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
Theme: Truth
-
APHORISM: THE COMPETITION BETWEEN TRUTH AND MEANING. In the competitive market f
APHORISM: THE COMPETITION BETWEEN TRUTH AND MEANING.
In the competitive market for the positive of meaning by the use of literature and the negative of falsehood by the use of law, we hope that only truth survives the conflict.
Law tells us not what to do, but what not to. Why? because there is no way to test literature other than with law.
This puts some of us in the position of mother: the teller of tales, and gossip, and recipes.
It’ puts some of us in the position of father: the limits of our words, displays, and deeds.
It is more pleasant to give away meaning, than it is to take away falsehood.
Some of us must police truth just as we police services and goods.
Some of us must be fathers.
Source date (UTC): 2017-06-14 22:35:00 UTC
-
THE BIG QUESTION FOR PETERSON, THAT HARRIS COULDN”T FIGURE OUT HOW TO ASK —“Pe
THE BIG QUESTION FOR PETERSON, THAT HARRIS COULDN”T FIGURE OUT HOW TO ASK
—“Peterson manages to inspire me without coming across as foolishly optimistic or unrealistic in expectation. That’s really quite an accomplishment.”—
(That is because you already agree with him. – Who *doesn’t* agree with him? Why? I read all the same research that he does. I just read very different LITERATURE from that which he does. )
RESOLVING HARRIS’ QUESTION
I want to resolve the same question Harris does, but I am capable of asking in more articulately than Harris.
THE QUESTION FOR JORDAN PETERSON
“Jordan, given the portfolio of Myth, Literature, History, and Science and Tort Law (record of existential disputes), why does one have to preserve political conflation (combining myth, law, history), choice conflation (the useful, the preferable, the good, and the true) and fictionalism (idealism, supernaturalism, occultism)?
In other words WHY DO YOU NEED TO PRESERVE LYING when it is by conflation and fictionalism that the west was destroyed in the ancient world; medieval man was trapped in illiteracy and superstition for a dark age – ended by literacy and restoration of our ancient thought; four great civilizations have been destroyed by islam and descended into ignorance; jews were unable to build a territory and institutions, and despite being literate contributed nothing good to human history, and in the modern era, kant, the french and the cosmopolitans, the marxists and the postmodernists have done nothing but attempt to produce a series of counter-enlightenments preventing the completion of the ‘restoration’ (enlightenment) by its extension to the social, political, and juridical sciences?
Why do we need to circumvent reason, and rely upon lying, when the secret by which the west in the black sea, aegean, Mediterranean, north-baltic sea (hansa), atlantic, and seven-seas eras, dragged mankind kicking and screaming out of superstition, ignorance, poverty, disease, and tyranny by the use of Martial Epistemology (Truth), Sovereignty, Heroism, and Markets?
Why isn’t the battle between good and evil, that between the use of truth in pagan aristocracy and the use of lies in monotheistic underclass socialism?
Isn’t the battle that we have had for 6000 years, between (a) the revolutionary invention of truth, paternalism, sovereignty, markets, and transcendence of the limits of mind and body, and (b) the counter-revolution against it and the preservation of the primitive? Isn’t the enlightenment and the ongoing counter-enlightemnent just a continuation of the cycle between truth and deceit?
How is history reducible to anything other than two rare peoples, each at opposite ends of the eurasian continent, (europe and china) inventing reason, and everyone between them retaliating against them in a series of cycles and counter-cycles?
How is it even conscionable to perpetuate that which was invented and has served as the primary means by which civilization has been reversed, regressed?
I mean. How is it in any way morally conscionable to advocate the preservation of the greatest cause of murder, suffering, destruction, poverty, ignorance, and dysgenia, – even greater than the black plague – when there is no demonstrable need to do so other than to appeal to the baser elements of man?
What is the difference between marketing the dream state by saturation in endorphins by hacking man’s submission-to-the-pack instinct, and saturating those endorphins by the use of opium?
