(FB 1544033582 Timestamp) GODS AS UNITS OF MEASURE —“Curt, when you say ‘A GOD is a unit of measure’, what do you mean? This idea hit me strictly from the judeo christian “god made man in his image”. Like a blue print. But i have found that referring to god as a unit of measure only seems to offend christians jews and muslims. My point was never meant to insult. Yaweh , Allah, Odin, even Satan are units of measure. Where as men we are meant to measure ourselves against as to see how and where we need to grow to become better. …i had to quit talking about this at work.”— First, while most people consider the big ideas, very few people think very deep thoughts. And the vast majority who try (like anything else) fail catastrophically. I tend to avoid such conversations unless others start them and make some error that I feel they would benefit from, or the commons would benefit from, correcting. And then, it might be better to say that a god or gods function as a system of measurement, by which people of the same god, make the same measurements (judgments), because those measurements are commensurable (compatible). Different gods require different sets of measurements, producing different judgements, that are internally commensurable (compatible) but externally not. So in this sense it’s a system of measurement we are referring to. And that is because anthropomorphism is much easier for we simple human animals to work with that reason science, and calculation. There are some relatively universal traits among all gods, but there are many differences. Particularly when ‘gods’ are ‘spirits’ or ‘ancestors’ rather than fictional characters. Those gods we ‘thank’ and persist their investments in us (ancestors), those gods that are like fickle humans and fickle nature for us to thank for the good, and outwit for the bad (european), those gods that provide wisdom (buddha), those gods that are slave-owners (abrahamic), each function as a system of measurement by which we understand, judge, and act in response to the universe and gods and politics and each other. The western Method of math, logic, Science, Economics, Law, History and Literature is a better system of measure – for an aristocracy of the middle class and higher. It does however require a great deal more training for a great deal longer, than children’s stories and anthropomorphic systems of measurement.
Theme: Religion
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1544195129 Timestamp) FROM THE THEOLOGICAL TO THE LITERARY – ANSWERING A COMPETENT CRITIC. (useful) —“Certain kinds of allegorical story try to teach a moral but most of what we consider great literature instead dramatizes a question like what does it mean to be a hero, or is it possible to find meaning in the world that we haven’t placed there ourselves? These questions don’t have univocal answers which is why we find the dramatizations more interesting than anybody’s opinion about such matters. We hate poetry that has palpable designs on us, as Keats said. Also, the dramatizing of ambiguous questions creates the beauty that “tease[s] us out of thought” and is the real payload of these stories, rather than some socially utilitarian archetype that you install in people like software, even if it’s open-source software. Beauty can be found in a postmodern novel like The Crying of Lot 49 as readily as in a heroic story like the Odyssey, or indeed in the wisdom books of the old testament, or the writings of medieval mystics. I think Norman Mailer was right that if the universe is a lock then the key is a metaphor, not a measure, but then he belonged to the class of intellectuals who haven’t given up on the question of why there’s something rather than nothing and therefore placed more importance on the inner life as a source of sovereignty than on being a member of a pack, the inner life being that by virtue of which we are incommensurable. I’m new here, but initial signs are that planet Doolittle is a place for people who have prematurely closed their accounts with reality.”— John Tangney
John, Intelligent, Articulate, Traditional, Conventional, but just another take on secular theology, closing with self service, contradiction, and error – and entirely missing the point of the challenges of the present, the purpose of my work, what I’m doing here with followers and lurkers, and the post. 1 – What faculties are you advocating exercising – and why? What faculties are those following me seeking to exercise? 2 – You use experiential terms for entertainment, or mindfulness, or escapism, as if they are moral goods, when they are simply forms of consumption, avoidance, and escape – self medication. Yet people who follow me are seeking the capacity to understand, improve, and act – particularly to act to change the current conflict. 3 – You ‘appear’ to assume that knowledge of right action, morality, and the virtues is complicated. It isn’t. it’s actually trivial, and can be taught by allegory, analogy, history, and rule. The difference is that what is objectively moral (what we do here) and what is subjectively open to interpretation as moral, are the difference between truth and preference. 4 – There is a very good reason Women, Mailer, and someone like you prefer the ‘undecidable’ metaphor, and Men, Aristotle, and someone like me, prefers the ‘decidable’ rule. The first conveys meaning while preserving the ability to cheat, the second conveys rule and eliminates the ability to cheat.(See my post earlier today to Eric Weinstein). 5 – The warrior prefers the conflict, the judge the law, the merchant the ability to weasel and negotiate, the women the ability to bait and not deliver, and the thief the ability to predate. We know your moral pretense by which degree of moral intolerance/intolerance you advocate (demand). 6 – Where you assume people are programmed or resistant to programming (a) they ARE programmed, and (b) they ARE resistant to programming, because they search for confirmation of their personal survival, consumptive, and reproductive strategies. In other words, people seek programming that they want. And norm encourages, and the law enforces rules that they must obey even if they contradict with the programming that they have sought. 