October 9th, 2018 9:19 AM LIBERALISM VS ABSOLUTISM As usual, the study of Philosophy is almost always used as simply a reformation of the study of Theology. In that sense, it’s a sophism of the pre-scientific period, or a pseudoscience in the present. 1 – Morality (rules of good (non-retaliatory), and bad (retaliatory) display word and deed) (a) morality can refer to objective (reciprocal) as in international conflict and law, (b) traditional (contextual) as in civilizational/national/political rules in favor of group evolutionary strategy, (c)normative (contextual) as in class, locality, and disciplinary in favor of social political and commercial cooperation, (d) conflated with legal (which is common). In all cases, from intuition, to norm, to law, all moral rules reflect the incentives and rewards necessary in the given competitive order. 2 – Liberalism (european), Classical Liberalism(american), Conservatism(Anglo) (center-right) vs Anarchism(jewish), Libertinism(Jewish), Libertarianism(anglo/continental) (center-Left), (a) the purpose of tolerating liberalism is to generate increasing revenues because those revenues increase the state (authoritarian) power, just as the purpose of tolerating theology is to decrease costs and increased revenue through discounts on the cost of suppression. (b) the problem with authoritarian regimes is that the bureaucracy not the authority ends up ruling, maximizing rents, and consuming the profits that make externalization of power possible. (c) the problem (…) 50 more examples here I won’t waste my time on. CONCLUDING Liberalism (market society) isn’t beneficial because it is moral, or because it’s ‘legitimate’ in someone’s mind, but because it is the cheapest means of producing COMPETITIVE POWER at the lowest administrative cost, with the greatest opportunity to suppress rents, providing the rulers with the greatest opportunity to exert power. Democracy is rather ridiculous and certainly a failed experiment outside of producing a constantly rotating senate (oligarchy), and monarchy is clearly superior at the conduct of war and the production of durable commons. But liberalism is simply a scheme for reaping the highest returns from the population given that money, prices, and markets allow the population to be self governing, and corruption limited and inexpensive. The problem with absolutism is that it’s highly error prone at the expense of easy replacement by Regicide – usually by the Regent’s own family. The problem with non-kin absolutism (corporatism), is that it sorts for the most malincentivized leadership. The optimum government is one that, like the roman, concentrates power for war, and redistributes power for normal times, and redistributes income from windfalls. The search for monopoly is merely the naive and not very bright youthful mind searching for that which it can comprehend.
Source: Original Site Post
-
The Final Word on Ontology vs Paradigm and Frame
October 9th, 2018 8:11 AM THE FINAL WORD ON ONTOLOGY vs PARADIGM AND FRAME. Ontology is used in subjective (experiential) and objective (testimonial) contexts to refer to a hierarchy of categories in a paradigm (network) of constant relations between existence perception cognition speech, and the service of speech in recreating the experience (loaded and inflated) or testimony (unloaded and deflated). . In the Continental Tradition (Literary, Platonic) sense it can include Experiential Categories (Phenomenalism for example), and in the Anglo Tradition (Science, Accounting, and Law), it cannot include experiential categories (imaginary, ideal, cognitive, emotive, pseudo-physical biases) as a defense against biases and their arbitrariness: inconstant, loaded, framed, fictionalized, idealized, relations between the universe and our descriptions of it. Being, and Ontology are currently “archaic”, and we use scientific categories instead: Paradigm. Paradigms are constructed of a network of theories, from terms to narratives; and we acknowledge that Paradigms (search for consistency correspondence possibility and parsimony) and Frames (loading, framing, suggesting, overloading) are both used by us in our speech. So we end up with (Ontology(conflationary)) vs ((Paradigm(measurement) and Frame(experience)) (deflationary)) Note below that “Being” and “Ontology” both describe this spectrum of subjective to objective. So when one uses the term Ontology, one can refer to literary-subjective-loaded-framed-arbitrary, or scientific-objective-deflated-correspondent. GRAMMATICAL DEFLATION (ontology of speech)SUPERNATURAL: Occult (religion, emotion) > IDEAL: Verbalism (Philosophical Rationalism, imagination) > REAL: Scientific (Testimonial, measurement). be·ing [ËbÄiNG] NOUN
- existence.
“the railroad brought many towns into being” · [more]
synonyms:
existence · living · life · animation · animateness · aliveness · reality · actuality · essential nature · lifeblood · vital force · entity · esse - the nature or essence of a person.
