Theme: Truth

  • NO, WHAT THREATENS ISLAM IS LOW STATUS, TRUTH, RECIPROCITY, MARKETS, MERITOCRACY

    NO, WHAT THREATENS ISLAM IS LOW STATUS, TRUTH, RECIPROCITY, MARKETS, MERITOCRACY, AND EUGENICS THAT RESULT

    —“Nothing threatens Islamic extremists in the West more than a Christian identity that revolves around family, authentic values and principles. They love what the Left promotes: no genders, no identity, and total confusion. They use that as a vehicle to take over and gain power.”—Imam of Peace @Imamofpeace

    What threatens islam is low status, b/c the terms by which one finds value in the self(obedience), and pretense of value to others(conformity), and means of advocacy (lying) is destructive, vs the value of western rule of law, truth before face, real productivity for reputation.

    Islam tried to solve the problem of pervasive corrupt tribal paternity with an equality in ignorance, respect, obedience, and poverty regardless of productivity. This meant success by stealing (conquest) and taxing (trade), but a failure to develop food, law, truth, tech, trade.

    The result was an exhaustion of the accumulated genetic, resource, intellectual, cultural, artistic capital of every great civilization of the ancient world, as each successive gene pool collapsed under the weight of a massive, ignorant, illiterate, unproductive, underclass.

    When the European Age of Sail eliminated the ability to ‘free ride’ on world trade, keeping the rest of the world as backward as islam, the world circumvented the islamic world and let it fall into natural productivity without european agrarian (balkan) food, or world trade.

    The greatest casualty for the west was Iran, and the loss of the Persian people into the catastrophe of islam, instead of following the indian and european peoples into modernity, and prosperity. Unfortunately, islam was attracted to the false promise of Jewish marxism (again).

    And western attempts to prevent the expansion of marxism – as economically destructive to people as islam was genetically, intellectually, and culturally – into the islamic world have failed, and islamic fundamentalism has returned as the alternative to marxism – ….

    … with the same tactics: sell false comfort to the underclass, who will then recruit neighboring underclasses, and destroy western and indian civilization as islam has destroyed north african, egyptian, byzantine, levantine, persian, civilizations. But genetic decline within.

    The chinese, japanes, and koreans are fully aware of the cancer of the abrahamic religions of judaism to undermine, christianity to weaken, and islam to destroy. The west has converted christianity into a germanic folk religion and destroyed the political church.

    All that remains: copy the Chinese, buy putting a wall around islam and letting muslims either reform or starve, rather than, like cancer, consume the other peoples by continuing the process of destruction of heroism and excellence, truth and duty, law, and merit in production.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-27 16:52:00 UTC

  • You don’t need to Understand P-law, P-Logic, or P-Truth to understand Reciprocit

    You don’t need to Understand P-law, P-Logic, or P-Truth to understand Reciprocity with one another – including that reciprocity in speech we call ‘truthful speech’. There is no person worthy of existence that does not want reciprocity for himself or herself.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-27 16:28:20 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1188492638359642112

  • You know Eric, you want to restore innovation, as do I(we), but you do not want

    You know Eric, you want to restore innovation, as do I(we), but you do not want to restore the natural law of reciprocity, the markets that result, and the uncomfortable truth of the eugenic effects – which are the only necessary ingredient upon which innovation depends.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-27 16:26:00 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1188492049982590976

    Reply addressees: @EricRWeinstein

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1188489029626413056


    IN REPLY TO:

    @EricRWeinstein

    Insert “by almost any means necessary” in the above. Sorry!

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1188489029626413056

  • P’s the largest change since the empirical enlightenment and american constituti

    P’s the largest change since the empirical enlightenment and american constitution. It’s the completion of the aristotelian project. It’s not like you’re going to pick it up overnight. Just disambiguation, serialization, operationalization, and falsification is a difficult shift.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-27 16:08:56 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1188487754478477312

  • It’s the largest scope of work since the empirical enlightenment and american co

    It’s the largest scope of work since the empirical enlightenment and american constitution;and the completion of the aristotelian project. It’s not like you’re going to pick it up overnight.Disambiguation, serialization, operationalization, and falsification is a difficult shift.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-27 16:07:16 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1188487335949881345

    Reply addressees: @directdemocrac7 @Nalo_Nei @JohnMarkSays

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1188485561616666624


    IN REPLY TO:

    @directdemocrac7

    @Nalo_Nei @curtdoolittle @JohnMarkSays I’m subbed to John Mark on YT.
    He has a great channel.
    Some of Curt’s ideas seem pretty good, but I’m having trouble putting all the pieces together TBH…
    I.e. how it all works in practice…

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1188485561616666624

  • I KNOW WHAT BOTHERS YOU ABOUT MY WORK. —” I don’t propose a good, or a prefere

    I KNOW WHAT BOTHERS YOU ABOUT MY WORK.

    —“
    I don’t propose a good, or a preference. I state a truth, and I state it prosecutorially, as natural law, that is not open to choice or dispute…. https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=493393164590912&id=100017606988153


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-26 20:34:11 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1188192120034725888

  • Don’t need to. That understanding is easy to articulate. the problem is we like

    Don’t need to. That understanding is easy to articulate. the problem is we like to lie so much we deny it.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-26 16:54:16 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1188136776579371011

    Reply addressees: @EricLiford

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1188088438387597316


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1188088438387597316

  • I KNOW WHAT BOTHERS YOU ABOUT MY WORK. —” I don’t propose a good, or a prefere

    I KNOW WHAT BOTHERS YOU ABOUT MY WORK.

    —“

    I don’t propose a good, or a preference. I state a truth, and I state it prosecutorially, as natural law, that is not open to choice or dispute.

    Why? The Victorians civilized greek prose in continuation of their virtue signalling by overextension of christianity to justify their conquest.

    The marxists, feminist, postmodernists, and denialists took advantage of our kindness. They took advantage of our virtue signaling. Conservatives failed to resist them, Libertarians only resisted them in the economy, and science has only now falsified them. And they have sought to achieve by immigration and conflict

    I don’t make the same mistake.

    I don’t write appealing theology you want. I don’t write appeals empathically in moral philosophy to suggest. I don’t write empathic and rational appeals in secular philosophy to persuade.

    I write the law. The natural law. The only terms under which cooperation and compromise are preferable to conquest. I’m stating the only terms under which it is rational for us NOT to conquer, rule, tax, enserf, or enslave you, or worse.

    Europeans are done asking. They’re done tolerating. They’re done hoping. Science is proving us correct in human differences, just as it proved us correct in economics; just as it has proved us correct in politics.

    These are the terms of non conflict.

    And honestly, we are hoping you don’t accept them.

    You owe us 100M lives. I hope you are are ready to pay the debt.

    “—


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-26 16:34:00 UTC

  • I’ve noticed over time, that what grammar people use almost always tells you eve

    I’ve noticed over time, that what grammar people use almost always tells you everything about their argument. And that if they’re using GSRRM, it’s collectivist,and if it’s scientific it’s cooperativist. And I think it might be better to say GSRRM=Parasitism, and Cooperativist=Balanced, and Fascist-Elmination of all parasitism


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-26 11:49:00 UTC

  • CONVERTING KANT’S APRIORISM TO SCIENCE(TESTIMONY) A Priori: “independent of obse

    CONVERTING KANT’S APRIORISM TO SCIENCE(TESTIMONY)

    A Priori: “independent of observation.”

    There are three dimensions to a priori truth claims:
    i) Aprioricity vs A posteriori,
    ii)… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=492678057995756&id=100017606988153


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-25 19:15:49 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1187810011755503616