WE ARE ALL COMPATIBLE, PRECISELY BECAUSE TRUTH IS TRUTH REGARDLESS OF OUR DIFFERENCES My specialty is in not erring. I don’t err often. For the simple reason that I work harder at not being wrong than almost anyone else. It’s my job. My emotional condition has no bearing on whether I speak the truth. Your technique of trying to say it does is just lying. Right? You’re engaging in deception? By trying to say the truth is other than the truth? By saying a normal distribution (bell curve) doesn’t exist whenever we describe the properties of any set of people? Again. It’s a cognitive bias (the lack of reason) that you’re demonstrating not reason. This is why men like me don’t debate with all but a minority of women like you. Because all but a minority of women like you are cognitively biases such that you cannot tell the difference between the TRUE, the GOOD, and the PREFERABLE. Because you are not in fact reasoning, but intuiting (feeling). Evolution made you the way you are so that you will defend your children no matter how bad they are for the family and tribe. It’s not an act of reason, but an instinct. What’s true is true whether you like it or not or whether it’s in your interests or not. I criticize arationality regardless of gender. That’s equality. No deceit allowed is equality. We are all compatible even if we are all different and unequal. it’s by advocating, cooperating and criticizing an conflicting that we calculate an evolutionary path through a universe largely hostile to life.
Theme: Truth
-
We Are All Compatible, Precisely Because Truth Is Truth Regardless of Our Differences
WE ARE ALL COMPATIBLE, PRECISELY BECAUSE TRUTH IS TRUTH REGARDLESS OF OUR DIFFERENCES My specialty is in not erring. I don’t err often. For the simple reason that I work harder at not being wrong than almost anyone else. It’s my job. My emotional condition has no bearing on whether I speak the truth. Your technique of trying to say it does is just lying. Right? You’re engaging in deception? By trying to say the truth is other than the truth? By saying a normal distribution (bell curve) doesn’t exist whenever we describe the properties of any set of people? Again. It’s a cognitive bias (the lack of reason) that you’re demonstrating not reason. This is why men like me don’t debate with all but a minority of women like you. Because all but a minority of women like you are cognitively biases such that you cannot tell the difference between the TRUE, the GOOD, and the PREFERABLE. Because you are not in fact reasoning, but intuiting (feeling). Evolution made you the way you are so that you will defend your children no matter how bad they are for the family and tribe. It’s not an act of reason, but an instinct. What’s true is true whether you like it or not or whether it’s in your interests or not. I criticize arationality regardless of gender. That’s equality. No deceit allowed is equality. We are all compatible even if we are all different and unequal. it’s by advocating, cooperating and criticizing an conflicting that we calculate an evolutionary path through a universe largely hostile to life.
-
WE ARE ALL COMPATIBLE, PRECISELY BECAUSE TRUTH IS TRUTH REGARDLESS OF OUR DIFFER
WE ARE ALL COMPATIBLE, PRECISELY BECAUSE TRUTH IS TRUTH REGARDLESS OF OUR DIFFERENCES
My specialty is in not erring. I don’t err often. For the simple reason that I work harder at not being wrong than almost anyone else. It’s my job.
My emotional condition has no bearing on whether I speak the truth. Your technique of trying to say it does is just lying. Right? You’re engaging in deception? By trying to say the truth is other than the truth? By saying a normal distribution (bell curve) doesn’t exist whenever we describe the properties of any set of people?
Again. It’s a cognitive bias (the lack of reason) that you’re demonstrating not reason. This is why men like me don’t debate with all but a minority of women like you. Because all but a minority of women like you are cognitively biases such that you cannot tell the difference between the TRUE, the GOOD, and the PREFERABLE. Because you are not in fact reasoning, but intuiting (feeling). Evolution made you the way you are so that you will defend your children no matter how bad they are for the family and tribe. It’s not an act of reason, but an instinct.
What’s true is true whether you like it or not or whether it’s in your interests or not. I criticize arationality regardless of gender. That’s equality. No deceit allowed is equality.
We are all compatible even if we are all different and unequal. it’s by advocating, cooperating and criticizing an conflicting that we calculate an evolutionary path through a universe largely hostile to life.