“sometimes one aspect of our being has been developed at the expense of the others”
synonyms:
soul · spirit · nature · essence · substance · entity · inner being · inner self · psyche · heart · bosom · breast · core · kernel · marrow · quiddity · pneuma - a real or imaginary living creature or entity, especially an intelligent one.
“alien beings” ·
synonyms:
creature · life form · living entity · living thing · living soul · soul · individual · person · personage · human being · human · man · woman · life · existence · earthling
on·tol·o·gy [änËtälÉjÄ] NOUN
- the branch of metaphysics dealing with the nature of being.
- a set of concepts and categories in a subject area or domain that shows their properties and the relations between them.
“what’s new about our ontology is that it is created automatically from large datasets” · “we’re using ontologies to capture and analyze some of the knowledge in our department”
- existence.
-
October 9th, 2018 12:31 AM (Before Trump’s election I wouldn’t touch politics at
October 9th, 2018 12:31 AM (Before Trump’s election I wouldn’t touch politics at all – it was ‘an unworthy subject’. I just stuck with my work. The problem is, that it just got to be so much FUN after the election, and it hasn’t stopped being fun yet. So, yes, I have squandered a bit of my intellectual capital on engaging in trash talk and political entertainment but, it’s sort of like spending your fortune on good food, beautiful women and fast cars, and saying ‘yea, and I wasted the rest’. lolz)
-
The Economics of Association in Heterogeneous Polities
October 9th, 2018 12:27 AM WHY WHITE PRIVILEGE? HERE IS THE CORRECT ANSWER: THE ECONOMICS OF ASSOCIATION IN HETEROGENEOUS POLITIES [I]t’s because ethnic europeans, particularly northern europeans, largely because of geography and culture came out of the dark ages first, had the enlightenment first, developed the first fully middle class civilization first, and did so both genetically, culturally, and institutionally, by using militias due to weak central governments, individual sovereignty because of militias, rule of law not rule by discretion, manorialism’s suppression of underclass rates of reproduction, and by aggressive hanging of criminal population for 1000 years, and as a consequence producing the highest trust society, with the highest trust population. So, in commerce and politics ethnic europeans have obtained a premium for their (earned) reputation for relative trustworthiness and work ethic (middle class public behavior), and they preserve the premium through intergenerational transfer of those habits, norms, traditions, and values. The problem is that high trust polities and a ‘deserved’ reputation for high trust is extremely expensive and no other people so far have been able to produce it except the Japanese and Koreans. This is the reason for the west’s higher standard of living. The rest is due to demographic distributions, meaning that the vast majority of ethnic europeans are within one degree of the genetic middle class (meaning that they can learn to use technology independently by reading), whereas the vast majority of peoples who complain about the reputational advantage of ethnic europeans are from groups with historically larger underclasses, and therefore, lower medians, where cultural norms are determined by the median, and we are all judged by ‘averages (median) of our group”. Why? Because stereotypes are the most accurate measurement in the social sciences. They are verified or falsified every day in ever personal interaction. We are all punished for (experience discounts), and privileged for (experience premiums) our identities: manners, ethics, morals, habits, body language, hygiene, speech pattern, vocabulary, dress, fitness, and everything else. To lose your discount or gain a premium, change your group’s sexual, social, economic, intellectual, and market value, by changing your group’s demographics, habits, manners, ethics, morals, traditions, values, rituals so that they are ALSO middle class (market) rather than whatever tradition you come from. it’s not complicated. Before the 1964 immigration act, everyone who came to america did it. The lesson is that people are not scarce. Individuals are not special.Humans by and large are a commodity. There are, if anything, far too many of us. People must work hard to find some way of providing value to others so that they are useful in the marketplace for sexual, social, economic, political cooperation. And because value is rare, and people are not scarce, all people are careful in making the best investments that they can. And they invest in what they can see. Hence why jews and asians do better than ethnic europeans in american university acceptance, but no one criticizes them. While whites are criticized daily, and experience reverse discrimination in the academy, politics, and the media, while preserving their economic advantage in the work place, and their social status. So, it’s not a privilege, it’s a cultural premium for 1350 years of suppression of underclass reproduction and downward expansion of the middle class. And training your children to do what is uncomfortable in order to obtain long term benefits of conforming to middle class behaviors. And it’s almost impossible to alter for that reason. People from other cultures or ethnicities assume white identity is arbitrary but it is merely the universal adaptation of middle class market behavior on a civilizational scale. Join the middle class by acting as middle class, and getting others with your identity to act middle class. It’s not complicated, but it’s terribly difficult, which is why so few cultures can do it without many generations of middle class civilization.
