(western thought obsessed with fallacy (error)rather than dishonesty)
The Definition of Abrahamism in Natural Law
In our Glossary of Natural Law “Abrahamism” refers to the argumentative technique of using Pilpul (via-positiva), and Critique (via-negativa) to construct sophisms (the argumentative equivalent of numerology and astrology) via use of loading, framing, suggestion, obscurantism, overloading, the Fictionalisms, appeals to reasonableness, and false promise, to create hazards.
All three Abrahamic Religions, Kantian philosophy, Marxist argument, and Postmodern thought all make use of this technique of argument, often stated as “Dialectic” but operationally consisting of Pilpul vs Critique.
Most of Propertarianism (the Natural Law of Reciprocity, The Law of Testimony) consists of attempts to prevent Abrahamic arguments and replace them with Testimonial (Ratio-Scientific-and-Operational) arguments so that Law (Constitutions) can be constructed strictly and logically and is not open to accidental, intentional, misinterpretation. Thus requiring legislatures reform a law rather than allow legislation from the Jurist’s bench – which is the means by which the US Constitution was undermined.
Propertarianism includes Testimonialism, the purpose of which is the suppression of deception and parasitism by rhetorical means.
The Constructive Definition of Abrahamism
Abrahamism: consists of False Promise, Pilpul (positive), Critique (negative), straw manning, and heaping of undue praise, to force you to appeal to your intuition rather than reason and evidence.
- Stating or Implying a False Promise, (escape from laws of nature)
- Without provision of Warranty, (skin in the game)
- For the purpose of Baiting into Moral Hazard, (failure)
- Where one can profit from others’ loss, by
- Free Riding,
- Socialization of Losses,
- Privatization of The Commons,
- Persuaded or Argued by “Pilpul” consisting of the
- Sophisms of:
- Conflation (!!)
- False Dichotomy
- False Equivalency
- Double Standards
- Cherry Picking
- and the Fictionslisms of:
- Supernaturalism, and
- Sophisms of:
- Appealing to:
- NAXALT (‘not all x are like that’)
- Optimisms or Pessimisms as Medians (outliers)
- Reasonableness (limiting to interpersonal)
- Morality (limiting to global)
- Face (Status, Reputation, Honor)
- Norms (what others do)
- Authority (scripture, law)
- Instead of:
- Truth or Falsehood
- Rationality vs irrationality (self interest)
- Reciprocity or Reciprocity
- Probability or Improbability
- Possibility or Impossibility
- And defended by “Critique”, consisting of:
- Heaping of Undue Praise on Straw Men (positive)
- Criticism by Straw Manning (negative), and
- Poisoning the Well (Polluting the Informational Commons)
- and GSRRM (denial, disapproval, ridicule, shaming, reputation destruction), consisting of:
- reputation Destruction
- and reputation destruction –
- distraction, and
- Instead of:
- True of False argument,
- Fully Informed Agreement or disagreement
- advancing a falsehood on one hand, and
- attacking the person rather than argument on the other.
- In order to obscure:
- stealing, to directly lie, cheat, steal, or
- baiting into hazards from which they can
- lie cheat and steal under cover of
- ambiguity and
- pretense of ignorance, and
- pretense of innocence for the harm done.
- lie cheat and steal under cover of
The Spectrum of
- False Promise,
- Without Warranty,
- Baiting into Moral Hazard
- Where one can profit from others’ loss
Origins of Abrahamism: The Gender Differences in Negotiating
The Genders differ in their competition, conflict and warfare strategy.
Males: Truth under threat of violence in the service of male solidarity in the preservation of the Tribe and Territory is the competitive strategy of males. Males fight for position in the hierarchy and end conflict with increases in loyalty to one another.
— vs —
Females: conformity under threat of reputation destruction in the service of female solidarity independent of Tribe and Territory is the competitive strategy of females. Females fight to destroy or kill without ending.
Abrahamism consists of the continuous advancement of the female means of conflict and war: undermining, deceit, and exhaustive relentless diligence in seizing every opportunity to do so. It is the ‘gatherer’ and ‘herd’ strategy of continuous harm. Men tend not to do this, in-group. Instead men use threats of violence and organized violence.
What I do, what we Propertarians do, is teach how to identify, understand, and defeat these feminine arguments – arguments that because of our high trust genetics, traditions, institutions, and civilization, we are disproportionately vulnerable to.
