Theme: Religion

  • So yes, gods provide intelligibility because they do not depend on reason but on

    So yes, gods provide intelligibility because they do not depend on reason but on the application of biological intuition (anthropomorphization) to systems beyond our perception and control. This allows us to interpret the regularities of the universe as intentional.


    Source date (UTC): 2021-08-12 17:13:36 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1425868082925510672

    Reply addressees: @Catholi64501821 @kanungo_priyam @iamnotasophist

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1425854812156043267

  • I see that there is an order to the universe, and nowhere to store information o

    I see that there is an order to the universe, and nowhere to store information outside of that universe; and that man has a history of anthropomorphizing his importance and ignorance which has every single time been false. Gods emerge for good reasons. There are better solutions.


    Source date (UTC): 2021-08-12 17:12:33 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1425867817472167941

    Reply addressees: @Catholi64501821 @kanungo_priyam @iamnotasophist

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1425855570788159492

  • Fantasy religions (Age of Transformation) all arose about the same time across t

    Fantasy religions (Age of Transformation) all arose about the same time across the eurasian trade zone because of increases in production, trade, division of labor, alienation, and need to normalize cooperation across populations that decreased loyalty insurance dependence.


    Source date (UTC): 2021-08-12 17:10:56 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1425867409009909760

    Reply addressees: @Catholi64501821 @kanungo_priyam @iamnotasophist

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1425854812156043267

  • Search: “Personality differences religious and atheists” Difference: feminine, i

    Search: “Personality differences religious and atheists” Difference: feminine, impulsive, empathic, agreeable vs masculine suppressive systematizing, disagreeable. These are physical differences in brain structure between extreme female and male brains.
    (And yes I’m an expert.)


    Source date (UTC): 2021-08-12 15:36:37 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1425843673133105155

    Reply addressees: @Dialogia2 @iamnotasophist

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1425820237233070081

  • Not at all. But like I said. Over your head. It’s ok. You’re a foil. It’s not as

    Not at all. But like I said. Over your head. It’s ok. You’re a foil. It’s not as thought it’s possible for you to change your intuitions. Abrahamismm produces an addiction response. That’s why reason science are costly, and western civ is costly. All costs are opportunity costs.


    Source date (UTC): 2021-08-12 15:16:11 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1425838532933918720

    Reply addressees: @Catholi64501821 @iamnotasophist

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1425836908291280901

  • An intellectually honest criticism would have to provide a competitive argument

    An intellectually honest criticism would have to provide a competitive argument on rational and scientific grounds that belief(fundamentalism) or imitation of belief(tradition) are necessary for social coherence between empathizers(F) and systematizers(M) on evidence of outcomes


    Source date (UTC): 2021-08-12 15:07:15 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1425836285214740480

    Reply addressees: @Catholi64501821 @iamnotasophist

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1425835160180768770


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @Catholi64501821 @iamnotasophist You used the Abrahamic(female) technique of Critique by GSRRM to create a false equivalency between empathizing(intuition) and systematizing(reason) by applying empathizing priorities to systematizing priorities, where atheists correctly criticize empathizers on empathic grounds.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1425835160180768770

  • You used the Abrahamic(female) technique of Critique by GSRRM to create a false

    You used the Abrahamic(female) technique of Critique by GSRRM to create a false equivalency between empathizing(intuition) and systematizing(reason) by applying empathizing priorities to systematizing priorities, where atheists correctly criticize empathizers on empathic grounds.