Source date (UTC): 2018-05-07 12:32:00 UTC
-
WISDOM LITERATURE PAST AND PRESENT: UNITS OF MEASUREMENT (very, very, important
WISDOM LITERATURE PAST AND PRESENT: UNITS OF MEASUREMENT
(very, very, important piece)
So, you know, how some fiction author creates a ‘universe’ and writes multiple books using that universe? Well, some authors write stories for other authors’ universes. And then publishers combine these stories into a compendium of short stories (anthologies)?
Paul (Saul of Tarsus) created a fantasy ‘universe’, just like Tolkien’s Middle Earth, Saberhagen’s Berserkers, Herbert’s Dune, Martin’s Song (Game of Thrones), Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes, the Arthurian Legends, or the greek and roman myths, or any of our original natural mythologies.
And a lot of other authors made up stories and attributed them to paul’s characters. (And whomever converted christian literature to islamic). Then the only debate was over which stories were included in the anthology (bible).
These stories consist of a rather small set of archetypal characters and archetypal plots, in a host of circumstances. And we use these characters, circumstances and plots as units of measurement for making decisions in the kaleidic complexity of real life. And in this sense we do need stories the same way we need logic, mathematics, weights and measures, norms and laws.
So these stories are no less important than any other system of measurement and standard of weights and measures. The differences is we do not see the consequences (and externalities) of mass use of these systems of measurement, and we are unable to correct these stories once we release them into the ‘wild’ (market).
In other words, while in most systems of measurement (what we call ‘weights and measures’) we can prohibit fraudulent systems of measure, and fraudulent exchanges. It’s not so much that we need to create standards (while we do for the purposes of commensurability, and as such for the prevention of fraud by incommensurability), it’s that we must ensure that our weights and measures are not fraudulent or harmful either directly, indirectly, or by externality.
In the ancient world, modernity was disrupting tribal hierarchies and traditions, and as such nearly all the underclass (vast majority of peoples) lost any hope of expressing dominance, success, or excellence. They lacked the genetics, agency, knowledge, and institutions to produce the confidence necessary to make decisions in a kaleidic universe undergoing dramatic change. They were losing their ability to calculate a feeling of success at whatever level of success or failure they were achieving.
And this is a serious problem, because evolution provided us with a set of cognitive biases to keep us pursuing lifespan even in the most hopeless of circumstances. And in order to prevent in the ancient world what middle age white men are doing today (committing suicide) young men are doing today (withdrawing from society), and women are doing today (forgoing children, then taking anti-depressants), they inverted the heroic legends of dominance with an heroic legend of submission and resistance – primarily resistance against the roman-greco-persian and less so egyptian empires: the people of fertile crescent slavery and impoverished pastoralists, against the people of armies, metal, reason, mathematics, farm, and trade.
In the recent era, we have seen Marxism and it’s suite of literatures, the continuation of Democratic literature (anti-aristocratic literature), Postmodern literature (all of these meaning the political literatures), and Science Fiction(our modern aryan mythos), Medieval fantasy, the War story, the Western, and the spy and detective story (the personal literatures). We have devolved into effeminate literatures (Japanese), and childish literatures (superheroes) – an attempt to create heroes without armies. And we have seen the active suppression of our ancestral literatures – of armies – as the democratic, marxist, and postmodern seek to erase them, just as the jewish, christian, and islamic sought to erase them in the ancient world – and all but succeeded.
Now, creating a conflationary wisdom literature that combines a fictional world, archetypal characters and plots, into stories and from stories into an anthology as a mythology( pseudohistory), that includes prescribed rules (pseudolaw), and a method of argument (pseudo rationalism), and justifies it by some sort of magic (pseudoscience), is to some degree necessary to create commensurability between the units of measurement (stories).
The difference is that the west began with sovereignty, and divided into specialized literatures: logic, mathematics, science, history, law, philosophy, literature, mythology – and all competed against each other using different terminologies and sometimes different languages (in english: german, french, latin, and greek). The chinese reacted to greek reason with confucian, dao, and eventually buddhism – a class based set of logics rather than a discipline base set of logics. The Persians reacted to greek reason and greek reason to persian, with a cult that slowly transformed the sky god into mithra. The semites reacted to greek reason by inverting every single dimension of the markets and creating a mandatory monopoly system of thought.
