It is pretty hard to be better than a good christian for the simple reason that the path to goodness – now from catholics as well as protestants – is ‘personal (direct) works of charity’ toward those in your proximity.
(and I argue that all else is just virtue signaling – a kind of fraud and the opposite of the christian mandate).
The principle virtue of such a mandate is that it’s entirely empirical. It’s deeds(actions) not beliefs(self congratulations) or rituals (self insulations).
There is no better theology than action in the service of others.
If you can do so my charity (caretaking).
If you can do so by production (trade)
If you can do so by war (violence)
Germanicized Christianity (as of vatican II, we are all protestants now) creates the civil society.
Everything else is just virtue signaling so someone else does the work, pays the costs, or takes the risk, and you can feel good about escaping from it.
Form: Mini Essay
-
Russel’s Teapot And The Existence Of God
One of the great falsehoods of philosophy: proof. You cannot prove anything, so the question itself is a deception. The questions are unfalsifiable, which is a center position between justifiable and warrantable. Justifiabl(excuse) > falsifiable (possible) > demonstrable(empirical) > warrantable (insured) Proofs exist in and only in mathematics, for the simple reason that positional relations (positional names that we call numbers) are by definition and necessity constant relations and cannot be otherwise. There are very few other constant relations. (time is one, and even that is a question of relative position and velocity). We can create certain set arguments. We can identify certain reductio (trivial) necessities just as we can identify certain prime numbers. But the question is fraudulent (a trick) of grammar. Since one cannot prove anything, one can merely justify (non-promissory), provide terms of falsification(promissory), demonstrate(tempmoral), or insure (intertemporal) As soon as you admit the criteria of … – deception and fraud – incentive – cost – warranty …. into philosophical argument, we change from philosophy to law, just as when we introduce empiricism into theology, we move into philosophy. -
RUSSEL’S TEAPOT AND THE EXISTENCE OF GOD One of the great falsehoods of philosop
RUSSEL’S TEAPOT AND THE EXISTENCE OF GOD
One of the great falsehoods of philosophy: proof.
You cannot prove anything, so the question itself is a deception.
The questions are unfalsifiable, which is a center position between justifiable and warrantable.
Justifiabl(excuse) > falsifiable (possible) > demonstrable(empirical) > warrantable (insured)
Proofs exist in and only in mathematics, for the simple reason that positional relations (positional names that we call numbers) are by definition and necessity constant relations and cannot be otherwise.
There are very few other constant relations. (time is one, and even that is a question of relative position and velocity). We can create certain set arguments. We can identify certain reductio (trivial) necessities just as we can identify certain prime numbers.
But the question is fraudulent (a trick) of grammar.
Since one cannot prove anything, one can merely justify (non-promissory), provide terms of falsification(promissory), demonstrate(tempmoral), or insure (intertemporal)
As soon as you admit the criteria of …
– deception and fraud
– incentive
– cost
– warranty
…. into philosophical argument, we change from philosophy to law, just as when we introduce empiricism into theology, we move into philosophy.
Source date (UTC): 2018-03-11 12:13:00 UTC
-
Russel’s Teapot And The Existence Of God
One of the great falsehoods of philosophy: proof. You cannot prove anything, so the question itself is a deception. The questions are unfalsifiable, which is a center position between justifiable and warrantable. Justifiabl(excuse) > falsifiable (possible) > demonstrable(empirical) > warrantable (insured) Proofs exist in and only in mathematics, for the simple reason that positional relations (positional names that we call numbers) are by definition and necessity constant relations and cannot be otherwise. There are very few other constant relations. (time is one, and even that is a question of relative position and velocity). We can create certain set arguments. We can identify certain reductio (trivial) necessities just as we can identify certain prime numbers. But the question is fraudulent (a trick) of grammar. Since one cannot prove anything, one can merely justify (non-promissory), provide terms of falsification(promissory), demonstrate(tempmoral), or insure (intertemporal) As soon as you admit the criteria of … – deception and fraud – incentive – cost – warranty …. into philosophical argument, we change from philosophy to law, just as when we introduce empiricism into theology, we move into philosophy. -
Teapots
This is a trivial problem in grammar with the terms truth and proof and can be debunked pretty easily. a) how can you testify that a teapot orbits the sun? This is a very different question than Russell is asking and is the entire reason why philosophy and theology became closely related after because of augustine. We demand warranty of goods and services, but we have stopped demanding warranty of information (words). So the question is, how can one warranty his statement that a teapot orbits the sun? Then why does he say such a thing? In other words, just as in any other crime, what is one’s incentive? -
