Gossip > Critique > Propaganda
Theme: Deception
-
Tools Of Consensus Over Truth:
Excuses > Pilpul > Critique > Gossip > Shame > Ridicule. -
TOOLS OF CONSENSUS OVER TRUTH: Excuses > Pilpul > Critique > Gossip > Shame > Ri
TOOLS OF CONSENSUS OVER TRUTH:
Excuses > Pilpul > Critique > Gossip > Shame > Ridicule.
Source date (UTC): 2017-11-12 14:52:00 UTC
-
Tools Of Consensus Over Truth:
Excuses > Pilpul > Critique > Gossip > Shame > Ridicule. -
I’m Not Trying To Convert, But To Deny Falsehood The Field
“Via-Negativa.” Every time a libertarian hits me with nonsense, I respond. I hear from converted people every day. So I clearly convert people. Although, I am not trying to convert anyone. I’m denying falsehood the field – from every abrahamic part of the spectrum. I’m trying to provide people who will use violence to restore sovereignty with arguments. If you understand my work (and the science) then people are not converted from a genetic moral intuition. The best we can do is eliminate falsehoods so that they are forced to choose the best existentially possible solution and act in favor of it, rather than fantasize over an impossible ideal solution, and take no meaningful action – because no meaningful action is possible in the atempt to produce the impossible. It’s analogous to the debate of capitalism vs socialism rather than rule of law vs arbitrary rule. We have been confused by this falsehood. The same is true with socialism, libertarianism, neoconism: the question is only rule of law or arbitrary rule, and kin vs universalism. -
I’M NOT TRYING TO CONVERT, BUT TO DENY FALSEHOOD THE FIELD “Via-Negativa.” Every
I’M NOT TRYING TO CONVERT, BUT TO DENY FALSEHOOD THE FIELD
“Via-Negativa.”
Every time a libertarian hits me with nonsense, I respond.
I hear from converted people every day. So I clearly convert people. Although, I am not trying to convert anyone. I’m denying falsehood the field – from every abrahamic part of the spectrum. I’m trying to provide people who will use violence to restore sovereignty with arguments.
If you understand my work (and the science) then people are not converted from a genetic moral intuition. The best we can do is eliminate falsehoods so that they are forced to choose the best existentially possible solution and act in favor of it, rather than fantasize over an impossible ideal solution, and take no meaningful action – because no meaningful action is possible in the atempt to produce the impossible.
It’s analogous to the debate of capitalism vs socialism rather than rule of law vs arbitrary rule. We have been confused by this falsehood. The same is true with socialism, libertarianism, neoconism: the question is only rule of law or arbitrary rule, and kin vs universalism.
Source date (UTC): 2017-11-12 11:54:00 UTC
-
I’m Not Trying To Convert, But To Deny Falsehood The Field
“Via-Negativa.” Every time a libertarian hits me with nonsense, I respond. I hear from converted people every day. So I clearly convert people. Although, I am not trying to convert anyone. I’m denying falsehood the field – from every abrahamic part of the spectrum. I’m trying to provide people who will use violence to restore sovereignty with arguments. If you understand my work (and the science) then people are not converted from a genetic moral intuition. The best we can do is eliminate falsehoods so that they are forced to choose the best existentially possible solution and act in favor of it, rather than fantasize over an impossible ideal solution, and take no meaningful action – because no meaningful action is possible in the atempt to produce the impossible. It’s analogous to the debate of capitalism vs socialism rather than rule of law vs arbitrary rule. We have been confused by this falsehood. The same is true with socialism, libertarianism, neoconism: the question is only rule of law or arbitrary rule, and kin vs universalism. -
Why Do You Need To Lie?
You have to falsify the argument that under the real, ideal, and supernatural orders, the ‘real’ has provided our ascent out of ignorance and poverty – and rapidly – while the ideal and the supernatural have provided either stagnation or regression. You have to falsify the argument that western people (which you always conflate to your argumentative advantage without separating the western from the indian, iranian, west-asian) and you can’t seem to identify the very obvious differnce between gods subject to the universe, and gods holding dominion over the universe. THere is NO ORIGIN MYTH per se in the west. There is not a good and evil – only a dysfunctional family of gods and heroes. There is no ideal, only the real. By the time we find rome, there are no ‘priests’ per se, but all aristocracy practices the rituals. We still carry the three traditions: real (roman/european), ideal (greek), and supernatural (semitic/persian). And we still practice all three semantic languages. Just as we have practiced three semantic languages in english (anglo saxon, french, and latin). No other civilization has done what the west has done common law > reason > philosophy > science. And no other civilization has done what the middle eastern has done: abrahamism > marxism > libertarianism > neo conservativsm > postmodernism. Period. So you can again, try another lie, (there are at least three in most of your posts) suggestion that the west is perfect, rather than that the result of the western exceptionalism in military orders was dependent upon voluntary orders, which was dependent upon contractualism, all of which were dependent upon truth, and that western civ, like all other civ’s, Anchored on those basic rules of order, just as ever other civlization anchored on those rules of order in the era of Transformation (See Armstrong). All you do is engage in lie, disapproval, gossip, shaming, and ridicule in order to preserve your bias in favor of lying. The question is – why do you need to lie? The evidence is the evidence. The greatest man to ever live was Aristotle. And the greeks produced socrates, plato and aristotle just as the germans produced mozart, bach, and beethoven, and the english produced locke, smith, and hume: becasue the evidence is that it takes a very long time over multiple generations to produce an innovator of that scale. (See Murray). And the reason Aristotle was the greatest man that ever lived is because he synthesized all fields, and mapped out the future of truth for us to follow, and laid enough of a foundation that we have all built upon it. Why did he, plato, and socrates do that? Because the old habits had been destroyed by the consequences of democracy, and her great days were behind her. Whereas lies enable conflation, truth provides deflation. Where democracy creates lies, law creates truth. -
WHY DO YOU NEED TO LIE? You have to falsify the argument that under the real, id
WHY DO YOU NEED TO LIE?
