Curt Doolittle

Theme: Religion

  • INDO EUROPEAN RELIGION: THE PRIMACY OF MAN by Daniel Gurpide What is most striki

    INDO EUROPEAN RELIGION: THE PRIMACY OF MAN

    by Daniel Gurpide

    What is most striking when studying Indo-European cosmogony is the solemn affirmation, found everywhere, of man’s primacy. Indo-European cosmogony places a ‘cosmic man’ at the ‘beginning’ of the current cycle of the world. It is from him that all things derive: gods, nature, living beings—and man himself as historical being. In the Indian world, the Rig Veda names him Purusha; his name is Ymir in the Edda; and, according to Tacitus, he was called Mannus among continental Germans. For the Vedic Indians, Purusha is the One through whom the universe begins (again). He is ‘naught but this universe, what has passed and what is yet to come.’ In the same fashion, Ymir is the undivided One: and by him the world is first organised. His own birth results from the meeting of fire and ice.

    The universe does not derive its existence from something not part of it. It proceeds from the being of cosmic man: his body, his gaze, his word—and his consciousness. There is no opposition between two worlds—between created being and uncreated being. On the contrary, there is incessant conversion and consubstantiality between beings and things, between heaven and earth, between men and gods.

    In such a Weltanschauung, the gods are themselves a quarter of the cosmic man. They are superior men in the Nietzschean sense; in a certain way they perpetuate the transfigured and transfiguring memory of the first ‘civilising heroes’: those who brought humankind from its precedent stage—and truly founded, by ordering it into three functions, human society, Indo-European society. These gods do not represent ‘Good’—neither do they represent ‘Evil.’ Insofar as they represent sublimated forms of the good and evil that coexist, as antagonists, within life itself, they are both good and evil. Hence, each presents an ambivalent aspect—a human aspect. This explains why mythical imagination tends to split personality: Mitra-Varuna, Jupiter-Dius Fidius, Odin/Wotan-Tyr, etc. In relation to present humankind, which they have instituted as such, these gods correspond indeed to their mythical ‘ancestors’ and ideal models. Legislators, inventors of social tradition, they remain present, are still active. However, they also remain subject to fatum: destined in a very human way to an ‘end.’

    In brief, we are referring not to creating gods, but rather to creatures—human gods who are, nevertheless, organisers-orderers of the world: ancestral gods for current humankind; gods who are great in both good and evil and who place themselves beyond such notions. On Olympus, says Heraclitus, ‘the gods are immortal men, whereas men are mortal gods; our life is their death and our death their life.’

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-15 17:42:00 UTC

  • The pantheons of the west represent normal semi-dysfuncitonal families – like re

    The pantheons of the west represent normal semi-dysfuncitonal families – like realty. They are unequal. LIke reality. They constitute a hierarchy. Like reality. We can outwith them. Like reality. We can negotiate with them. like reality. We can ignore them. like reality. We can choose a favorite mentor. LIke reality. We can construct plays using archetypes, plots, virtues, like reality.

    The egyptians preserved their primitive animism and didn’t evolve into human characters. The reasons for which we can guess.

    The west did.

    BECAUSE MAN DISPLACED THE GODS IN THE WEST AND TOOK HIS SOVEREIGNTY FROM THEM.

    BY FIRE, BRONZE, WHEEL, HORSE, CHARIOT

    WESTERN MAN LOOKED TO DEFEAT THE SKIES NOT THANK THE EARTH

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-15 14:46:00 UTC

  • “What about X dogma?”– There were no christians after Jesus

    –“What about X dogma?”–

    There were no christians after Jesus.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-15 12:43:00 UTC

  • WHY A UNIVERSAL RELIGION? Well, if you (a) ban falsehood, and (b) provide a non-

    WHY A UNIVERSAL RELIGION?

    Well, if you (a) ban falsehood, and (b) provide a non-false ‘religion’, what will occur? Do you need a universal religion?