What is the difference between the British sale of opium to the chinese, and the state, academy, and church’s sale of the opium of endorphins to the west?
Why aren’t constantine and justinian, the middle eastern purveyors of the same thing to the west that the British were to the east?
What moral justification can you give for what appears to be nothing more than one of the greatest crimes, if not THE greatest crimes, in history: the invention of zoroastrianism-abrahamism? The use of conflation to overload reason as a counter-revolution AGAINST truth and reason?
THERE ISN’T ANY MORAL JUSTIFICATION FOR IT, IS THERE?
Source date (UTC): 2017-06-14 22:26:00 UTC
-
Gossip is a means of overloading the information system with opinions, bias, and
Gossip is a means of overloading the information system with opinions, bias, and falsehood. ie: Propaganda.
Source date (UTC): 2017-06-14 14:18:00 UTC
-
A WHOLE LOT OF WHAT YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND ABOUT PHILOSOPHY IN ONE SERIES OF DEF
A WHOLE LOT OF WHAT YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND ABOUT PHILOSOPHY IN ONE SERIES OF DEFINITIONS
Definitions:
Reasoning: the method comparing categories, relations, and values within the limits of our perception and cognition.
Identity: the production of categories, relations and values that eliminate conflation producing the possibility of comparison and choice.
Mathematics: the use of one to one correspondence between a unit of measure and a category as a measure of constant relations at scale independence, otherwise beyond the limits of perception and cognition. (units)
Logic: the use of categories, relations and values to test the internal consistency of verbal propositions. (sets)
Operationalism: (Recipes/Algorithms/Functions): The use of physically possible operations in order to produce names of categories, relations, and values that are externally correspondent, existentially possible, and sequentially possible. (existence)
Rational Choice: given a sequence of existentially possible operations, wherein each change in state caused by each operation provides an opportunity for choice, it is in the rational interest of the actor to make such a choice.
Morality (reciprocity): the test of reciprocity. given an opportunity to make a choice, one chooses that which does not violate the demand for reciprocity that preserves the incentive to cooperate and avoids providing an incentive to retaliate.
Full Accounting (scope): the test of full accounting and limits such that cherry picking and suggestion (full accounting), and overloading and fictionalism (limits) cannot be used for the purpose of deception.
Science: the production of instrumentation by which we can measure categories, relations and values beyond the limits of our perception and cognition, thereby reducing that which is beyond perception to that which is within perception, and comparable via reason.
Philosophy: an internally consistent set of categories, relations and values for the purpose of decidability within a domain, incorporating science, mathematics, logic, operations, rational choice, reciprocity, and full accounting.
Truth: an internally consistent set of categories, relations, and values, for the purpose of decidability independent of domain, incorporating science, mathematics, logic, operations, rational choice, reciprocity, and full accounting.
Source date (UTC): 2017-06-14 13:57:00 UTC
-
A QUESTION OF INSTITUTIONAL SEPARATION (serious question) 1) If the church can n
A QUESTION OF INSTITUTIONAL SEPARATION
(serious question)
1) If the church can no longer teach falsehoods, why do we need schools separate from the church? If the curriculum includes Sacredness, Piety, Mindfulness, Ritual, and Oath – all of which are necessary for education – why do we need church separate from schools? if schools can no longer teach falsehoods, why do we need the competition of the church? Why do we need separation of church and school?
(thinkers please)
Source date (UTC): 2017-06-14 11:24:00 UTC
-
Physical Property wasn’t enough. We need Acquisitionism (Psychology), Propertari
Physical Property wasn’t enough. We need Acquisitionism (Psychology), Propertarianism (Sociology), Testimonialism (Epistemology), and Sovereignty(Ethics). Then natural law was complete. And we could explain Markets in Everything (Politics), and Group Evolutionary Strategy(outgroup relations).