Common Properties of Abrahamism
- 1) Restatement of Myth as History
- 2) Projection of Traditional Wisdom as Authoritarian Law
- 3) Dependence upon Supernaturalism (“Magic”, “Miracle”)
- 4) Monopoly (exclusivity) and threat of loss for non compliance.
- 5) False Promise of Impossible (supernatural, natural) Reward for Compliance.
- 6) Use of Pilpul and Critique In Defense of the falsehoods.
- 7) Castes of Priests with status, power, and economic incentives to perpetuate the falsehoods.
- 8) Secret Knowledge, or Prohibition on Competing Knowledge, or Denial of contradictory knowledge.
- 9) Costs of Entry:
- Oath to a falsehood. (prayer)
- Payment of Ritualistic costs to the falsehood. (rituals)
- Payment of ‘donations’ (fees) to the priesthood (tithes)
Revolt: Abrahamism is a Grammar of Dysgenia and Deceit
The Revolt Against The Invention of Truth Duty Aristocracy Meritocracy And Eugenic Evolution.
…. Pilpul(positiva) + Critique(negativa) =
…. …. …. …. (undermining, loading, framing, overloading, suggestion,
…. …. …. …. obscurantism, propagandism, fictionalisms) =
….. …. Gossip (undermining) =
…. …. …. Female Group Strategy of Undermining Alphas =
…. …. …. …. Female reproductive strategy of advancing her high-investment
…. …. …. …. …. …. …. offspring regardless of merit =
…. …. …. …. …. Dysgenic Parasitism.
The Abrahamic Strategy
- Abrahamism = authoritarianism (submission) + Pilpul + Critique + fictionalism.
- Gods serve as a system of calculation (decidability) by most primitive means (anthropic comparison).
- Abrahamism is Incompatible with Western Reason
- Universalism, Monopoly, authority, justificationism (lying), polymoralism, fictionalism, deceit and parasitism;
…are very different from…:
- Nationalism, Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Markets, falsification, reciprocity, warranty, and truth, and productivity.
- Universalism, Monopoly, authority, justificationism (lying), polymoralism, fictionalism, deceit and parasitism;
The Technique of Pilpul
Their technique of Pilpul: They use an element of truth to create a false dichotomy and therefore frame the question by suggestion, and obscure the solution due to anchoring.
- We are always vulnerable to anchoring.
- Because we are vulnerable to anchoring we are vulnerable to framing.
- Because we are vulnerable to framing we are vulnerable to suggestion and obscurantism.
- Because we are vulnerable to suggestion and obscurantism we are vulnerable to influence.
If we are provided for incentive to justify that influence we can be controlled – by Blocking our Opportunity and Motivation for seeking truth.
The three abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) all produce recursive ignorance due to BLOCKING our search for truth.
This is how PILPUL is used to deceive, and why math, logic, science, economics, law and testimonial truth are such an important defense.
A lie (incentive), a half truth, a False dichotomy (choice).
Low trust people simply don’t go beyond the tangible. High trust people do. Our asset of high trust in constructing the commons which produce such outsized returns compared to other peoples. But our trust( suspension of disbelief), and vulnerability to anchoring, suggestion, and obscurantism make our ordinary folk easily deceived, manipulated, controlled, and preyed upon.
Critique Technique: “GSRRM”
Undermining and Disapproval rather than Truth and Reason;
The Female (herd) competitive strategy by circumventing argument by use of undermining, poisoning the well, reputation destruction by use of (G)ossiping (S)haming, (R)allying, (R)idicule, (M)oralizing, (P)sychologizing, (U)ndermining, (R)eputation destruction. and solving for (F)ace or consent – instead of Male (pack) strategy by factual argument solving for truth regardless of face or consent. In other words female “feels” using rejection or approval vs male “reals” of truth of falsehood.
… … (M)oralizing,
… … … (P)sychologizing,
… … … … (R)idiculing
… … … … … (R)allying
… … … … … … (G)ossiping
… … … … … … … (P)ropagandizing
… … … … … … … … (U)ndermining,
… … … … … … … … … (R)eputation destruction.
… … and solving for…
… … … … … … … … … … (F)ace, approval, or consent – instead of truth.
Men generally make an argument and let the argument do it work. We use shaming if necessary in response to GSRM. Whereas the feminine cognitive strategy is to rely entirely on GSRM as a means of denying or suppressing the argument rather than refuting it.
