(this one is going to hurt. hold on to something) [T]here is no god. Only the god imagined by the faithful such that they preserve the peace between them by prohibition on variation in strategy, and prohibition on debate, and prohibition on learning, and prohibition on innovation and evolution. It’s a contract with one another written in fiction. I agree that there is value to the faithful in the production of psychological mindfulness from certainty, conformity, under this contract written in fiction. It re-creates the safety of the herd for those who lack agency, by casting submission, conformity, stagnation as heroic. I also understand that there is value in the freedom from emotional burden, intellectual burden, that the rest of us bear on behalf of Christians, who are nothing but free-riders – Christians ‘free ride’ on our emotional, and mental hard labors. The feminine christian perpetuates the female reproductive strategy of worrying only about the safety of her nest, while the men do the hard labor of transforming reality into safety and resources which she can spend on her nest, herself, her offspring. Yet as christians daily demonstrate, she maintains utility in hostility to his breaking of her illusion, because then she would have to acknowledge the debt, and provide something in trade. Y’all are parasites, liars, and thieves unless you fight – hard, and soon. Just parasites. Why do you think islamism, marxism, feminism, and postmodernism, make the same promise of equality, in exchange for the same contract written in fiction, that the will work together to live parasitically upon the emotional and intellectual efforts of ‘men’: The Aristocracy. So pay your way.
Theme: Deception
-
The Economics and Ethics of Abrahamic Religions
(this one is going to hurt. hold on to something) [T]here is no god. Only the god imagined by the faithful such that they preserve the peace between them by prohibition on variation in strategy, and prohibition on debate, and prohibition on learning, and prohibition on innovation and evolution. It’s a contract with one another written in fiction. I agree that there is value to the faithful in the production of psychological mindfulness from certainty, conformity, under this contract written in fiction. It re-creates the safety of the herd for those who lack agency, by casting submission, conformity, stagnation as heroic. I also understand that there is value in the freedom from emotional burden, intellectual burden, that the rest of us bear on behalf of Christians, who are nothing but free-riders – Christians ‘free ride’ on our emotional, and mental hard labors. The feminine christian perpetuates the female reproductive strategy of worrying only about the safety of her nest, while the men do the hard labor of transforming reality into safety and resources which she can spend on her nest, herself, her offspring. Yet as christians daily demonstrate, she maintains utility in hostility to his breaking of her illusion, because then she would have to acknowledge the debt, and provide something in trade. Y’all are parasites, liars, and thieves unless you fight – hard, and soon. Just parasites. Why do you think islamism, marxism, feminism, and postmodernism, make the same promise of equality, in exchange for the same contract written in fiction, that the will work together to live parasitically upon the emotional and intellectual efforts of ‘men’: The Aristocracy. So pay your way.
-
Belief and Profession of It, Are Almost Always Lies
Belief and Profession of It, Are Almost Always Lies https://propertarianism.com/2019/11/02/belief-and-profession-of-it-are-almost-always-lies/
Source date (UTC): 2019-11-02 01:46:46 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1190445111395700737
-
Belief and Profession of It, Are Almost Always Lies
[I] do not know what you believe. I cannot know. I can only determine judge you by your actions. If you testify to an un-testifiable belief, then you can only lie. If you lie then you have a reason to lie. I can only seek to discover the reason you lie. I cannot distinguish a profession of belief in an un-testifiable lie, from any other lie. Belief is irrelevant. Either you imitate the works of Jesus or you are just another liar, fraud, and thief. Keep a diary of the actions you take in the service of others for no other reason than the love of others, and the cost to you for having done so. If it is not an action, is not in the services of others, is not in the service of others by your personal service to them, at personal cost to you, then you are a liar, fraud, and thief, and your claims of Christianity are no different from wearing the uniform of those who did service when you have not done so, a pretending to equal their honor. No. You are just a free-rider. A parasite on other’s labors. A free rider on those few Christians who exist, just as a free rider on those few warriors that exist. A Christian ACTS. Profession of belief, and belief are irrelevant.
-
Belief and Profession of It, Are Almost Always Lies
[I] do not know what you believe. I cannot know. I can only determine judge you by your actions. If you testify to an un-testifiable belief, then you can only lie. If you lie then you have a reason to lie. I can only seek to discover the reason you lie. I cannot distinguish a profession of belief in an un-testifiable lie, from any other lie. Belief is irrelevant. Either you imitate the works of Jesus or you are just another liar, fraud, and thief. Keep a diary of the actions you take in the service of others for no other reason than the love of others, and the cost to you for having done so. If it is not an action, is not in the services of others, is not in the service of others by your personal service to them, at personal cost to you, then you are a liar, fraud, and thief, and your claims of Christianity are no different from wearing the uniform of those who did service when you have not done so, a pretending to equal their honor. No. You are just a free-rider. A parasite on other’s labors. A free rider on those few Christians who exist, just as a free rider on those few warriors that exist. A Christian ACTS. Profession of belief, and belief are irrelevant.