7 – So as a specialist in the ‘Grammars’ (paradigms of programming and decidability) it’s quite obvious that you’re invested in a form of escapism (and perhaps denialism) that is indifferent from Mysticism, Theology, Idealism, Utopianism, Fictionalism, Self Medication, or drug use. Where most here are looking for non-escapism. For the opposite. FOR AGENCY. So it is not that I or we escape reality – it is that we seek to understand it, and take advantage of it. It is those who seek sedation that seek to escape reality. QUESTIONS/PROBLEMS I SEEK TO ANSWER/SOLVE How do we end lying in economics, politics, and law? How do we solve the conflict of our current attempts at speciation by moral intuition (left-feminine, right-masculine)? How do we end the systematic destruction of western civilization which is the only one to produce a high trust labor, working, middle, and professional class? How do we prevent another abrahamic dark age of ignorance, superstition, and dysgenia? I am one of the most innovative thinkers working today. That is not a compliment to myself. It is a criticism of the current state of thought – and the near loss of the 20th century – and the second fall of Europa. Affections. Curt
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1544195129 Timestamp) FROM THE THEOLOGICAL TO THE LITERARY – ANSWERING A COMPETENT CRITIC. (useful) —“Certain kinds of allegorical story try to teach a moral but most of what we consider great literature instead dramatizes a question like what does it mean to be a hero, or is it possible to find meaning in the world that we haven’t placed there ourselves? These questions don’t have univocal answers which is why we find the dramatizations more interesting than anybody’s opinion about such matters. We hate poetry that has palpable designs on us, as Keats said. Also, the dramatizing of ambiguous questions creates the beauty that “tease[s] us out of thought” and is the real payload of these stories, rather than some socially utilitarian archetype that you install in people like software, even if it’s open-source software. Beauty can be found in a postmodern novel like The Crying of Lot 49 as readily as in a heroic story like the Odyssey, or indeed in the wisdom books of the old testament, or the writings of medieval mystics. I think Norman Mailer was right that if the universe is a lock then the key is a metaphor, not a measure, but then he belonged to the class of intellectuals who haven’t given up on the question of why there’s something rather than nothing and therefore placed more importance on the inner life as a source of sovereignty than on being a member of a pack, the inner life being that by virtue of which we are incommensurable. I’m new here, but initial signs are that planet Doolittle is a place for people who have prematurely closed their accounts with reality.”— John Tangney
John, Intelligent, Articulate, Traditional, Conventional, but just another take on secular theology, closing with self service, contradiction, and error – and entirely missing the point of the challenges of the present, the purpose of my work, what I’m doing here with followers and lurkers, and the post. 1 – What faculties are you advocating exercising – and why? What faculties are those following me seeking to exercise? 2 – You use experiential terms for entertainment, or mindfulness, or escapism, as if they are moral goods, when they are simply forms of consumption, avoidance, and escape – self medication. Yet people who follow me are seeking the capacity to understand, improve, and act – particularly to act to change the current conflict. 3 – You ‘appear’ to assume that knowledge of right action, morality, and the virtues is complicated. It isn’t. it’s actually trivial, and can be taught by allegory, analogy, history, and rule. The difference is that what is objectively moral (what we do here) and what is subjectively open to interpretation as moral, are the difference between truth and preference. 4 – There is a very good reason Women, Mailer, and someone like you prefer the ‘undecidable’ metaphor, and Men, Aristotle, and someone like me, prefers the ‘decidable’ rule. The first conveys meaning while preserving the ability to cheat, the second conveys rule and eliminates the ability to cheat.(See my post earlier today to Eric Weinstein). 5 – The warrior prefers the conflict, the judge the law, the merchant the ability to weasel and negotiate, the women the ability to bait and not deliver, and the thief the ability to predate. We know your moral pretense by which degree of moral intolerance/intolerance you advocate (demand). 6 – Where you assume people are programmed or resistant to programming (a) they ARE programmed, and (b) they ARE resistant to programming, because they search for confirmation of their personal survival, consumptive, and reproductive strategies. In other words, people seek programming that they want. And norm encourages, and the law enforces rules that they must obey even if they contradict with the programming that they have sought. 7 – So as a specialist in the ‘Grammars’ (paradigms of programming and decidability) it’s quite obvious that you’re invested in a form of escapism (and perhaps denialism) that is indifferent from Mysticism, Theology, Idealism, Utopianism, Fictionalism, Self Medication, or drug use. Where most here are looking for non-escapism. For the opposite. FOR AGENCY. So it is not that I or we escape reality – it is that we seek to understand it, and take advantage of it. It is those who seek sedation that seek to escape reality. QUESTIONS/PROBLEMS I SEEK TO ANSWER/SOLVE How do we end lying in economics, politics, and law? How do we solve the conflict of our current attempts at speciation by moral intuition (left-feminine, right-masculine)? How do we end the systematic destruction of western civilization which is the only one to produce a high trust labor, working, middle, and professional class? How do we prevent another abrahamic dark age of ignorance, superstition, and dysgenia? I am one of the most innovative thinkers working today. That is not a compliment to myself. It is a criticism of the current state of thought – and the near loss of the 20th century – and the second fall of Europa. Affections. Curt
-
Curt Doolittle shared a Page.