The people of Connecticut must finally come to understand that the reason they a
The people of Connecticut must finally come to understand that the reason they are 44th in the nation (and CT is a dump) is because the people of CT have always been wrong. ALWAYS. Self righteous puritanism led to self righteous socialism led to self righteous postmodernism, and what was the finest parcel of real estate habitable by man outside of the Loire Valley in France, has been reduced to a soviet slum from the border of Fairfield county -which is nothing more than a tax haven for New Yorkers, and New York is just the profit center for the marketing and sale of US Federal Fiat Currency to the financial and banking markets. Why did Boston lose the technology market to the Bay Area? Why has every company of every possible size that can physically afford to do so, left connecticut? Why does ever person with any economic ability leave connecticut? Why doe entrepreneurs laugh when Connecticut is mentioned? Connecticut was the state that most thoroughly implemented the soviet model, and is paying the same price of the soviets. Connecticut is a wasteland from springfield through hartford through new haven through bridgeport, and has now lost the southeast to immigrant crime. There is a reason we replaced the priesthood with the middle class business person during the enlightenment. There is a reason we replaced the church with science. People who try to do good by political means always and everywhere do ill for the simple reason that anything you subsidize increases. Western civilization created extraordinary wealthy by innovation, expansion, competition, and conquest. And northeasterners and their ‘cult’ have destroyed that civilization in less than a century of ‘good intentions’. The road to hell, and the road to bankruptcy and poverty are paved with good intentions. Prosperity is always and everywhere the result of continuous competitive advancement. All the great arts and sciences are the work of conquering commercial empires. So if you are a new englander, of ‘priestly’ bent, you are doing nothing other than buying self serving virtue signals by spending down the accumulated competitiveness of your ancestors. And you have paved your way to hell. A very wise man said: “Whenever you are unsure how to vote, consult a well meaning fool, and vote the other direction. People of Connecticut need to move radically in the other direction, or this “soviet worker’s paradise on englishs soil’ will continue to decline as did the soviet union, and every other nation that has attempted the same. The future is not star trek. It’s venezuela, brazil, and india. -
The people of Connecticut must finally come to understand that the reason they a
The people of Connecticut must finally come to understand that the reason they are 44th in the nation (and CT is a dump) is because the people of CT have always been wrong.
ALWAYS. Self righteous puritanism led to self righteous socialism led to self righteous postmodernism, and what was the finest parcel of real estate habitable by man outside of the Loire Valley in France, has been reduced to a soviet slum from the border of Fairfield county -which is nothing more than a tax haven for New Yorkers, and New York is just the profit center for the marketing and sale of US Federal Fiat Currency to the financial and banking markets.
Why did Boston lose the technology market to the Bay Area? Why has every company of every possible size that can physically afford to do so, left connecticut?
Why does ever person with any economic ability leave connecticut? Why doe entrepreneurs laugh when Connecticut is mentioned?
Connecticut was the state that most thoroughly implemented the soviet model, and is paying the same price of the soviets.
Connecticut is a wasteland from springfield through hartford through new haven through bridgeport, and has now lost the southeast to immigrant crime.
There is a reason we replaced the priesthood with the middle class business person during the enlightenment. There is a reason we replaced the church with science.
People who try to do good by political means always and everywhere do ill for the simple reason that anything you subsidize increases.
Western civilization created extraordinary wealthy by innovation, expansion, competition, and conquest. And northeasterners and their ‘cult’ have destroyed that civilization in less than a century of ‘good intentions’.
The road to hell, and the road to bankruptcy and poverty are paved with good intentions.
Prosperity is always and everywhere the result of continuous competitive advancement.
All the great arts and sciences are the work of conquering commercial empires.
So if you are a new englander, of ‘priestly’ bent, you are doing nothing other than buying self serving virtue signals by spending down the accumulated competitiveness of your ancestors.
And you have paved your way to hell.
A very wise man said: “Whenever you are unsure how to vote, consult a well meaning fool, and vote the other direction. People of Connecticut need to move radically in the other direction, or this “soviet worker’s paradise on englishs soil’ will continue to decline as did the soviet union, and every other nation that has attempted the same.
The future is not star trek. It’s venezuela, brazil, and india.
