Curt Doolittle

Form: Quote Commentary

  • GERMAN PHILOSOPHY by Daniel Gurpide The more I follow Curt’s posts, the more I r

    GERMAN PHILOSOPHY

    by Daniel Gurpide

    The more I follow Curt’s posts, the more I realize German philosophy is not that ‘great’.

    The Greats of German philosophy (Kant-Fichte-Hegel-Marx-Heidegger, I’m leaving Nietzsche outside on purpose, I know) make up a Counter-Enlightenment tradition that ends up being suspicious of science and technology, anti-individualistic and anti-liberal. They all contributed in varying degrees to the authoritarian regimes that developed in the 1900s – the various forms of authoritarian nationalisms, the national and international socialisms, the fascisms – and the cultural catastrophes named ‘Frankfurt School’ and ‘Post-Modernism’.

    Kant (the only picture in Kant’s house was a portrait of Rousseau that was hanging over his writing desk) buttressed the pre-modern worldview of faith and duty against the inroads of the Enlightenment: “I have therefore found it necessary to deny knowledge in order to make room for faith.” (Kant)

    Hegel explicitly attacks the entire tradition of logic as it had developed from Aristotle to modernity. He wants to believe in a kind of spiritually-driven, dialectically-evolving metaphysics that cannot be expressed logically. His deeper views are that one’s self is but an aspect of the collective, that the Divine works through collective self-realization, and that the State is the manifestation of the Divine.

    Hegel on the beginning of the universe: “So far, there is nothing: something is to become. The beginning is not pure nothing, but a nothing from which something is to proceed; so that being is already contained in the beginning. The beginning thus contains both, being and nothing; it is the unity of being and nothing, or is not-being which is being, and being which is also not being.” This is a forewarning of the worst Heidegger, the ‘nazi’ philosopher par excellence who paradoxically ended up recreating the Jewish cosmogonic myth (Creation ‘ex nihilo’).

    The triad Kant-Fichte-Hegel is behind the modern German educational system, still active nowadays: a factory of perfect automata devoid of personality, adept at crushing any signs of individualism. Social conformism explains why today in Germany there is no resistance to the suicidal program implemented by ‘Big Mutti’.

    German philosophers are Lutheran pastors in a new garb. All of them, even Marx. Is he German or Jewish? I’m not sure. Isn’t Protestantism another big gulp of Abrahamism? Are Kant, Fichte, Hegel, Heidegger German or Jewish? Is more dangerous the combination of a German philosopher raised in an Abrahamic cult or a Jewish thinker educated in the German school?

    Source date (UTC): 2017-09-14 09:01:00 UTC

  • German Philosophy

    by Daniel Gurpide The more I follow Curt’s posts, the more I realize German philosophy is not that ‘great’. The Greats of German philosophy (Kant-Fichte-Hegel-Marx-Heidegger, I’m leaving Nietzsche outside on purpose, I know) make up a Counter-Enlightenment tradition that ends up being suspicious of science and technology, anti-individualistic and anti-liberal. They all contributed in varying degrees to the authoritarian regimes that developed in the 1900s – the various forms of authoritarian nationalisms, the national and international socialisms, the fascisms – and the cultural catastrophes named ‘Frankfurt School’ and ‘Post-Modernism’. Kant (the only picture in Kant’s house was a portrait of Rousseau that was hanging over his writing desk) buttressed the pre-modern worldview of faith and duty against the inroads of the Enlightenment: “I have therefore found it necessary to deny knowledge in order to make room for faith.” (Kant) Hegel explicitly attacks the entire tradition of logic as it had developed from Aristotle to modernity. He wants to believe in a kind of spiritually-driven, dialectically-evolving metaphysics that cannot be expressed logically. His deeper views are that one’s self is but an aspect of the collective, that the Divine works through collective self-realization, and that the State is the manifestation of the Divine. Hegel on the beginning of the universe: “So far, there is nothing: something is to become. The beginning is not pure nothing, but a nothing from which something is to proceed; so that being is already contained in the beginning. The beginning thus contains both, being and nothing; it is the unity of being and nothing, or is not-being which is being, and being which is also not being.” This is a forewarning of the worst Heidegger, the ‘nazi’ philosopher par excellence who paradoxically ended up recreating the Jewish cosmogonic myth (Creation ‘ex nihilo’). The triad Kant-Fichte-Hegel is behind the modern German educational system, still active nowadays: a factory of perfect automata devoid of personality, adept at crushing any signs of individualism. Social conformism explains why today in Germany there is no resistance to the suicidal program implemented by ‘Big Mutti’. German philosophers are Lutheran pastors in a new garb. All of them, even Marx. Is he German or Jewish? I’m not sure. Isn’t Protestantism another big gulp of Abrahamism? Are Kant, Fichte, Hegel, Heidegger German or Jewish? Is more dangerous the combination of a German philosopher raised in an Abrahamic cult or a Jewish thinker educated in the German school?

