women, and most in central europe (germanic) countries. And women were uneducated and … uneducated women (as we see in daily videos) .. and as evidenced by asylum populations (mostly women), and current mental health statistics, were as disruptive in the past with psychosis as they are today – just like males -although we control males aggressively and we don’t control anti-social behavior in females. In other words I interpret it as a puritan reaction to the transfer of power of catholic inquisition to protestant hands, and the ‘fashion’ of exercising that power, until it was rather obvious that it was out of hand, and (a) judges would no longer accept testimony obtained under torture, (b) it was increasingly outlawed.
-
Which of Your Cognitive Markets Are You Serving?
Oct 25, 2019, 9:48 AM The verb to be circumvents existence, which is what you are trying to circumvent testifying for, just as Heidegger was trying to circumvent and reverse the verb and noun – because both of you are tying to make speech conform to experience rather than speech test experience – which is it’s only POSSIBLE function unless you’re trying to lie. All imagination is produced by association and introspective causes justificationary but all speech like all action is falsificationary – whether or not we wish it to be. So you can describe your predictions, imaginations and fantasies (meaning) in an effort to deceive yourself and others, or you can speak your predictions, imaginations and fantasies (meaning) and have others falsify them or not, or you can act on your predications, imaginations, and fantasies (meaning) and physical reality will falsify them or not. We are capable of free association, imagination (prediction), and fiction (relations between predictions), just as we capable of our own falsification of our fictions (reason, calculation, computation). But this requires agency, and to prefer the rewards of knowledge (truth) over masturbation( sedation by daydreaming) . So we physically demonstrate the series: sense(collection), perception(disambiguation), auto-association (free association), prediction (imagination), fictions (compositions) produce hypotheses, and THEN we falsify (test) them (detect risk and losses) using Reason, Calculation (transformation of inputs into outputs) and computation (using assistants-to-memory to overcome limits – something a we cannot do without external instrumentation, especially symbols that preserve correspondence-name, and other properties of the name-noun expressed as measurements of varying degrees of precision.) So the question is which market are you serving when you speak? Purely psychological (psychotic), purely personal interpretation of interpersonal (solipsistic), interpersonal (empathic), practical action (evidentiary), generalization (analytic), generalization without empathy (aspergers), failure to generalize or empathize (autism). And this is the underlying question. Are you preventing your learning and continuous adaptation to reality by the incremental development of agency, or are you trying to do the opposite which is the primary function of all religions, and most philosophies, and most pseudoscience, and that is to justify not paying the psychological, emotional, physical, and material costs of adapting to reality such that you develop agency? And always and everywhere with very little effort we can ask any individual a few questions, and discover the economics of his or her system of decidability, given costs and returns. (my favorite being christians, muslims, and hindus, as we do not see this other than ‘nationalism’ in the far east and the non-superstitious right, and the upper classes who have and have demonstrated agency. We don’t think of language as a system of measurement (but measurement of what?) but a cursory disambiguation and operationalization of english vocabulary (names of references, whether person, place, thing, action, change etc – reduced to scales that are open to human perception. As an example, Time in english includes always – sometimes – just a bit ago – now – not just a bit ago – sometimes not, and never. Most english vocabulary follows this 3 to 5 to 7 example range, which is about the maximum of human means of disambiguation into scopes of untidily; matches human short term memory; matches the number of points necessary to falsify a line (reduce most errors). I find when I disambiguate a concept that is not well understood because of insufficient operationalization, I end up with twelve or more points. I find that when I serialize existing terms I end up with five or seven. And this difference illustrates the function of operationalization – to improve precision in human speech.
-
Which of Your Cognitive Markets Are You Serving?