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-15 11:45:00 UTC

  • Teaching reading and mathematics is hard. Teaching stoicism is no harder. And of

    Teaching reading and mathematics is hard. Teaching stoicism is no harder. And of the three of them I”m pretty sure it’s the most important. Otherwise ‘continous therapy’ of religion is necessary

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-15 10:47:00 UTC

  • CHRISTIAN ETHICS IN FIVE RULES (IN ORDER) 1) Do nothing unto others that you wou

    CHRISTIAN ETHICS IN FIVE RULES (IN ORDER)

    1) Do nothing unto others that you would not have done unto you.

    2) Do unto others, only what they desire done unto them.

    3) Exhaust forgiveness for that which they do unto you, before retaliating.

    4) Retaliate only to the minimum extent necessary to prevent harms to you and others – do not seek revenge.

    5) Extirpate all hatred from your heart.

    This is the optimum strategy humans can adopt in order to construct cooperation despite differences.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-15 10:29:00 UTC

  • PUT A FORK IN IT. RELIGION IS BAKED. I’m gonna call religion ‘baked’ and put a f

    PUT A FORK IN IT. RELIGION IS BAKED.

    I’m gonna call religion ‘baked’ and put a fork in it. It’s fully decidable now. So, that means, it took, from the early spring of 2015 to the late spring of 2017 for me to solve it. And that makes religion the most difficult subject I’ve had to solve among the disciplines and institutions. Truth was nowhere near as hard because mathematicians and computer scientists had done so much work, even if logicians really ended up in nonsense land. Of the three disciplines, only computer science refrained from idealism (platonism). But I was able to combine the work of a century of ‘thinkers’ to make testimonial truth possible.

    OK. So the remaining work is just to finish the constitution (application of propertarianism, testimonialism, … etc) and then the really, really …. unpleasant work, is producing the examples of the more subtle concepts in testimonialism into an algorithm (set of steps) that are sufficient for the courts.

    I don’t think I need to do that to publish. I think getting the ideas together is one job. putting the ‘courses’ together another job. And surrounding it with literary history in the Robert Greene model is last.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-15 10:19:00 UTC

  • PETERSON, HAIDT, AND DOOLITTLE (AND TALEB) AND THE NEED FOR RELIGION AS CONTINUO

    PETERSON, HAIDT, AND DOOLITTLE (AND TALEB) AND THE NEED FOR RELIGION AS CONTINUOUS THERAPY DUE TO OUR LOSS OF STOICISM

    (profound) (read this)

    I’d venture that Peterson’s current with psychology and if you were to read both his work (therapy) and Haidt’s work (morality), haidt does not retreat into the literary (religion). And so you sort of get the same message against postmodernism from both Haidt(Morality) and Peterson(Psychology), and me (Decidability). The difference is between personal, political, and legal.

    Now I agree that appealing to myth and literature is a way of CREATING A DISTANCE BETWEEN THE INDIVIDUAL AND HIS EXPERIENCES SO THAT HE CAN ASSESS THEM.

    Theraputically, that is what myth and literature allow you to do: look at yourself(feelings) and ‘norms’ (via ancient myths still living) in a depersonalized way.

    And having depersonalized YOURSELF and depersonalized SOCIETY AND OTHERS your rational (human) mind can be used to defeat (reprogram) the animal and reptilian mind.

    I mean. But that’s operationally what is going on.

    It’s what talk therapy tries to do through one-on-one safety.

    It’s what exposure therapy tries to do through social (mentor) safety.

    It’s what literary analysis tries to do through social (religious) therapy.

    It’s exactly what anti-depressants allow you to do.

    That’s exactly what hallucinogens allow you to do.

    I mean, all of it it. All of religion is just THERAPY. It’s therapy that’s only necessary because of ignorance, poor teaching, and our lack of continuous reinforcement from the family and tribe in a vast, alienating, impossible-to-calculate division of perception, knowledge, and labor, using an information system increasingly dependent upon nothing except REJECTION and PRICES.

    The problem is achieving enough detachment that you can reprogram (assign new weights) to memories and relations without at the same time reinforcing the weights of existing traumas.

    I mean. It’s not even scientifically difficult.

    What’s difficult is the near universal ignorance among us that this is what we’re doing, why we’re doing it by the different means, and why it works, and why its necessary:

    WE LACK SUFFICIENT TRAINING (STOICISM) SO THAT WE REQUIRE CONTINUOUS THERAPY TO COMPENSATE.