GSRRM (leftist, Postmodern, Feminine) Speech
Leftist speech is not protected speech. It is always either:
Fraud – promising benefits that will never be delivered at costs that will never be disclosed.
Slander(oral) and Liber(written) Defamation – malicious lies designed to slur, marginalize, and dehumanize rivals or critics.
Obscenity – Transgression of taboos for the purpose of subversion, demoralization, and/or parasitic profit.
Blasphemy – Attacking the sacred for the purpose of subversion, undermining, the destruction of intergenerational wisdom, and the erosion of necessary and helpful moral rules.
False Alarm : relentlessly fear-mongering and sensationalizing imaginary threats as a means of obscuring/justifying real ones.
Abrahamism : False Promise
Pilpul (Sophism) – Overloading. Misdirecting. Obscuring. Disputation by sheer volume and variety of fallacy to overwhelm resistance to false and pernicious conclusions. Can include sophism, pseudoscience, fiction, fictionalisms, or supernaturalists.
Critique (Undermining) – Criticism of a straw man to undermine without proposing an alternative or superior solution open to equal analysis and criticism. Includes loading, framing, obscuring, suggesting, fictionalizing, denying, deceiving and outright lying.
Heaping of Undue Praise – Advancing a hero in order to create an appeal to authority rather than advancing an argument to test whether it survives application to the context.
Propaganda – narrative manufacturer by sheer repetition to fill the “marketplace of ideas” with bullshit congenial to the gatekeepers who control the broadcast chanels and media.
Psychoanalysis (Psychologising) – pseudo-scientifically pathologizing legitimate disagreement as a means of obtaining and exercising social control and marginalizing and silencing dissenting voices and views.
Feminine Coercion – Rallying, shaming, gossip, disapproval, moralizing, mockery, ridicule, nagging, scolding, and character assassination to raise the emotional and social cost of disagreement and dissent without addressing their causes.
Or some combination of these and other categories of parasitic, deceptive, and destructive speech.
History Of GSRRM
In western history GSRM was largely illegal or punishable by direct violence between men. And laws against “scolds” -women’s gossiping and undermining – were enforced to keep the peace. During the democratic and marxist and postmodern movements as women demanded political power, they undermined these laws of the duel, libel, slander, and scolding, under the pretense of free speech – rather than free truthful factual speech (testimony). Marxism, Postmodernism, and feminism consist largely of sophism pseudoscience and denialism defended by GSRM.
GSRM, like outright denial, is one of the means of dishonesty that avoids argument, whereas dishonestly constructing argumentative deception is done by Loading Framing Obscuring Cherry Picking, Fictionalizing, Sophisms, and the Fictionalisms of idealism, supernaturalism, and pseudoscience.
The Evolution of The Art of Lying:
- Abrahamism v1: Judaism against Babylon’s Aristocracy
- Abrahamism v2: Christianity against Western Aristocracy.
- Abrahamism v3: Islam against the ancient world’s Aristocracy
- Abrahamism v4: Marxism against the modern world’s Aristocracy.
- Abrahamism v5: French Postmodernism against the current world’s Aristocracy.
- Abrahamism v6: Islamism against the entire world’s Aristocracy.
[ graphic goes here]
This is why the abrahamic (jewish in particular, or semitic in general) means of countering greco-roman-european argument by using false promise, baiting into hazard, pilpul (sophism), and critique (undermining) is so effective: it is how our females talk to us, and because of our high trust, we are either genetically or culturally vulnerable to it – where other lower trust people are not. And we are easily undermined politically and academically because our females naturally find greater ‘affinity’ with semitic non-argument (religion, postmodernism, feminism, denialism) than with european reason science truth testimony.
- Male European – Truth over Face, Regardless of cost.
- Male everywhere else – some degree of face over truth.
- Female everywhere – nearly universal face over truth.
Yet it is truth over face that is the reason for the ‘western miracle’ – why the rest is so different from the rest.
Hence why christians are the vulnerability of western civilization: their religion was developed to obtain the attention of women, and to appeal to GSRM. The religion is stated and argued with false promise(‘salvation’), baiting into hazard (cultural vulnerability to conquest), using pilpul (excuse making) and critique (straw manning), and the fictionalism of supernaturalism.