Oct 25, 2019, 9:48 AM The verb to be circumvents existence, which is what you are trying to circumvent testifying for, just as Heidegger was trying to circumvent and reverse the verb and noun – because both of you are tying to make speech conform to experience rather than speech test experience – which is it’s only POSSIBLE function unless you’re trying to lie. All imagination is produced by association and introspective causes justificationary but all speech like all action is falsificationary – whether or not we wish it to be. So you can describe your predictions, imaginations and fantasies (meaning) in an effort to deceive yourself and others, or you can speak your predictions, imaginations and fantasies (meaning) and have others falsify them or not, or you can act on your predications, imaginations, and fantasies (meaning) and physical reality will falsify them or not. We are capable of free association, imagination (prediction), and fiction (relations between predictions), just as we capable of our own falsification of our fictions (reason, calculation, computation). But this requires agency, and to prefer the rewards of knowledge (truth) over masturbation( sedation by daydreaming) . So we physically demonstrate the series: sense(collection), perception(disambiguation), auto-association (free association), prediction (imagination), fictions (compositions) produce hypotheses, and THEN we falsify (test) them (detect risk and losses) using Reason, Calculation (transformation of inputs into outputs) and computation (using assistants-to-memory to overcome limits – something a we cannot do without external instrumentation, especially symbols that preserve correspondence-name, and other properties of the name-noun expressed as measurements of varying degrees of precision.) So the question is which market are you serving when you speak? Purely psychological (psychotic), purely personal interpretation of interpersonal (solipsistic), interpersonal (empathic), practical action (evidentiary), generalization (analytic), generalization without empathy (aspergers), failure to generalize or empathize (autism). And this is the underlying question. Are you preventing your learning and continuous adaptation to reality by the incremental development of agency, or are you trying to do the opposite which is the primary function of all religions, and most philosophies, and most pseudoscience, and that is to justify not paying the psychological, emotional, physical, and material costs of adapting to reality such that you develop agency? And always and everywhere with very little effort we can ask any individual a few questions, and discover the economics of his or her system of decidability, given costs and returns. (my favorite being christians, muslims, and hindus, as we do not see this other than ‘nationalism’ in the far east and the non-superstitious right, and the upper classes who have and have demonstrated agency. We don’t think of language as a system of measurement (but measurement of what?) but a cursory disambiguation and operationalization of english vocabulary (names of references, whether person, place, thing, action, change etc – reduced to scales that are open to human perception. As an example, Time in english includes always – sometimes – just a bit ago – now – not just a bit ago – sometimes not, and never. Most english vocabulary follows this 3 to 5 to 7 example range, which is about the maximum of human means of disambiguation into scopes of untidily; matches human short term memory; matches the number of points necessary to falsify a line (reduce most errors). I find when I disambiguate a concept that is not well understood because of insufficient operationalization, I end up with twelve or more points. I find that when I serialize existing terms I end up with five or seven. And this difference illustrates the function of operationalization – to improve precision in human speech.
-
If You Want to Learn P
Oct 25, 2019, 5:27 PM IF YOU WANT TO LEARN P Propertarianism is like aristotelianism – it is a huge project that reforms much human thought especially logic, language, epistemology (knowledge), psychology, sociology, ethics, law, and politics.
- You can learn about our proposed constitution and it’s policies (it’s a lot, and you might have to learn a bit bout economics and the justice system but you can do it.)
- You can learn the Big History of the competition between civilizations and in particular between european and semitic.(easy)
- You can learn why europeans evolved faster than the rest, and developed the only truth telling, high trust, wealthy, advanced, technological, civilization in so short a span in the bronze, ancient, and modern worlds – except for our period of failure during the abrahamic dark age. (relatively easy)
- You can learn a whole suite of the propertarian arguments (Takes some work)
- You can learn how to conduct propertarian arguments
You can learn how to use the p-methodology (Not easy) - And you can if you want to get into the foundations of the P-methodology, the completed scientific method, and logic and epistemology. (Hard)
SO IF YOU WANT TO LEARN ANY OF THAT 1) you can use the site and read it. 2) you can follow along. 3) you can use my friends list to contact and catch the attention of a mentor by asking for help: alain, stepan, bill, luke, brandon, erik, steve, eli, …(thera are a lot more) 4) you can take our course (if you are patient enough for me to slowly release content – and I mean slowly). The other folks are better teachers than I am. Really. By far.
-
If You Want to Learn P
Oct 25, 2019, 5:27 PM IF YOU WANT TO LEARN P Propertarianism is like aristotelianism – it is a huge project that reforms much human thought especially logic, language, epistemology (knowledge), psychology, sociology, ethics, law, and politics.
- You can learn about our proposed constitution and it’s policies (it’s a lot, and you might have to learn a bit bout economics and the justice system but you can do it.)
- You can learn the Big History of the competition between civilizations and in particular between european and semitic.(easy)
- You can learn why europeans evolved faster than the rest, and developed the only truth telling, high trust, wealthy, advanced, technological, civilization in so short a span in the bronze, ancient, and modern worlds – except for our period of failure during the abrahamic dark age. (relatively easy)
- You can learn a whole suite of the propertarian arguments (Takes some work)
- You can learn how to conduct propertarian arguments
You can learn how to use the p-methodology (Not easy) - And you can if you want to get into the foundations of the P-methodology, the completed scientific method, and logic and epistemology. (Hard)
SO IF YOU WANT TO LEARN ANY OF THAT 1) you can use the site and read it. 2) you can follow along. 3) you can use my friends list to contact and catch the attention of a mentor by asking for help: alain, stepan, bill, luke, brandon, erik, steve, eli, …(thera are a lot more) 4) you can take our course (if you are patient enough for me to slowly release content – and I mean slowly). The other folks are better teachers than I am. Really. By far.
-
Usury
Oct 28, 2019, 1:23 PM USURY (repost) Interest vs Usury. Interest is necessary for the organization of complex production. it is beneficial for production of generations. It is risky for the purpose of consumption. It is harmful for the production of entertainment. It is very harmful for the production of anti-social behaviors. What demarcates Interest from Usury?
