Source: Facebook

  • Curt Doolittle shared a post

    Curt Doolittle shared a post.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-04-28 17:16:00 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle shared a post

    Curt Doolittle shared a post.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-04-28 17:15:00 UTC

  • GRAMMARS —“How can grammar be Fictional?”— FIrst, see: Fictionalism (Stanfor

    https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fictionalism/THE GRAMMARS

    —“How can grammar be Fictional?”—

    FIrst, see: Fictionalism (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

    https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fictionalism/

    Next, technically speaking Grammar consists of rules of continuous disambiguation.

    You can follow me when I have the class on it becuase it’s some of the most interesting parts of my work

    For example, in temporal logic only so many words make sense.

    So, the grammar of temporal logic includes constraints on vocabulary.

    So when I talk about GRAMMARS I show how each grammatical structure (logic) does in fact limit vocabulary.

    As such if you stack the grammars from most simple to most complex, then vocabulary is a subset of grammar.

    So

    Cognitive ability of the mind

    >>> Grammars

    >>>>> Phonemes

    >>>>>> Vocabularies

    This is what I discovered while working with ‘the grammars’ and it’s one of the reasons I had to do so much work.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-04-28 14:59:00 UTC

  • THE HISTORY OF PILPUL Pilpul is the Talmudic term used to describe a rhetorical

    THE HISTORY OF PILPUL

    Pilpul is the Talmudic term used to describe a rhetorical process that the Sages used to formulate their legal decisions. The word is used as a verb: one engages in the process of pilpul in order to formulate a legal point. It marks the process of understanding legal ideas, texts, and interpretations. It is a catch-all term that in English is translated as “Casuistry.”

    (CD: Casuistry means “Sophistry” or more specifically “clever but unsound reasoning, especially in relation to moral questions”.)

    In order to maintain the distinction between the Written Torah — the Hebrew Bible — and the Oral Law, the Talmudic Sages conceived of the idea of pilpul as a means to join each Law to its Biblical prooftext.

    The Ashkenazi rabbis saw pilpul as a substantive debate over the content of the Law rather than as a simple rhetorical matter. Their understanding of Talmudic pilpul took the form of a radical reinterpretation of the Law.

    (CD: let’s repeat that: —“radical reinterpretation of the Law.”—)

    “Reinterpretation” is actually a misleading term. More accurately one should ask what led them to read the Talmud, to perceive the Talmud, in a fashion which could be construed as a justification of the status quo.

    (CD: let’s repeat that: —“..justification of the status quo.”—

    The Ashkenazi rabbis were less concerned with promulgating the Law transmitted in the Talmud than they were with molding it to suit their own needs.

    Pilpul was a means to justify practices already fixed in the behaviors of the community by re-reading the Talmud to justify those practices.

    As if this was not enough, the Tosafists instituted one more pilpul principle into Talmudic discourse. This was called the Lav Davqa method. In English we might call it the “Not Quite” way of reading a text. When a text appeared to be saying one thing, the Tosafot — in order to conform to the already-existing custom — would re-interpret it by saying that what it seemed to mean is not what it really meant!

    The Tosafist reading based on the Lav Davqa method completely transformed Judaism; the Ashkenazi tradition was the one that ultimately triumphed.

    Pilpul occurs any time the speaker is committed to “prove” his point regardless of the evidence in front of him. The casuistic aspect of this hair-splitting leads to a labyrinthine form of argument where the speaker blows enough rhetorical smoke to make his interlocutor submit.

    Reason is not an issue when pilpul takes over: what counts is the establishment of a fixed, immutable point that can never truly be disputed.

    What is thought to be the Jewish “genius” is often a mark of how pilpul is deployed. The rhetorical tricks of pilpul make true rational discussion impossible; any “discussion” is about trying to “prove” a point that has already been established. There is little use trying to argue in this context, because any points being made will be twisted and turned to validate the already-fixed position.

    Pilpul is the rhetorical means to mark as “true” that which cannot ever be disputed by rational means.

    by David Shasha

    Director, Center for Sephardic Heritage


    Source date (UTC): 2018-04-28 14:13:00 UTC

  • WHAT YOU WILL LEARN Once I’m done teaching you, you’ll understand that aryan rea

    WHAT YOU WILL LEARN

    Once I’m done teaching you, you’ll understand that aryan reason and science produced a series of deflationary grammars by which we iteratively increase our truth tests, while semitic pilpul took that invention and inverted it creating a series of conflationary and inflationary grammars of fictionalism, by which to produce deceptions.