  • Science: Applied Operational Epistemology

    by John Dow I think it’s more accurate to say that you’re an operational epistemologist, and you consider pretty much all divergent epistemological techniques to have failed to achieve functional coherence to the degree of operationalism – and therefore you define ‘science’ as applied operational epistemology. (genius. i wish i’d said that)

  • SCIENCE: APPLIED OPERATIONAL EPISTEMOLOGY by Joel Davis I think it’s more accura

    SCIENCE: APPLIED OPERATIONAL EPISTEMOLOGY

    by Joel Davis

    I think it’s more accurate to say that you’re an operational epistemologist, and you consider pretty much all divergent epistemological techniques to have failed to achieve functional coherence to the degree of operationalism – and therefore you define ‘science’ as applied operational epistemology.

    (genius. i wish i’d said that)

    Source date (UTC): 2017-09-14 08:29:00 UTC

  • Science: Applied Operational Epistemology

    by John Dow I think it’s more accurate to say that you’re an operational epistemologist, and you consider pretty much all divergent epistemological techniques to have failed to achieve functional coherence to the degree of operationalism – and therefore you define ‘science’ as applied operational epistemology. (genius. i wish i’d said that)

  • GENDERS, MANY DISORDERS In other words, there are only two genders, sexual attra

    http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/nov/22/transgender-cyclist-places-first-among-women-arizo/TWO GENDERS, MANY DISORDERS

    In other words, there are only two genders, sexual attraction can vary due to in utero disorders, and gender identity (sympathy) can vary due to developmental or mental disorders. Our brains begin with tendencies but our experiences can train them to our benefit or detriment. De-Socialization is the primary cause of mental illness, and socialization or desocialization can amplify or suppress the natural biases and developmental vicissitudes of our maturity.

    We will eventually be able to control for or repair homosexuality since it appears to be an in-utero developmental disorder. We can easily repair gender identity through restoring human socialization.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-09-14 08:21:00 UTC

  • Gender Threats To The Civic Order

    by John Dow Men threaten civic order primarily with predatory violence. Women threaten civic order primarily with parasitic demands. In both cases, they fail/refuse to negotiate interpersonal reciprocity, thereby reducing the net incentives of the people affected by their behaviour to interpersonally negotiate in good faith – threatening the stability of civic order.

  • GENDER THREATS TO THE CIVIC ORDER by Joel Davis Men threaten civic order primari

    GENDER THREATS TO THE CIVIC ORDER

    by Joel Davis

    Men threaten civic order primarily with predatory violence.

    Women threaten civic order primarily with parasitic demands.

    In both cases, they fail/refuse to negotiate interpersonal reciprocity, thereby reducing the net incentives of the people affected by their behaviour to interpersonally negotiate in good faith – threatening the stability of civic order.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-09-14 08:11:00 UTC

  • THIS – THIS IS HOW

    http://worldif.economist.com/article/13526/electromagnetic-shockREAD THIS – THIS IS HOW

    Source date (UTC): 2017-09-14 00:38:00 UTC

  • Joell Davis Our sacred rights as Englishmen descend from (the quasi-myth of) the

    Joell Davis Our sacred rights as Englishmen descend from (the quasi-myth of) the Magna Carta, a contract between the Sovereign and his people, a promise to respect and protect their life, liberty and property in return for their loyalty and service. Anglo militias have time and again staged rebellions against sovereigns who broke this sacred contract. Their blood gave us our inheritance of liberty, not God.