Source date (UTC): 2017-06-14 11:17:00 UTC
-
How about we require truth in all things? Instead of licensing falsehood in spee
How about we require truth in all things? Instead of licensing falsehood in speech, academy, church and state;
Source date (UTC): 2017-06-14 11:10:00 UTC
-
WHY DIDN’T WE PREVENT CANTOR’S INFINITIES? (Ghosts?) by Propertarian Frank The e
WHY DIDN’T WE PREVENT CANTOR’S INFINITIES? (Ghosts?)
by Propertarian Frank
The exact same argument we use to stop believing in ghosts should have prevented Cantor’s infinities. But it didn’t.
(1) People familiar with Diagonal Argument and understand it is epistemic cancer.
(2) People familiar with advanced Platonist trickery like the Diagonal Argument and buy it even though they avoid falling for Platonism in other domains.
(3) People that are unfamiliar with advanced Platonist trickery, but intuitively understand truth is ultimately about actionable reality.
(4) People that are unfamiliar with advanced Platonist trickery, and believe in primitive forms of Platonism (theism, dualism).
Type (1) people will get testimonialism immediately.
Type (2) people could be persuaded. Trick is to prompt them to explain what differentiates the type of reasoning Cantor uses from the type of reasoning that tries to determine how many angels can dance simultaneously on the head of a pin. Induce cognitive dissonance by making explicit that wishful thinking is only possible when you use non-constructed names.
Type (3) people lack the information necessary to judge constructionism in philosophy of mathematics. Understanding Testimonialism requires a bare minimum of familiarity with philosophy of science. Absolute key concept is ‘decidability’. How does a type (3) person ascertain that he ‘gets’ operationalism? Through demonstration in something like the ‘line exercise’ from the other day. So, unfortunately, this type of person will miss the profundity and importance of operationalism. (Seeing the importance of operationalism was the reason I kept reading your corpus). We need to see concrete instances of a method failing so that we can eventually incorporate the solution to that failure into our epistemological method. Without the concretes, it’s impossible. Unfortunately, adding lessons on the Diagonal Argument, operationalism in psychology, instrumentalism and measurement in physics etc, would not be feasible methods for familiarizing the uninitiated. In other words, if you haven’t spent considerable time thinking about philosophy of science already, courses in Propertarianism will not convince you, because you lack the means of judging them.
Type (4) people are the hardest to persuade. You have to show them a domain in which Idealism fails, and prompt them to think about why they think it doesn’t fail in this other domain. If you can’t crush their Platonist belief in a certain domain (due to emotional blocks for instance), they can’t consistently apply operationalism. The fact that they haven’t already given up on simpler forms of Platonism indicates that they may have psychological blocks. Ergo, I think this type of person is the least amenable to learn Testimonialism through video lectures.
Source date (UTC): 2017-06-14 07:43:00 UTC
-
WHAT IS ARYANISM? (ARISTOCRATIC EGALITARIANISM) Aryanism: truth, heroism, sovere
WHAT IS ARYANISM? (ARISTOCRATIC EGALITARIANISM)
Aryanism: truth, heroism, sovereignty, techne (knowledge), and competitive excellence: dominion over man and nature and therefore transcendence. Once you have sovereignty, you must produce natural law of reciprocity (equality). Once you have natural law, you can cooperate only with markets. Including the market for defense: the militia. Once you have markets and natural law and truth telling and a militia, you are innovating as fast as humans can possibly achieve.
The consequence of markets in everything is the production of agency by the elimination of those who lack capacity of agency either through starvation, reproductive pressure, or extermination for their crimes.
Or more simply: that to speak the truth the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, despite the consequences to the existing dominance hierarchy, is an heroic act, and a very ‘expensive tax’ that we pay. And those who would retaliate against truthful speech betray the community and constitute a theft from the commons paid for by the high cost of truth telling by all of us.
Welcome to the Restoration.
Source date (UTC): 2017-06-13 18:39:00 UTC