-
Um. Shroud of Turin Is a Nice Forgery. Sorry
October 9th, 2018 2:08 PM UM. SHROUD OF TURIN IS A NICE FORGERY. SORRY [A]s far as I know the Shroud of Turin was produced for profit (a forgery) after the Fourth Crusade, as was common for all religious artifacts of the era. (Every little church wanted one as it provided an excuse for pilgrimage (vacationers). It is produced on fabric from the crusade period. The pattern of the weave was not produced in the origin period (not even sure it COULD be produced), which usually consisted of simple two-way weave. It appears likely that the cloth was of medieval Indian origins. The blood artifacts on the shroud are neatly applied not fitting splatter or settlement patterns. The posture appears to have been of a sculpted figure, not natural. The sculpture itself is medieval in technique (a knight) not ancient (a soldier or nobility). The coloring itself and its iron oxide can be produced relatively easily by wetting with organic compounds and laying on a relief sculpture and placing it in the sunshine to dry (uv radiation), thereby oxidizing (‘rusting’) the organic compounds. In other words all that was necessary was to find a relief sculpture common on a crusader burial of the period, to wet it with any number of organic materials (speculation on which was used isn’t clear), rub those organic compounds while on the sculpture, and to dry it in the intense regional sunshine. The problem we face is that so many people have come in contact with it, that other than the oxidation (Stains), we can’t trust any of the micro particles we’ve pulled from it since they contain everything from europe to the levant. In any event, as someone with a lot of experience with dead bodies, who has done rubbings of ancient 3d arts from all over the world, it looks like an obvious forgery, and it’s pretty hard for me to imagine anyone would think otherwise. But then I have an education in ancient art history, in identifying are methods, and as a consequence, art fraud, and my family is in the ‘burial’ business so maybe I’m just more informed by accident of circumstance.
-
Harman on Abandoning Hope for Western Women, And Resorting to Self Defense.
By Ely Harman At this point, I officially no longer care even about legitimate victims of rape or victims of legitimate rape or whatever you want to call them. Too many of them, in a blind, senseless, rage, mean to make ME a victim of a suffocating and overzealous matriarchy that won’t even address, but will simply compound, their own troubles. For an example, look at those shrieking harpies who cornered Jeff Flake in that elevator. Ok, maybe you were raped? What does that have to do with Kavanaugh? Sure, the guy is a stud. But he can’t be responsible for ALL the raping. Screaming at Jeff Flake about Brett Kavanaugh is a total non sequitur and attempted miscarriage of justice motivated not by reason or even self-interest, but by vengeful hysterics. And Jeff Flake knuckling under, even just a little bit, makes him a weak and spineless cuck in exact proportion as he lends credence to their infantile tantrums. Furthermore, wasting the moral and emotional weight of their experiences on naked partisan hackery devalues OTHER real victims, and makes it less likely they’ll ever see justice in their own cases. But that last is a moot point, because assuming that institutions have any business preventing or redressing the emotional anguish of women supposes that there was ever any hope of incorporating them into masculine societies on an equal footing, with rights, responsibilities, and all that other jazz, same as men. But all we’re doing now, all day, every day, is proving that hope was always foolish and vain. I don’t want institutions to protect women at all, because I don’t want them to listen to women at all, and I don’t want their officers to care about women at all, because women will simply try to take advantage of that in silly and self-defeating ways. I want institutions and their officers to protect me and my sons. And as for my daughters, me and my sons can do our best to protect them… But I will not sacrifice my sons for my daughters, or anyone else’s, because it’s simply not worth it. It’s not like they’d provide anything worthwhile in return, but only far LESS of what worth they CAN provide under a vigorous patriarchy that disregard their wishes (or demands) totally.
-
Harman on Abandoning Hope for Western Women, And Resorting to Self Defense.