The west’s use of competing markets of measurements (stories) rather than chinese hierarchy of stories, or semitic authoritarian monopoly stories is a natural consequence of western sovereignty. However, while the western system can adapt to changes faster than all others – it can be defeated by Overloading (immigration, conversion, propaganda) precisely because the underlying system of measurement (truth, sovereignty, reciprocity, duty, markets) was never written down – only practiced out of habit in our traditional (pre urban) (indo-)european law.
Had this underlying system of weights measures and values (truth, sovereignty, reciprocity, duty, markets) been articulated, the market for disciplines (grammars and semantics) would have remained possible. The reason being that our aryan system of weights and measures and values, (truth, sovereignty, reciprocity, duty, markets) is purely via-negativa. It does not tell us what to do, only what we may not. As such each discipline may compete for what we should do, even though we prohibit discretion in what we may not do: violate truth, sovereignty, reciprocity, duty, markets.
And while our law contains implicitly a record of decisions using truth, sovereignty, reciprocity, duty, and markets, our law does not articulate the mandate for truth, sovereignty, reciprocity, duty, and markets.
So what I have tried to do for my people, and perhaps if they wish to use it, the rest of mankind, is to articulate those first principles in a formal logic, as a via negativa, so that those markets for stories (systems of measurement) may continue to compete via positiva, but so that we can prohibit stories (systems of measurement) that violate those first principles of formal logic that make the rapid adaptation and therefor rapid innovation, and therefore rapid wealth, of western aryan civilization possible.
In this way I seek to modify (amend, rewrite) our constitutions such that they make explicit these first principles in formal logic, and their objective and purpose as a via negativa commensurable system of decidability, across all competing grammars, as a defense against another abrahamic dark age that inverted those values, and the marxist-postmoder-feminist age that seeks through immigration, takeover of the academy, the media, and the state, to replace that system once again- and deliver us and mankind into another dark age like the jewish-christian-islamic, and the loss of another thousand years, and the suffering that is produced, by the inversion of the first principles of western (aryan) civilization.
The cost of this defense against the second abrahamic dark age is the criminalization of literatures that violate truth(scientific truth), sovereignty, reciprocity, duty, and markets.
In other words, we will be able to suppress invasion by fraudulent systems of measurement that seek to create monopolies by which we undermine and replace markets.
And the cost of persisting that prosperity is the upward redistribution of reproduction and the downward redistribution of compensation, in order to maintain a polity that is far more invulnerable to desirable monopoly frauds. And the reversal of underclass immigration and forced integration the purpose of which is to achieve through culture-cide and genocide that which could not be achieved by the veracity of their ideas.
Curt Doolittle
The Philosophy of Aristocracy: Nomocracy
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukraine
Source date (UTC): 2018-05-07 10:29:00 UTC
-
THE SCIENCE OF CHRISTIANITY (REALLY) —-“What is the overall message of the bib
THE SCIENCE OF CHRISTIANITY (REALLY)
—-“What is the overall message of the bible?”—
(“Salvation”)
It is:
“If you submit (abandon) your reason, and surrender (abandon) your will to the commands of an evil omnipotent and omniscient fictional character, and imitate the life of another very benevolent and charitable fictional character, that you will find salvation (be saved) in a non existent afterlife, after you die.”
Scientifically:
Now scientifically speaking, christianity is reducible to:
1) the eradication of hatred from the human heart.
2) the extension of kinship love to non-kin.
3) the extension of exhaustive forgiveness before punishment, imprisonment, enserfment, enslavement, death, or war.
And this turns out to be the optimum strategy for producing persistent high trust cooperation. It’s just counter intuitive since we evolved very aggressive altruistic punishment.
And functionally:
More than 1/3 if not 1/2 of people are lack the agency both internal and environmental, and or the intelligence, and or the resources to contrive a means of successfully competing in market civilization, when ones self worth and status are determined by by that success.
As such providing an alternative method by which people of limited agency, ability, and resources can develop virtuous behavior, and personal mindfulness, and therefore happiness with their self image, through merely extension of kinship love, forgiveness, and charity is a successful strategy. Moreover, the externalities produced in a market civilization by large numbers of these people constructs the trust necessary for prosperity in a market civilization.