    Source date (UTC): 2021-08-12 15:02:47 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1425835160180768770

    Reply addressees: @Catholi64501821 @iamnotasophist

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1425834122212167680

  • FUNDAMENTALISM IS LIMITED TO FIRST ORDER CLAIMS

    FUNDAMENTALISM IS LIMITED TO FIRST ORDER CLAIMS


    Source date (UTC): 2021-08-12 14:44:09 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/106743690016307280

  • Fundamentalism Is Limited to First-Order Claims

    FUNDAMENTALISM IS LIMITED TO FIRST-ORDER CLAIMS
    No I’m not anti-christian so to speak, I’m anti-Abrahmism.
    — “Some atheists claim that religion is a comfort to simple minds too weak to tolerate a world without God, but perhaps I wonder if it is the other way around. Perhaps atheism is a comfort to those minds too fearful of what the existence of God would entail.” —
     
    Well, we have the science. Religiosity is determined by the demand for empathy over systematizing. And the reasons for this are simple neural economy of in utero developmental differences. Smarter people tend to be system thinkers, so the same emotional need is filled differently.
     
    — “I could tell you that eyes are just the result of sense organs evolving over time. That wouldn’t then suggest that they don’t actually see anything.” —
     
    Technically speaking eyes don’t ‘see’ they just sense information. ‘Seeing’ requires the organization of that information into edges, textures, fragments, objects, spaces, and boundaries into a model to predict where muscles can move our bodies – that happens in the brain.
     
    — “Way to miss the point. You can describe the activity any way you like.” —
     
    Not missing the point, but making one over your head, that others will recognize: the three categories of fictionalism (deceit by pseudoscience(magic) pseudo reason(sophistry) and supernaturalism(occult)) make use of that method of argument-substitute, and Abrahamism teaches it.
     
    I told you it was over your head. 😉 All deceit is constructed from the same set of techniques that use ambiguity(vs identity), grammatical tolerance, incomplete sentences(vs testable transactions) to suggest relations by analogy that they cannot testify to (and do not exist).
     
    So for example the liars paradox isn’t. It’s a lie created by design using an incomplete statement that violates the grammatical law of continuous recursive disambiguation. Idiomatic speech relies heavily on suggestion vs description. Languages differ in precision. Cultures do too.
     
    And because cultures do too, cultures are more vulnerable to an index between aggregate (normative) intelligence, institutional evoluton, the precision of language. So English > German > Russian > Hindu > Semitic > Sinic differences in context vs precision.
     
    It’s actually a tragedy, in that (a) the church failed to produce an Augustine or Aquinas in response to Darwin, Maxwell et all, given that the scholastics had nearly united laws of nature natural law and catholic mythology (b) the Marxist, neo-Marxists, pomo, woke cult WON.
     
    And worse, that you idiots can’t comprehend that trend, and are ignorant of the coherence of the laws of nature, natural law, economics, and evolution = and worse aren’t taught grammar, logic, rhetoric, and grammatical suppression of the cognitive biases.
     
    And worse, you are ignorant of the fact that while Jesus increasingly appears to be a fictional character in the Semitic mythicist tradition consisting of combined wisdom literature from Egyptian and Persian traditions, that “Jesus” solved the problem of cooperation at scale.
     
    If one ‘sciences’ Christian ethics (not dogma) it is the ‘scientific’ solution to the prisoner’s dilemma of trust development in a heterogeneous polity – and requires training since it is contrary to all human instincts.
     
    The consequences? (a) reduce familism and tribalism, (b) prepare people for middle-class ethics (trade), (c) provide a means for the lower classes to find status in Indo-European civilization which treats the lower classes as domesticated animals – integrating them into society.
     
    So I don’t mind that you’re an ignorant peasant that obsesses about nonsense if the consequence is that you behave as the ‘programmers’ intended you to behave. I only mind when you use Abrahamic deceit to pretend intellectual status instead of the social moral status it produces.
     
    As such Abrahamic theology is just wisdom literature that tells you how to behave. This is a first-order wisdom. It does not tolerate second-order deduction, induction, or abduction. It is not a system of reason or science, it is a system of analogy. To say otherwise is lying.
     