    (this should be one of the most profound things you’ve read in your life)

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-15 09:55:00 UTC

  • THE STRUCTURE OF ‘GOOD’ and ‘TRUE’ RELIGION. As far as I know, the optimum relig

    THE STRUCTURE OF ‘GOOD’ and ‘TRUE’ RELIGION.

    As far as I know, the optimum religion (teaching) we currently can know of consists of:

    1) Myths-Fables-Fairy Tales, Biographies, History.

    2) Literary Analysis: Transcendence, thru Virtues

    3) Disciplines that teach the virtues (and provide comforts)

    4) Reward for learning with the joy of submission to the pack (safety)

    5) Rewarding submission to the pack with Holidays and Festivals.

    (The problem is falsifying consumer-status and virtue signaling which is terribly addictive and makes us crazy.)

    This treatment allows the use of and analysis of all of our vast literature across the “Matters Of” Greece, Rome, Germania, Scandinavia, the Isles, and The Slavic Lands. And to rely on muth, biography and history for lessons.

    And to discourse on the virtues. Since man is constant and his struggles identical in each era, this provides an enormous set of choices for us.

    The difference is, (a) love one another, (b) love your people, (c) work as a community, (d) accept reality as inescapable and (e) adapt yourself to succeed in reality.

    What dogmas (favored messages, favored teachings) will emerge from such an order? I have no idea. The market will solve that problem. But as long as they are not false. As long as they are True, Good, And Desirable, then they are in fact ‘good’.

    HIERARCHY OF INSTITUTIONS

    3) Roman Paganism (archetypes) (categories and measures)

    2) Roman Stoicism (virtues) (via positiva) (subcategories and measures)

    1) Roman Law (limits) (via negativa) (further subcategories and measures)

    0) The Laws of Nature (science) further subcategories and measures)

    THE SYNTHESIS OF LITERATURE AND TRUTH

    (read it and weep) (stoicism) (truthful literature)

    1) THE MONOMYTH – Transcendence (Transformation)

    2) THE ARCHETYPES – Characters (Categories)

    3) THE VIRTUES – Comparison Operators (Values)

    4) THE ORDERS – Axioms (Relations: sets of conditions)

    5) THE NARRATIVES – Operations (Methods of change in state)

    6) THE DISCIPLINES – Mindfulness/Stoicism ( Noise Reduction)

    7) THE SCIENCES – Measurement (reduction of ignorance, error, bias, deception reduction)

    8) THE TRUTH – Parsimony (Most Parsimonious Operational Name of a Recipe of Transformation.)

    THE LIMITS

    There exists only one objective – transcendence.

    There exists only one narrative – transcendence

    There exist only a few sub-narratives – methods of transcendence

    There exist only so many non-false virtues – variables of transcendence

    There exist only so many portfolios of virtues – transcendent characters.

    There exist only so many methods of non-false noise reduction – transcendent mind.

    There exist only so many methods of non-false elimination of falsehoods – transcendent reason.

    There exists only so many sets of primary operations – transcendent truths.

    Via-Positiva:

    A myth can employ anthropomorphism in an act of transcendence.

    A myth can employ hyperbole (super-normalism) in an act of transcendence.

    A myth can employ any technique to create an immoral condition against which one employs virtues to transcend.

    A myth can employ virtues in an act of transcendence.

    Via Negativa:

    A myth cannot contradict the virtue of transcendence.

    A myth cannot contradict of a virtue of transcendence in an act of transcendence.

    A myth cannot employ a falsehood in an act of transcendence

    A myth cannot employ luck or miracles in an act of transcendence.

    A myth cannot employ fictionalism (idealism, supernaturalism, pseudoscience/pseudo-rationalism) in an act of transcendence.

    CONCLUSION

    If a myth can survive these tests then it is true, and good.

    If a myth cannot survives these tests then it is false, and evil.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-15 09:02:00 UTC

  • Superstition for the very weak. Myth for the less weak, Literature for the less

    Superstition for the very weak. Myth for the less weak, Literature for the less weak. And measurement for the not-weak.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-14 23:41:00 UTC