    Armed with this understanding you will have the basis of white sharia: natural law.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-04-28 13:09:00 UTC

  • by Ely Harman Slaves -> Serfs -> Free Men -> Lords -> Kings -> Gods -> King of t

    by Ely Harman

    Slaves -> Serfs -> Free Men -> Lords -> Kings -> Gods -> King of the Gods

    (Also: Beast > Slave > Serf > Freeman > Citizen > Senator > Emperor. )

    The hierarchy can of course be reorganized or individuals can rise or fall within it (to a limited extent) but the point of even having a hierarchy is to be united under one structure.

    If you’re just doing your own thing, you don’t get that benefit, you don’t get the economies of scale or the network effects. People doing that might as well be atheists.

    But if they’re doing stuff together, they are a true religious community, and their own, individual, influence on the norms, doctrines, beliefs, etc… Of the community are minimal. Rather, they adopt those of the community.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-04-28 12:59:00 UTC

  • “Paganism is the monarchy and aristocracy of the gods. The intertemporal model w

    —“Paganism is the monarchy and aristocracy of the gods. The intertemporal model we seek to both emulate and avoid the hubris of.”– Eli Harman


    Source date (UTC): 2018-04-28 12:50:00 UTC

  • Are you kidding me? My hero is Palpatine. The Empire did nothing wrong. 😉

    Are you kidding me? My hero is Palpatine. The Empire did nothing wrong. 😉


    Source date (UTC): 2018-04-28 12:46:00 UTC

  • There are no limits in the bedroom other than the safe word

    There are no limits in the bedroom other than the safe word.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-04-28 12:38:00 UTC

  • ON THE CHURCH I think that people are easily confused between the the biblical s

    ON THE CHURCH

    I think that people are easily confused between the the biblical stories and our relation to god as absolutely horrific, and the church as a governing institution that developed and eventually implemented natural law.

    The Aryan version of “church” is the military (militia) and the law. But with massive invasion, over extension, and the loss of military discipline, that church (cult) fell to an underclass cult of superstition, and the sequestering of literacy to obscure the pretense of knowledge.

    Upon invasion by the vikings restoring militarism, and upon subsequent restoration of greek knowledge, and the development of printing, we escaped our dark ages, with the prussian state under frederick the most successful example of that restoration. And it resulted in the great intellectual leap of germans, the second industrial and scientific revolution in germany, and if not for the defeat of germany by the anti aryans (catholic france, all but catholic england, and orthodox russia, followed by Jewish (Soviet) Russia, Germany might have restored our ancient order to its full scientific and romantic pagan origins.

    I view Chesterson, Evola, Kirk and the others, like Kant as catastrophic failures trying to restore and preserve the invasion rather than continue our rescue from semitic deceit and barbarism. The fact that they stumbled upon vague half truths now and then doesn’t really impress me. Instead, look at the artists of the late 19th, the thought of the late 19th, and the science and technology and german academy of the 19th.

    Once you understand what makes the west is the militia and the oath and the feast, and that western man prohibited priests for very good reasons, requiring the aristocracy to perform the rituals instead, you understand how sick a disease is the church, and how it made us weak, and vulnerable, and remains our enemy.

    The church rediscovered natural law via aristotle via the scholastics. The church had the opportunity to reform. It has failed us. It has abandoned us, and now it works aggressively against us. And the mental diseases that the church gave us are why we are vulnerable to the ambitions of marxism and the lies of postmodernism.

    So, while we may need *A* church, in the sense that we need a sacred place – and the churches were intentionally located in our sacred groves – and while we may need history, advice, oath, and feast (the mass), we do not need lies, pilpul, and anything other than worship and appreciation of nature and our ancestors, from whom we can select hundreds of heroes to learn from, rather than a false god whose behavior is that of a demon, and whose consequences were our destruction and enslavement.

    WE BEGIN AND END WITH THE MILITIA.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-04-28 11:21:00 UTC