    I like to share knowledge and understanding with those capable of using it. You are just a tool that provides a frame for the distribution of that knowledge. You don’t matter other than that you’re a foil. This is why you have no meaning in life and your religion is dying.
  • Fundamentalism Is Limited to First-Order Claims

    FUNDAMENTALISM IS LIMITED TO FIRST-ORDER CLAIMS
    No I’m not anti-christian so to speak, I’m anti-Abrahmism.
    — “Some atheists claim that religion is a comfort to simple minds too weak to tolerate a world without God, but perhaps I wonder if it is the other way around. Perhaps atheism is a comfort to those minds too fearful of what the existence of God would entail.” —
     
    Well, we have the science. Religiosity is determined by the demand for empathy over systematizing. And the reasons for this are simple neural economy of in utero developmental differences. Smarter people tend to be system thinkers, so the same emotional need is filled differently.
     
    — “I could tell you that eyes are just the result of sense organs evolving over time. That wouldn’t then suggest that they don’t actually see anything.” —
     
    Technically speaking eyes don’t ‘see’ they just sense information. ‘Seeing’ requires the organization of that information into edges, textures, fragments, objects, spaces, and boundaries into a model to predict where muscles can move our bodies – that happens in the brain.
     
    — “Way to miss the point. You can describe the activity any way you like.” —
     
    Not missing the point, but making one over your head, that others will recognize: the three categories of fictionalism (deceit by pseudoscience(magic) pseudo reason(sophistry) and supernaturalism(occult)) make use of that method of argument-substitute, and Abrahamism teaches it.
     
    I told you it was over your head. 😉 All deceit is constructed from the same set of techniques that use ambiguity(vs identity), grammatical tolerance, incomplete sentences(vs testable transactions) to suggest relations by analogy that they cannot testify to (and do not exist).
     
    So for example the liars paradox isn’t. It’s a lie created by design using an incomplete statement that violates the grammatical law of continuous recursive disambiguation. Idiomatic speech relies heavily on suggestion vs description. Languages differ in precision. Cultures do too.
     
    And because cultures do too, cultures are more vulnerable to an index between aggregate (normative) intelligence, institutional evoluton, the precision of language. So English > German > Russian > Hindu > Semitic > Sinic differences in context vs precision.
     
    It’s actually a tragedy, in that (a) the church failed to produce an Augustine or Aquinas in response to Darwin, Maxwell et all, given that the scholastics had nearly united laws of nature natural law and catholic mythology (b) the Marxist, neo-Marxists, pomo, woke cult WON.
     
    And worse, that you idiots can’t comprehend that trend, and are ignorant of the coherence of the laws of nature, natural law, economics, and evolution = and worse aren’t taught grammar, logic, rhetoric, and grammatical suppression of the cognitive biases.
     
    And worse, you are ignorant of the fact that while Jesus increasingly appears to be a fictional character in the Semitic mythicist tradition consisting of combined wisdom literature from Egyptian and Persian traditions, that “Jesus” solved the problem of cooperation at scale.
     
    If one ‘sciences’ Christian ethics (not dogma) it is the ‘scientific’ solution to the prisoner’s dilemma of trust development in a heterogeneous polity – and requires training since it is contrary to all human instincts.
     
    The consequences? (a) reduce familism and tribalism, (b) prepare people for middle-class ethics (trade), (c) provide a means for the lower classes to find status in Indo-European civilization which treats the lower classes as domesticated animals – integrating them into society.
     
    So I don’t mind that you’re an ignorant peasant that obsesses about nonsense if the consequence is that you behave as the ‘programmers’ intended you to behave. I only mind when you use Abrahamic deceit to pretend intellectual status instead of the social moral status it produces.
     
    As such Abrahamic theology is just wisdom literature that tells you how to behave. This is a first-order wisdom. It does not tolerate second-order deduction, induction, or abduction. It is not a system of reason or science, it is a system of analogy. To say otherwise is lying.
     
    I like to share knowledge and understanding with those capable of using it. You are just a tool that provides a frame for the distribution of that knowledge. You don’t matter other than that you’re a foil. This is why you have no meaning in life and your religion is dying.