Source date (UTC): 2018-03-11 11:17:00 UTC
-
The people of Connecticut must finally come to understand that the reason they a
The people of Connecticut must finally come to understand that the reason they are 44th in the nation (and CT is a dump) is because the people of CT have always been wrong. ALWAYS. Self righteous puritanism led to self righteous socialism led to self righteous postmodernism, and what was the finest parcel of real estate habitable by man outside of the Loire Valley in France, has been reduced to a soviet slum from the border of Fairfield county -which is nothing more than a tax haven for New Yorkers, and New York is just the profit center for the marketing and sale of US Federal Fiat Currency to the financial and banking markets. Why did Boston lose the technology market to the Bay Area? Why has every company of every possible size that can physically afford to do so, left connecticut? Why does ever person with any economic ability leave connecticut? Why doe entrepreneurs laugh when Connecticut is mentioned? Connecticut was the state that most thoroughly implemented the soviet model, and is paying the same price of the soviets. Connecticut is a wasteland from springfield through hartford through new haven through bridgeport, and has now lost the southeast to immigrant crime. There is a reason we replaced the priesthood with the middle class business person during the enlightenment. There is a reason we replaced the church with science. People who try to do good by political means always and everywhere do ill for the simple reason that anything you subsidize increases. Western civilization created extraordinary wealthy by innovation, expansion, competition, and conquest. And northeasterners and their ‘cult’ have destroyed that civilization in less than a century of ‘good intentions’. The road to hell, and the road to bankruptcy and poverty are paved with good intentions. Prosperity is always and everywhere the result of continuous competitive advancement. All the great arts and sciences are the work of conquering commercial empires. So if you are a new englander, of ‘priestly’ bent, you are doing nothing other than buying self serving virtue signals by spending down the accumulated competitiveness of your ancestors. And you have paved your way to hell. A very wise man said: “Whenever you are unsure how to vote, consult a well meaning fool, and vote the other direction. People of Connecticut need to move radically in the other direction, or this “soviet worker’s paradise on englishs soil’ will continue to decline as did the soviet union, and every other nation that has attempted the same. The future is not star trek. It’s venezuela, brazil, and india. -
THE SPECTRUM OF REFERENTS WE CALL GODS I dunno. I think we just use the word ‘go
THE SPECTRUM OF REFERENTS WE CALL GODS
I dunno. I think we just use the word ‘god’ to represent increasingly poetic references. It’s the simple people for whom that poetry is existential and anthropomorphic, common people for whom it is literary, atheists who are in between (‘educated’) for whom it is pseudoscience or deceit, and the sophisticated people for whom it is poetry (aesthetic).
I talk to my god every day. But my understanding of ‘god’ would to an atheist make sense, but be silly. To an ordinary person not refer to god at all, and to literalists be atheism.
The reason people at the bottom are more attracted to the divine is to ‘know’ right action, feeling, and belief, and take comfort in right action, feeling, and belief, and therefore giving them confidence in right action, feeling, and belief – without being persuaded (manipulated) by those with greater abilities and lower ethics and morality. In other words, religions give people a shield against guilt, manipulation, coercion, and risk.
Religion was successful because mindfulness(certainty, clarity, confidence) is increasingly necessary as you move left on the curve.
I have been working on this question for I think three or four years now and the phenomenon is widespread, and not limited to religion, but philosophy, and the modern social pseudosciences, and even literature.
We evolved in bands where the entire group functioned as a single distributed nervous system. We prospered by extending our numbers beyond our ability to perceive. So we needed rules (limits) and goods (objectives), and we eventually needed writing, numbers, money (prices really), and governments (commons), to coordinate our actions in large numbers.
But while we gained increasingly diverse physical certainties, they came at the high cost of mental and emotional certainties. At this point we are comforted primarily by consumption and (at least in america) we are seeing extraordinary increases in suicide among the aged. So we are extremely ‘alone’. And as alone we search for some sort of membership and shared understanding, by which to obtain the certainty of our evolutionary history in bands.
Hence the expansion of social media among the verbally acute.
Source date (UTC): 2018-03-11 09:44:00 UTC
-
The Spectrum Of Referents We Call Gods
I dunno. I think we just use the word ‘god’ to represent increasingly poetic references. It’s the simple people for whom that poetry is existential and anthropomorphic, common people for whom it is literary, atheists who are in between (‘educated’) for whom it is pseudoscience or deceit, and the sophisticated people for whom it is poetry (aesthetic). I talk to my god every day. But my understanding of ‘god’ would to an atheist make sense, but be silly. To an ordinary person not refer to god at all, and to literalists be atheism. The reason people at the bottom are more attracted to the divine is to ‘know’ right action, feeling, and belief, and take comfort in right action, feeling, and belief, and therefore giving them confidence in right action, feeling, and belief – without being persuaded (manipulated) by those with greater abilities and lower ethics and morality. In other words, religions give people a shield against guilt, manipulation, coercion, and risk. Religion was successful because mindfulness(certainty, clarity, confidence) is increasingly necessary as you move left on the curve. I have been working on this question for I think three or four years now and the phenomenon is widespread, and not limited to religion, but philosophy, and the modern social pseudosciences, and even literature. We evolved in bands where the entire group functioned as a single distributed nervous system. We prospered by extending our numbers beyond our ability to perceive. So we needed rules (limits) and goods (objectives), and we eventually needed writing, numbers, money (prices really), and governments (commons), to coordinate our actions in large numbers. But while we gained increasingly diverse physical certainties, they came at the high cost of mental and emotional certainties. At this point we are comforted primarily by consumption and (at least in america) we are seeing extraordinary increases in suicide among the aged. So we are extremely ‘alone’. And as alone we search for some sort of membership and shared understanding, by which to obtain the certainty of our evolutionary history in bands. Hence the expansion of social media among the verbally acute.