(FB 1544266409 Timestamp) CHRISTIANITY Just finished a talk with James Fox Higgins of The Rational Rise. (Damn, seriously love that man. Wonderful human.) In that discussion I think I have talked about my view of reforming christianity more so than any other public venue. The net of it is that christianity (and all our european religions for that matter) are compatible with natural law. Yet, it is christian tolerance that has made us vulnerable and is the reason we can be so easily undermined. The most intolerant wins, and we were not intolerante enough. So hence my advocacy of a very intolerant law. But a law that must somehow accommodate our traditional religion(s). He did bring up one interesting idea that (foolishly) hadn’t occurred to me: is our vulnerability as christians due to our failure to legislate christianity and thereby prevent other religions. The answer to which I think was yes. But taking it further, what would have happened if we had been smart enough to (a) legislate america as a christian country, (b) had used the jefferson bible as the definition of christianity, (c) and encoded the christian ethos (as I have), as well as (d) natural law of reciprocity (as I have)? In retrospect that would have been a very good thing. Now, i still hold the opinion that training in mindfulness by stoic (cognitive behavioral) method is superior to supernaturalism; that training in ‘sacredness’ by ‘church lesson, ritual, and oath’ is superior to any other method available to us because unlike schools it involves the whole family; that the model of jesus is excellent for teaching optimum cooperation; that the natural law can be taught in church – because the church advocated it; that it can be taught with sacredness not supernaturalism; and that the church did a much better job of educating the people than the state. I think these things are almost impossible to argue with. This is a very non-supernatural method of achieving christian ends. But it preserves the church(es) as the center of civil society and restores via-positiva to the moral discipline and limits the state to via-negativa actions. Thereby ending the means by which our civilization has been undermined.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1544234280 Timestamp) CONTRA WEINSTEIN VS DAWKINS I would love to have this debate because the alternative is that while we have a natural neurological demand for stories (frames) the world has solved for the satisfaction of demand, and one can solve for the satisfaction of that demand by a host of means – some of which have entirely positive externalities, and some of which have entirely negative externalities. Some of which are in fact eugenic, and some of which are in fact dysgenic – a disease, or cancer. In other words, we SURVIVE some religions, but those religions that we survive appear to have been reproductively successful for that which does not lead to ends that put our survival under our CONTROL: domestication. And while a relativist might say ‘well evolution doesn’t make that distinction’ – saying so would be incompatible with (a) self determination of group or man, (b) the evidence that we achieve what we do through self and other ‘domestication’, or (c) that those who achieve the most domestication are responsible for dragging mankind out of his animal condition into his human rational condition with which he control his destiny (survival), in a universe arguably hostile to (costly) sentient life.
-
Curt Doolittle shared a Page.