By Ely Harman At this point, I officially no longer care even about legitimate victims of rape or victims of legitimate rape or whatever you want to call them. Too many of them, in a blind, senseless, rage, mean to make ME a victim of a suffocating and overzealous matriarchy that won’t even address, but will simply compound, their own troubles. For an example, look at those shrieking harpies who cornered Jeff Flake in that elevator. Ok, maybe you were raped? What does that have to do with Kavanaugh? Sure, the guy is a stud. But he can’t be responsible for ALL the raping. Screaming at Jeff Flake about Brett Kavanaugh is a total non sequitur and attempted miscarriage of justice motivated not by reason or even self-interest, but by vengeful hysterics. And Jeff Flake knuckling under, even just a little bit, makes him a weak and spineless cuck in exact proportion as he lends credence to their infantile tantrums. Furthermore, wasting the moral and emotional weight of their experiences on naked partisan hackery devalues OTHER real victims, and makes it less likely they’ll ever see justice in their own cases. But that last is a moot point, because assuming that institutions have any business preventing or redressing the emotional anguish of women supposes that there was ever any hope of incorporating them into masculine societies on an equal footing, with rights, responsibilities, and all that other jazz, same as men. But all we’re doing now, all day, every day, is proving that hope was always foolish and vain. I don’t want institutions to protect women at all, because I don’t want them to listen to women at all, and I don’t want their officers to care about women at all, because women will simply try to take advantage of that in silly and self-defeating ways. I want institutions and their officers to protect me and my sons. And as for my daughters, me and my sons can do our best to protect them… But I will not sacrifice my sons for my daughters, or anyone else’s, because it’s simply not worth it. It’s not like they’d provide anything worthwhile in return, but only far LESS of what worth they CAN provide under a vigorous patriarchy that disregard their wishes (or demands) totally.
-
What Does Markets in Everything Mean?
October 8th, 2018 3:09 PM WHAT DOES MARKETS IN EVERYTHING MEAN? (Literally Everything) Markets in everything: 1 – Association (Disassociation), 2 – Reproduction, (Families), 3 – Cooperation, (interpersonal, social), 4 – Production, (commercial), 6 – Commons, ( private and public ), 5 – Frames: Disciplines/Paradigms/Grammars (conceptual), ……(this is the hard one to get across that I’m not done with), 7 – Polities ( Institutions ), and; 8 – Warfare (Conflict and Defense ). I resort to using ‘everything’ to keep it simple. But maybe just enumerating all of them like I do everything else is better for clarity.
-
The Difference Between Understanding(knowledge) and Use (craft)
October 8th, 2018 2:28 PM THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN UNDERSTANDING(KNOWLEDGE) AND USE (CRAFT) I just thought of a good analogy. Mathematicians do amazing things without having any idea why their craft performs as it does. Then we have this nonsense of the contortions of the logical foundations of mathematics, that once you understand them, are ridiculous. Not false, just ridiculous – because the foundations of mathematics are TRIVIAL. But the whole host of nonsense we call mathematics doesn’t stop us from using the CRAFT of mathematics, any more than adding ancestor’s bones to a crucible of iron doesn’t explain why the extra carbon can produce low grade steel. It didn’t stop people from making steel. The same is true of the LAW. People conflate the ethical, moral, legal, and necessary law (natural law) all the time as what they intuit as ‘wrong’. Yet a minority of laws, moral norms, social norms, customs, traditions are in fact ethical, and moral under natural law because our various polities, groups, cultures, and civilizations used different portfolios of rights and obligations to preserve the social order regardless of its morality – survival is not a moral question. So we just habituate all sorts of means of calculating, from math and logic to laws, and norms, we produce vocabularies that help us do what we do in the context that we do it in, and we lose, if we ever new, which mostly we don’t, the ‘science’ and ‘logic’ in the rich weave of normative rules that we use on a day to day basis. It’s a small minority of us that must learn, recall, use, persist, and evolve those fundamental ideas that allow us to manufacture those normative ideas in useful form. Goods, Services, and Information are all products. The thing is, that goods are easy to charge for, services less so, and information hardly useful at all except in dispute resolution.
-
What Does Markets in Everything Mean?
October 8th, 2018 3:09 PM WHAT DOES MARKETS IN EVERYTHING MEAN? (Literally Everything) Markets in everything: 1 – Association (Disassociation), 2 – Reproduction, (Families), 3 – Cooperation, (interpersonal, social), 4 – Production, (commercial), 6 – Commons, ( private and public ), 5 – Frames: Disciplines/Paradigms/Grammars (conceptual), ……(this is the hard one to get across that I’m not done with), 7 – Polities ( Institutions ), and; 8 – Warfare (Conflict and Defense ). I resort to using ‘everything’ to keep it simple. But maybe just enumerating all of them like I do everything else is better for clarity.