Curt Doolittle shared a post.
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-17 13:52:12 UTC
Curt Doolittle shared a post.
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-17 13:52:12 UTC
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
RELIGION VS CULT
—“What is the difference between a cult & religion in practice?”—Zach Edward
First, religions and cults consist of a mythos and costly rituals that require demonstration of advocacy (not necessarily belief) in one or more falsehoods as a substitute for reason and a signal of contribution to the group’s informational and as a consequence, behavioral commons.
It’s that a religion is adopted at scale and has political influence, and a cult has a smaller scale and does not have political influence.
And because a cult differs from the mainstream, and requires higher costs of adherence, members of a cult are generally more devoted than those of a religion or major religion.
– Major Religion (influential in a civilization – many governments)
– Religion (Influential in a polity – government)
– Cult (not influential in a polity or government)
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-17 13:51:41 UTC
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
The grammars help a great deal. If you could see teh world as I do, which is far closer to a computing system than an experiential and fictional one we traditionally have relied upon you’d feel as I do like Neo when he can finally see the matrix. Now, unlike neo we can’t intervene in that system, but at least we can understand it for what it is. one continuous stream of causation from the fundamental forces of the universe to human cognition.
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-17 13:37:21 UTC
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
—“[Your answer is too complex and unusable.]”—
For stupid folk yes. It is however, correct. ã
Just ’cause economics is hard doesn’t mean its false.
Just ’cause algebraic geometry is hard doesn’t mean it’s false.
Just ’cause subatomic physics is hard, doesn’t mean it’s false.
Just ’cause natural law is hard, doesn’t mean it’s false.
Stupid people only matter under universal democracy.
One cannot fix stupid people.
One can however eliminate them from democratic participation.
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-17 13:31:57 UTC
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
Acting makes you insane just as religion makes you insane. It’s become a cult.
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-17 13:27:59 UTC
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
YES, OBJECTIVISM IS A RESTATEMENT OF ASHKENAZI SEPARATISM (key concept)
(But the same method of analysis allows us to decompose every group evolutionary strategy)
(a) Objectivism like libertarianism, is simply private property marxism – a monopoly of private property, just as marxism is common property monopoly. With Marxist disincentive to produce private property at one end, Objectivist and Libertarian disincentive to produce common property on the other.
(b) Objectivism is argued using the positive and negative sophisms of pilpul and critique, just as are marxism, postmodernism, and the abrahamic religions use the same method of constructing sophisms.
(c) All groups must choose between the hierarchy of decisions that allow us to hold territory(property in all forms) from competitors necessary for agrarianism and the production of fixed capital; or the hierarchy of pastoralists that rent the land and treat it as renters (badly – the majority of earth’s peoples); or the hierarchy of predators that treat the land other human groups as resources to extract from (ashkenazi, roma-gypsies, mongols, islam, and late-empire [Disraeli] British). And we can determine which groups pursue which strategy on that spectrum by nothing other than the commons they produce and the condition of those commons.
These strategies are *Necessary* given the group’s ability to produce commons (or lack of ability to produce commons) and the (vast) multipliers (returns) that commons produce as a consequence.
One does not knowingly pursue a strategy – that would weaken its utility in the population by exposing it to argument just as religion would be weakened by science and rationality.
In general, the feminine strategy consumes the commons, the ascendant male strategy trades without paying for commons, and the established male strategy conserves. These are reproductive strategies that are *necessary* given our class, age and gender capital demands.
Objectively speaking, Objectivism is, as its origin in Russian Ashkenazi Middle Class would suggest, the middle class philosophy of diasporic askehnazi who seek to preserve pastorlist poly-logical (immoral) ethics, by privatizing host commons (physical, normative, cultural, institutional) rather than contributing to them.
Which is what objectivism and libertarianism are reducible to.
Every philosophy can be decomposed using these same strategic criteria. And most philosophy consists of middle class appeals for greater influence(ascendant male), the way religion(feminine) is for underclass, and law is for upper class (masculine).
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-17 13:23:23 UTC
—“You hear about areas highly populated by muslims having more extremists – they simply have more confidence. And then we act like its just that area, or just a few areas, or just a few cities, until its the whole country.”—Dann Hopkins
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-17 13:10:00 UTC
MONOTHEISTIC DIFFERENCES IN DEMAND FOR THRUTH
We are taught to tell the truth no matter the consequences. Judaism teaches that deceit is acceptable with non-jews. Islam teaches to lie whenever advantagous.
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-17 13:08:00 UTC
NATURAL LAW FACISM = MARKET FASCISM
That is (a) universal, (b) nationalist, (c) reciprocity (d) forcing markets in everything, (e) free of imposition of costs directly or indirectly, (f) and extreme intolerance for the opposites: internationalism, irreciprocity, discretionary rule over common and private.
I’ve gone “full fash”. In the sense of militaristic, expansionist, zero tolerance for anything other than sovereignty, reciprocity, truth, duty, and markets in everything.
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-17 13:04:00 UTC
THE BASIS OF COMMUNITY IS SELF INTEREST
The underlying basis of community is self interest, and the production of commons because commons provide returns for self interest. It is, as far as I know, not possible to contradict morality as stated in propertarianism (reciprocity) since it is both a logical necessity and empirically evident in all judicial proceedings known to man.
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-17 13:00:00 UTC