Judaism to undermine, Christianity to weaken, and islam to destroy.
The middle east uses the female reproductive strategy and the far east and the west use the male reproductive strategy, with the far east using face over truth to defend hierarchy and the west using truth before face to defend the market of the peerage. And the middle east today just as in the age of the greeks, just lying and shaming all truth without end.
The world is not complicated. It is our lies that make it seem so.
All Critique Is “Lying” – and Here Is Why
1 – Either we are engaged in
… … productive,
… … fully informed(truthful),
… … warrantied (skin in the game),
… … voluntary transfers (exchanges),
… … free of imposition of costs upon the demonstrated investments of others by externality,
… … limited to our ability to perform restitution (reversal),
.. or we are not.
2 – Every forced transfer is a lost opportunity for exchange – even if an exchange of good, for norm (behavior).
3 – In other words, all demands for goods independent of exchange are simply use of threats of disassociation (boycott) as a means of extraction (rent seeking).
Ignorance Is Not Excuse for Failures of Due Diligence
The fact that one has habituated a means of deception (continental conflationary philosophy and literature) rather than habituated a means of transparency (anglo analytic deflation – ie: science and law) and therefore argues for the profoundly dishonest and immoral out of cultural habit, has nothing to do with whether one INTENDS to argue immorally – it just means one’s CULTURE is endemically immoral. Which is just an argument to ignorance. It doesn’t absolve you from the failure of due diligence for the consequences of your display, speech, or action.
Reciprocity (morality) requires one do nothing (by display, word, or deed) that one cannot perform restitution for – else one is externalizing risk upon others (conducting a theft). And some costs are impossible to perform restitution for. For example, what has been the cost of the pseudosciences and pseudo-rationalisms and pseudo-histories, of the French (Derrida, Rorty, et all) and Ashkenazi (Marx, Boas, Freud, Cantor, Adorno (et all), Mises, Rothbard, Leo Strauss) – all failures of due diligence against the immorality of their habits (cultural assumptions and argumentative grammar)?
If you cannot make an operational argument in economics and politics ( that means a procedural model) that tests your theory then you do not know of what you speak. These people made Rousseauian (false) assumptions of human nature, and economic possibility – most notably because Rousseau was a profoundly immoral (irreciprocal) man, and the entirety of the french and ashkenazi, and some of the german intelligentsia, produce a reactionary movement misrepresented as ‘the enlightenment’, as always do people of armies, or of diaspora, seeking ‘liberty’ and thereby lacking the ‘sovereignty’ of the scandinavian sea-farers. They attempted to return the church’s demands upon others (appeals to the common good) counter to the british (anglo empirical) intellectual revolution (markets in everything.)
In law, (conflict resolution by tests of reciprocity), and in war (conflcit prevention by tests of reciprocity), we do not make excuses for ignorance – ignorance and indiscipline (failure of due diligence) are just means of reducing costs and externalizing risk upon others. That is what these people did. They were liberated (no thanks to them) by the atlantic transport, agrarian, and industrial revolutions and made arguments that they were ‘kept down’, and politically liberated, rather than that they sexual, social, and political market value, and that with increased productivity they could not consume vastly more of everything, and create a little market value despite their lower previous market value.
Grammars of Truth and Deceit
Argument in the broadest sense (colloquial persuasion) is a technology like any other, consisting of a hierarchy of grammars (rules of continuous disambiguation covering the spectrum from sounds through sentences), from the intuitionistic logics through mathematics, physics, contract, testimony, fiction, and the fictionalisms (‘mythologies) through the deceits.
Those grammars are either deflationary, commensurable, and testable, or they are not – and instead, like all fictions, operate by suggestion using selection, obscurantism, loading, framing, overloading. And they all make use of the trust (free association) we place in one another when listening (opening ourselves to suggestion for the purpose of communication).
So one can create or criticize a model in deflationary prose, or one can create or criticize a fictionalism in conflationary (selected, obscurant, loaded, framed, overloaded) prose.
That technique we call ‘critique’ is simply the modern version of ‘pilpul’ (Religious interpretation, numerology, astrology) which seeks to criticize (straw man) some solution without creating a testable model open to transparent comprehension, and thereby taking advantage of the fact that in that overloaded state you will (the human mind must) appeal to intuition by free association. In other words, you will substitute whatever you think and feel, thereby creating a sense of agreement on critique without agreement on MODEL (actions, reciprocity, and consequences.)