And Politically:
Despite lacking agency, ability, knowledge, education, and resources, people are able to use ‘faith’ and the ‘christian strategy’ to defend against threats to their strategy, their self image, and the good they do to society, are impervious to corruption, to persuasion, to coercion, and to abandonment of that strategy (hence why intelligence agencies love to hire christians).
The problem is that there is an ever declining percentage of the population willing to use this strategy by faith, even if there is an ever expanding population willing to use this strategy if stated as scientifically as I have here.
So while a demand for ‘church’ remains, a demand for the primitivism of semitic underclasses, has been replaced by a demand for the advance reason of european middle classes.
The already devoted are irrelevant. It’s those who are not open to devotion that don’t need a religion of faith, but a religion of reason, that need mindfulness.
Source date (UTC): 2018-05-06 19:58:00 UTC
-
Um, technically speaking it’s Pilpul I have a problem with regardless of whether
Um, technically speaking it’s Pilpul I have a problem with regardless of whether it’s in religion, philosophy, traditional law, argumentative rationalism (Pseudo-rationalism), pseudoscience, propaganda, or any other form of falsehood prose.
The reason is that I understand that all deceptions are created by the same technique(s). And that just as the greeks invented reason on a scale previously impossible, the rabbis took the greek technique and invented lying on a scale previously impossible. And that this technique is extremely dangerous both in religious (christianity and islam) and pseudoscientific (marx,freud,boas, cantor, mises, rothbard), and pseudo rational (rousseauian , kantian, postmodern) forms.
So I want to prevent another abrahamic dark age whether created by christianity and islam in the past, or marxism, postmodernism and multiculturalism in the present.
Because we are extremely susceptible to these forms of lies.
Source date (UTC): 2018-05-06 18:52:00 UTC
-
The Overconfidence Of The Contemporary Populace
Usually people who want to debate aren’t knowledgeable enough, intelligent enough, or intellectually honest enough to bother with, but given a moderator I’ll try. —“Are Property Regimes Ponzi Schemes?”– Property isn’t a ponzi scheme (it’s not false) however it will (often) increasingly lead to the concentration of wealth, until it no longer can, unless certain safeguards are put in place (natural law). The reason for this concentration of wealth is that we tolerate financial rents today like we tolerated land rents of yesterday. The problem has been prohibiting rents. We can actually prevent rents today. But that means the price of such prevention is working while younger and older, direct redistribution of liquidity, the ending of consumer intersets, very strict nationalism to prevent immigration, and a requirement that women produce more than replacement rate children. So as always problems can be fixed if you’re a scientist, but not if you’re merely a rationalist, or a purveyor of moralistic fairy tales.
-
The Overconfidence Of The Contemporary Populace
Usually people who want to debate aren’t knowledgeable enough, intelligent enough, or intellectually honest enough to bother with, but given a moderator I’ll try. —“Are Property Regimes Ponzi Schemes?”– Property isn’t a ponzi scheme (it’s not false) however it will (often) increasingly lead to the concentration of wealth, until it no longer can, unless certain safeguards are put in place (natural law). The reason for this concentration of wealth is that we tolerate financial rents today like we tolerated land rents of yesterday. The problem has been prohibiting rents. We can actually prevent rents today. But that means the price of such prevention is working while younger and older, direct redistribution of liquidity, the ending of consumer intersets, very strict nationalism to prevent immigration, and a requirement that women produce more than replacement rate children. So as always problems can be fixed if you’re a scientist, but not if you’re merely a rationalist, or a purveyor of moralistic fairy tales.
-
The Work of The Creative Theorist
It is just as hard to deny allies the familiar safe grounds of self destruction than to move them to unfamiliar grounds of survival. Unfortunately the work of the creative theorist includes denying well intentioned fools of otherwise good character, refuge in the familiar but self destructive. In this way we move people into new choices as much by denying them defection as we do by presenting them with opportunities for persistence.
-
The Essential Difference
Aryanism = Truth, Tripartism and universal sovereignty. Christianity = Fiction, Equality and universal submission.