May 26, 2020, 11:28 PM
—“Curt sees everything in the context sexual gratification. It’s an interesting theory, but doesn’t explain why countless martyrs in the ancient world were voluntarily flayed alive, burned alive, eaten alive, etc., in the name of Christ. It doesn’t explain why children voluntarily died for Christ. It doesn’t explain why the barbarians, in a very short timeframe, put down their weapons and picked up crosses and scripture. Presumably, they didn’t have any problems with women.
It simply doesn’t provide an adequate explanation for the dramatic shift in the world resulting from Christ.”—Emil Suric
—“Curt Doolittle what’s your take on that?”—Skye Stewart
I think that’s silly. (Actually i think it’s a rationalization to defend a prior. And Emil is not a foolish person. He is a product of his culture. And like most, even some of the best, he cannot overcome it.)
I see everything:
1 – In context of acquisition.
2 – I understand how limited our agency (free will).
3 – I understand that the bias in our cognition has only three axis of variation, of which the physical differences in brain structure and chemical signaling between the sexes is most significant. (the others being developmental hierarchy and developmental degree).
4 – I understand that civilizations use strategies, myths, and grammars to defend them.
5 – And that people are largely ‘bots’ running that software on hardware with different biases.
6 – And it takes both a less biased brain and mind, and a tremendous amount of effort to free ourselves of those inheritances.
Most of my work if not all of it provides a uniform system of measurement to circumvent those biases, which producing the first complete language of science: testimony.
Martyrs were killed because:
(a) they would not demonstrate even token loyalty to the empire – instead disloyalty and treason.
(b) they were considered atheists (god deniers) and impious in an era where pleasing the gods was considered necessary.
(c) they were spreading a falsehood that tacitus correctly called a ‘mischievous superstition’.
(d) the religion they were spreading was a hatred of the human race, and of life and joy itself.
(e) the religion they were spreading put itself above reality and the state rather than a peerage to reality and the state.
(f) they were fomenting an underclass rebellion against the empire’s demonstrated benefits the majority valued with a false promise of supernatural benefits of a hostile minority.
(g) they were creating conflict between sects and forenting social unrest.
(h)they were reversing the aryan program of incremental domestication of the underclasses and the gradual earning of freedom, liberty, and sovereignty (privilege) creating peers in a majority “middle class” (propertied) civilization.
They were rightly considered anti social and treasonous.
Just as we rightly consider the ((())) marxists, postmodernists, feminists, hbd-denialists, and anti-traditionalists, ant-moralists, anti-martialists, anti-familists, and sexual deviants today as a means of undermining the aristocracy.
The romans were far too kind, have been far too kind during the middle ages, and just as we are far too kind today.
They should have exterminated them to the last man woman and child.
And in doing so saved europe from the dark ages.