You have to falsify the argument that under the real, ideal, and supernatural orders, the ‘real’ has provided our ascent out of ignorance and poverty – and rapidly – while the ideal and the supernatural have provided either stagnation or regression.
You have to falsify the argument that western people (which you always conflate to your argumentative advantage without separating the western from the indian, iranian, west-asian) and you can’t seem to identify the very obvious differnce between gods subject to the universe, and gods holding dominion over the universe. THere is NO ORIGIN MYTH per se in the west. There is not a good and evil – only a dysfunctional family of gods and heroes. There is no ideal, only the real. By the time we find rome, there are no ‘priests’ per se, but all aristocracy practices the rituals.
We still carry the three traditions: real (roman/european), ideal (greek), and supernatural (semitic/persian). And we still practice all three semantic languages. Just as we have practiced three semantic languages in english (anglo saxon, french, and latin).
No other civilization has done what the west has done common law > reason > philosophy > science. And no other civilization has done what the middle eastern has done: abrahamism > marxism > libertarianism > neo conservativsm > postmodernism.
Period.
So you can again, try another lie, (there are at least three in most of your posts) suggestion that the west is perfect, rather than that the result of the western exceptionalism in military orders was dependent upon voluntary orders, which was dependent upon contractualism, all of which were dependent upon truth, and that western civ, like all other civ’s, Anchored on those basic rules of order, just as ever other civlization anchored on those rules of order in the era of Transformation (See Armstrong).
All you do is engage in lie, disapproval, gossip, shaming, and ridicule in order to preserve your bias in favor of lying. The question is – why do you need to lie?
The evidence is the evidence. The greatest man to ever live was Aristotle. And the greeks produced socrates, plato and aristotle just as the germans produced mozart, bach, and beethoven, and the english produced locke, smith, and hume: becasue the evidence is that it takes a very long time over multiple generations to produce an innovator of that scale. (See Murray).
And the reason Aristotle was the greatest man that ever lived is because he synthesized all fields, and mapped out the future of truth for us to follow, and laid enough of a foundation that we have all built upon it.
Why did he, plato, and socrates do that? Because the old habits had been destroyed by the consequences of democracy, and her great days were behind her.
Whereas lies enable conflation, truth provides deflation.
Where democracy creates lies, law creates truth.
Source date (UTC): 2017-11-12 11:32:00 UTC
-
Why Do You Need To Lie?
You have to falsify the argument that under the real, ideal, and supernatural orders, the ‘real’ has provided our ascent out of ignorance and poverty – and rapidly – while the ideal and the supernatural have provided either stagnation or regression. You have to falsify the argument that western people (which you always conflate to your argumentative advantage without separating the western from the indian, iranian, west-asian) and you can’t seem to identify the very obvious differnce between gods subject to the universe, and gods holding dominion over the universe. THere is NO ORIGIN MYTH per se in the west. There is not a good and evil – only a dysfunctional family of gods and heroes. There is no ideal, only the real. By the time we find rome, there are no ‘priests’ per se, but all aristocracy practices the rituals. We still carry the three traditions: real (roman/european), ideal (greek), and supernatural (semitic/persian). And we still practice all three semantic languages. Just as we have practiced three semantic languages in english (anglo saxon, french, and latin). No other civilization has done what the west has done common law > reason > philosophy > science. And no other civilization has done what the middle eastern has done: abrahamism > marxism > libertarianism > neo conservativsm > postmodernism. Period. So you can again, try another lie, (there are at least three in most of your posts) suggestion that the west is perfect, rather than that the result of the western exceptionalism in military orders was dependent upon voluntary orders, which was dependent upon contractualism, all of which were dependent upon truth, and that western civ, like all other civ’s, Anchored on those basic rules of order, just as ever other civlization anchored on those rules of order in the era of Transformation (See Armstrong). All you do is engage in lie, disapproval, gossip, shaming, and ridicule in order to preserve your bias in favor of lying. The question is – why do you need to lie? The evidence is the evidence. The greatest man to ever live was Aristotle. And the greeks produced socrates, plato and aristotle just as the germans produced mozart, bach, and beethoven, and the english produced locke, smith, and hume: becasue the evidence is that it takes a very long time over multiple generations to produce an innovator of that scale. (See Murray). And the reason Aristotle was the greatest man that ever lived is because he synthesized all fields, and mapped out the future of truth for us to follow, and laid enough of a foundation that we have all built upon it. Why did he, plato, and socrates do that? Because the old habits had been destroyed by the consequences of democracy, and her great days were behind her. Whereas lies enable conflation, truth provides deflation. Where democracy creates lies, law creates truth.