(FB 1544266409 Timestamp) CHRISTIANITY Just finished a talk with James Fox Higgins of The Rational Rise. (Damn, seriously love that man. Wonderful human.) In that discussion I think I have talked about my view of reforming christianity more so than any other public venue. The net of it is that christianity (and all our european religions for that matter) are compatible with natural law. Yet, it is christian tolerance that has made us vulnerable and is the reason we can be so easily undermined. The most intolerant wins, and we were not intolerante enough. So hence my advocacy of a very intolerant law. But a law that must somehow accommodate our traditional religion(s). He did bring up one interesting idea that (foolishly) hadn’t occurred to me: is our vulnerability as christians due to our failure to legislate christianity and thereby prevent other religions. The answer to which I think was yes. But taking it further, what would have happened if we had been smart enough to (a) legislate america as a christian country, (b) had used the jefferson bible as the definition of christianity, (c) and encoded the christian ethos (as I have), as well as (d) natural law of reciprocity (as I have)? In retrospect that would have been a very good thing. Now, i still hold the opinion that training in mindfulness by stoic (cognitive behavioral) method is superior to supernaturalism; that training in ‘sacredness’ by ‘church lesson, ritual, and oath’ is superior to any other method available to us because unlike schools it involves the whole family; that the model of jesus is excellent for teaching optimum cooperation; that the natural law can be taught in church – because the church advocated it; that it can be taught with sacredness not supernaturalism; and that the church did a much better job of educating the people than the state. I think these things are almost impossible to argue with. This is a very non-supernatural method of achieving christian ends. But it preserves the church(es) as the center of civil society and restores via-positiva to the moral discipline and limits the state to via-negativa actions. Thereby ending the means by which our civilization has been undermined.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1544234280 Timestamp) CONTRA WEINSTEIN VS DAWKINS I would love to have this debate because the alternative is that while we have a natural neurological demand for stories (frames) the world has solved for the satisfaction of demand, and one can solve for the satisfaction of that demand by a host of means – some of which have entirely positive externalities, and some of which have entirely negative externalities. Some of which are in fact eugenic, and some of which are in fact dysgenic – a disease, or cancer. In other words, we SURVIVE some religions, but those religions that we survive appear to have been reproductively successful for that which does not lead to ends that put our survival under our CONTROL: domestication. And while a relativist might say ‘well evolution doesn’t make that distinction’ – saying so would be incompatible with (a) self determination of group or man, (b) the evidence that we achieve what we do through self and other ‘domestication’, or (c) that those who achieve the most domestication are responsible for dragging mankind out of his animal condition into his human rational condition with which he control his destiny (survival), in a universe arguably hostile to (costly) sentient life.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1544299862 Timestamp) —If we had the icelandic church here I would go. I don’t care about desert dwelling sheep-f–kers. I want to hear the history of our people, and the lessons that we can learn from that. Learn from men who are gods not slaves.—
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1544286004 Timestamp) THE HOLE IN CHRISTIANITY IS OPENNESS TO NON-KIN – THE SOLUTION, LEGISLATION AGAINST INCOMPATIBLE RELIGIONS by Jennifer Dean The problem with Christianity as I see it is not tolerance – Christians are PLENTY intolerant (in some ways I agree with and others I do not) – the problem is that Christians have an inability to recognize many of the things they are intolerant to, when it comes to outsiders or foreigners, and instead mostly prefer to enforce intolerance on their own kind. Look at the Amish to see the most exaggerated example of what I mean, they use shunning and excommunication over the most petty things you could imagine. Rule enforcement for the sake of sheer submission. And while their ability to preserve their way of life is admirable in some ways, obviously it is only possible within a larger context of free riding, and their way of life is all or nothing. T hey might seem to be an extreme or unusual example of Christianity, but the same elements of submission and intolerance are present in other denominations, only the others have allowed outsiders to infiltrate and subvert their doctrine. I believe legislating Christianity, in this country, would have been a disaster. The fundamental problem is that it is still welcoming of outsiders and converts (civnat at the religious level and indeed, where civnat comes from) for the sake of winning souls to Christ, and THAT is the loophole that outsiders have exploited. The better strategy would have been to have legislation AGAINST Judaism, Talmudism, Babylonian mysticism, Satanism, Luciferianism (as we already do have some legislation against Islam, but unfortunately we needed more and what we have has not been enforced) and to educate people on the dangers of these religious ideologies, and their hidden, very real and very very sick practices of human sacrifice (of INNOCENTS – not murderers, criminals, undesirables, but BABIES. CHILDREN.), pedophilia and child marriage. But the problem is due to the convert loophole in Christianity, they simply come in anyway and hide in our midst, and kidnap our children and traffic them. (CD: well done)
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1544298380 Timestamp) WHAT DO THESE RELIGIOUS TERMS MEAN? You won’t like the answers…. What do the rituals mean? Membership Fees. What is sacrament? Debt Creation. What is atonement? Debt Repayment. What is baptism? Debt Forgiveness What is the priesthood? Accountant. I told you that you wouldn’t like the answers. All these ‘fancy words’ are code words for debt for creatures who are extremely sensitive to proportionality. (reciprocity). Christianity consists uniquely of just the rules I stated, respect for the women and slaves, in retaliation against tripartism and aristocracy, and nothing else. Everything else is simply our pre-literate western tradition