-
There Is No Theological Sophism that I Cannot Falsify and Translated Into an Att
There Is No Theological Sophism that I Cannot Falsify and Translated Into an Attempted Fraud or Theft. https://propertarianism.com/2019/11/02/there-is-no-theological-sophism-that-i-cannot-falsify-and-translated-into-an-attempted-fraud-or-theft/
Source date (UTC): 2019-11-02 01:45:37 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1190444821682491393
-
There Is No Theological Sophism that I Cannot Falsify and Translated Into an Attempted Fraud or Theft.
DON’T BOTHER. AT PRESENT THERE IS NO THEOLOGICAL SOPHISM THAT I CANNOT FALSIFY AND TRANSLATED INTO AN ATTEMPTED FRAUD OR THEFT.
—“You are going to have a bad time giving a materialist account for logical absolutes”—
[N]o I am no going to have any difficulty. You are going to be horrified that I am not. 😉 Man can sense by nerves, disambiguate, categorize, perceive categories, and associate them, reinforce them by rehearsal, and recall them, hold one or combination or a prediction from a combination in his attention, recursively modify it, and in that order, because of his neurological ability to identify constant ad inconstant relations between stimuli over time. That’s all neurons do: on off, faster, slower.
- Man can discover and identify (categorize) and name (give name to) sets of constant relations (an identity, referent,).
- Man can invent patterns of testing constant-inconstant relations(relations)
Man can name those patterns of constant-inconstant relations (general rules)
Man is capable of language using ‘continuous recursive disambiguation over time.
Man can invent a grammar (rules of continuous recursive disambiguation) for any paradigm of constant relations (dimensions) he chooses. For example, counting, accounting, linear geometry, curvalinear geometry, multi-dimensional geometry. Or testimony, narrative, story, fiction, fictionalism, lie. Or physics, chemistry, biochemistry. one of the grammars he developed we call logic: the tests of constant relations in state between statements.
Man can use a grammar of any one of the logics, the most simple being first order logics, to describe the constant relations or failure of constant relations between any two or more references that he is capable of imagining, or which, by some instrumentation we can reduce to perceivable differences.
The brain is a very simple thing it turns out. It does only one thing really. focus attention on successful prediction of from patterns of stimulation.
-
There Is No Theological Sophism that I Cannot Falsify and Translated Into an Attempted Fraud or Theft.
DON’T BOTHER. AT PRESENT THERE IS NO THEOLOGICAL SOPHISM THAT I CANNOT FALSIFY AND TRANSLATED INTO AN ATTEMPTED FRAUD OR THEFT.
—“You are going to have a bad time giving a materialist account for logical absolutes”—
[N]o I am no going to have any difficulty. You are going to be horrified that I am not. 😉 Man can sense by nerves, disambiguate, categorize, perceive categories, and associate them, reinforce them by rehearsal, and recall them, hold one or combination or a prediction from a combination in his attention, recursively modify it, and in that order, because of his neurological ability to identify constant ad inconstant relations between stimuli over time. That’s all neurons do: on off, faster, slower.
- Man can discover and identify (categorize) and name (give name to) sets of constant relations (an identity, referent,).
- Man can invent patterns of testing constant-inconstant relations(relations)
Man can name those patterns of constant-inconstant relations (general rules)
Man is capable of language using ‘continuous recursive disambiguation over time.
Man can invent a grammar (rules of continuous recursive disambiguation) for any paradigm of constant relations (dimensions) he chooses. For example, counting, accounting, linear geometry, curvalinear geometry, multi-dimensional geometry. Or testimony, narrative, story, fiction, fictionalism, lie. Or physics, chemistry, biochemistry. one of the grammars he developed we call logic: the tests of constant relations in state between statements.
Man can use a grammar of any one of the logics, the most simple being first order logics, to describe the constant relations or failure of constant relations between any two or more references that he is capable of imagining, or which, by some instrumentation we can reduce to perceivable differences.
The brain is a very simple thing it turns out. It does only one thing really. focus attention on successful prediction of from patterns of stimulation.
-
What Does “Bait Into Hazard” Mean?
What Does “Bait Into Hazard” Mean? https://propertarianism.com/2019/11/02/what-does-bait-into-hazard-mean/
Source date (UTC): 2019-11-02 01:41:57 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1190443897857695747
-
What Does “Bait Into Hazard” Mean?
—“You often say “bait into hazard”, any chance you could explain that in more depth? I don’t really get what you mean. Are you talking about moral hazard in economics? And what’s the baiting?”—
If I suggest you might win at gambling (you can’t), that’s baiting you into hazard. If I entice you into buying drugs, i’m baiting you in to a hazard, since addiction is a spiral. If I offer you a loan to get what you want under impulse or duress, but I can extract interest from you, and then seize your property in restitution. If I promise you equality or socialism when it’s genetics that cause our differences, and you act to destroy your civilization, then that’s all baiting into hazard. if I promise you salvation in heaven if you rebel against the government that is trying to create order and prosperity over the next few decades, that is baiting you into a hazard. In other words, you are entering into a voluntary exchange that is not in your interests, simply because for whatever reason you are vulnerable to the trap.