(a) credit for consumption rather than production. (b) borrower beware rather than lender beware. (c) collateral If lending is limited to production, lender risk, and un-recoverability for anything other than fraud, then it’s shared risk. And it increases use of stock markets where access to liquidity is possible instead of collateral recovery. The enemy’s technique consists of false promise, baiting in to moral hazard, pilpul, critique, and profiting from capture of hazards, and capitalizing those captures as systems of rents. Usury is the most common example of baiting into hazard, by the extension of credit for the purpose of consumption, the use of collateral, and the use of the court to transfer assets to the lender. The enemy’s technique uses every possible means of baiting into hazard, defending this bait by pilpul and critique, profiting from the hazard – both private and public – then taking the accumulated capital and seeking rents against the population until they revolt and prosecute their revenge. … There is a reason this technique works with high trust europeans but not elsewhere. There is a reason it works with women and underclasses but not established men. Because our democracy makes us vulnerable to false promise, and the underclasses are easily baited by false promise, we are tolerant of meritocracy until too late. Worse, it is easiest to exploit our social order of MARKETS and LAGGING legal codes in defense of those markets and our people. And lagging technology for replacing each of the means of parasitism: financial, commercial, educational, informational, political, social, normative, and traditional
-
Truth in Humor: The History of Entrepreneurial Warfare
Oct 28, 2019, 5:00 PM The Templars started out as ‘the poor knights’ as shown by two men on horseback. The Hospitaliers were not poor. They had money, arms, fleets of ships, and took territory. The Vikings were entrepreneurial warriors. The romans were entrepreneurial conquerors. The Greeks were entrepreneurial warriors. The indo europeans were entrepreneurial conquerors. Why do you think we live under the long tradition of Severity, Reciprocity, Jury, Truth, Duty, and Contract? Because we have descended from entrepreneurial warfare. Now if I could just get my fellow western MEN to understand that we are historically entrepreneurial warriors – colonialists, pirates, vikings, in every age, and that it was only the Peace of Westphalia under which our ancestors prohibited us from ‘entrepreneurial war’, and limited warfare to the states. Russia, Iran, and the Muslims and the Jews have broken the Peace of Westphalia, and returned us to a war of all against all, which is the reason for our continuous defeat in central asia and the middle east. To restore our people we must return to our long tradition in the industrialization of ‘entrepreneurial warfare’. Meaning “war for adventure, fun, and profit”. It’s the civic nationalists and the christians so cuckolded that they can’t comprehend this – and those of us who are ‘aryans’, ‘pagans’, ‘raiders’, ‘pirates’ and ‘conquerors and colonizers’ and natural entrepreneurial warriors that are willing to return to ‘revolution as a for profit industry”. This is why you want leaders. You’re still ‘Cucks’ to the state and the ‘church’. You need permission. But European Men don’t need leaders to hoist the jolly roger, pillage, plunder, and burn the house down. To engage in conquest for fun and profit? Only cowards do. 😉 Happy to ‘knight’ you if it’ll make you feel better. 😉
-
Truth in Humor: The History of Entrepreneurial Warfare
Oct 28, 2019, 5:00 PM The Templars started out as ‘the poor knights’ as shown by two men on horseback. The Hospitaliers were not poor. They had money, arms, fleets of ships, and took territory. The Vikings were entrepreneurial warriors. The romans were entrepreneurial conquerors. The Greeks were entrepreneurial warriors. The indo europeans were entrepreneurial conquerors. Why do you think we live under the long tradition of Severity, Reciprocity, Jury, Truth, Duty, and Contract? Because we have descended from entrepreneurial warfare. Now if I could just get my fellow western MEN to understand that we are historically entrepreneurial warriors – colonialists, pirates, vikings, in every age, and that it was only the Peace of Westphalia under which our ancestors prohibited us from ‘entrepreneurial war’, and limited warfare to the states. Russia, Iran, and the Muslims and the Jews have broken the Peace of Westphalia, and returned us to a war of all against all, which is the reason for our continuous defeat in central asia and the middle east. To restore our people we must return to our long tradition in the industrialization of ‘entrepreneurial warfare’. Meaning “war for adventure, fun, and profit”. It’s the civic nationalists and the christians so cuckolded that they can’t comprehend this – and those of us who are ‘aryans’, ‘pagans’, ‘raiders’, ‘pirates’ and ‘conquerors and colonizers’ and natural entrepreneurial warriors that are willing to return to ‘revolution as a for profit industry”. This is why you want leaders. You’re still ‘Cucks’ to the state and the ‘church’. You need permission. But European Men don’t need leaders to hoist the jolly roger, pillage, plunder, and burn the house down. To engage in conquest for fun and profit? Only cowards do. 😉 Happy to ‘knight’ you if it’ll make you feel better. 😉