That is a very technical means of saying that ALL CRITIQUE IS LYING BY SUGGESTION. Either you can propose a complete alternative model or you can’t.
(Think on that one a bit and be justifiably horrified.)
The Grammars of Truth and Deceit
Grammar (rules) or A Grammar (book) consists of:
- Rules of continuous recursive disambiguation (speech transactions)
- governing the composition(organization) of words, phases, and clauses,
- traditionally divided into:
- Phonology (systems sounds),
- Morphology (structure of words, parts of words, relations between words, and intonation, stress, influence of context),
- Syntax ( the structure – especially meaning word order – of sentences),
- Punctuation using Symbols to separate and clarify the meaning of a text, or, to speak with the Annunciation, Inflection, Tone, Volume, and Pause to separate and clarify the meaning of speech.
- Semantics (meaning) and
- Pragmatics (context),
- often complemented by linguistics:
- Phonetics (the human production of sounds),
The Logics are further constrained. We all know about mathematics (the constant relations between positional names.) And some of us know the logics (the test of constant relations between statements). And some of us know the formal logics ( general rules of constant relations in various (disambiguated) dimensions.
So, for example in:
Geometry and Calculus
But the problem is more complicated when we are discussing
(a) Rational Choice (Incentives)
(b) Reciprocity (reciprocal incentives, voluntary transfers)
(c) Human Actions (possible sequences of action)
However, “Grammar” in Propertarianism, also includes the transformation of different Speech Paradigms into a set of Operational Logics.
Formal Operational Logic vs Formal Set Logics
So we refer to Formal Logic or Formal Set Logic from the interpretation of algebra, text, and scripture (and tea leaves, astrology, and entrails), versus Formal Operational Logic of a sequence of objectively testable human operations, either physical (body), rational(incentive), or logical (cognitive).
That Formal Operational Logic includes:
- The Scope (Dimensions) of Pragmatics.
- The Scope (Dimensions) of Semantics.
- The scope of Syntax (demands requirements for a sentence – meaning transaction) within the scope of those Pragmatics and Semantics
- The Scope (set) of the Operators possible within those Pragmatic and Semantic limitations.
- The Necessary Function of that set of Pragmatics, Semantics, Syntax, and Operators as:
- disambiguation (eliminate ambiguity to falsify and warranty)
ambiguation ( increase opportunity for meaning to assist in communication )
- disambiguation (eliminate ambiguity to falsify and warranty)
- The relationship between:
- The Necessary Function in the given Pragmatics, Semantics and Operators APPLIED,
The Pragmatics, Semantics and Operators sufficient for due diligence against error, bias, and deceit that those subject DEMANDS.
- The Necessary Function in the given Pragmatics, Semantics and Operators APPLIED,
So a Traditional Grammar is a ‘Weak’ or “Loose” logic of speech across all Paradigms of Speech, and a Propertarian Grammar is a ‘Strong’ logic of speech for each of those Paradigms of Speech.
We provide a Periodic Table of Speech (Poster really) listing all of the Grammars.
NOTE: Find our Periodic Table of Speech Here <— (Add Link)
However, here is a very small subset that’s relevant to our discussion:
1) |TRUTHFUL GRAMMARS OF EXPRESSION| Math, Logic, Science, Operations(protocols, processes, recipes), Economics (money, banking, finance, accounting), Law (Natural), History, Literature (including poetry > essay > fiction > mythology).
2) |DECEIT| failure of due diligence > ignorance > error > bias > wishful thinking > loading > framing > suggestion > obscurantism > fictionalism > denialism > and deceit.
3) |FICTIONALISMS| Deceit > Sophism > Pseudoscience > Supernaturalism.
4) |AVOIDANCE and UNDERMINING (GSRRM)| Disapproval > shaming > moralizing > psychologizing > ridicule >rallying > gossiping > undermining > and reputation-destruction.
5) |ABRAHAMIC GRAMMARS|: Disapproval as substitute for argument > False Promise > Pilpul (sophism) > Critique (undermining) > Heaping of Undue Praise, Straw Man Criticism as a Vehicle for Disapproval > Reputation Destruction > Failure to Supply a Competing alternative capable of surviving same criticisms > Authoritarian Conformity,
6) |ABRAHAMIC EVOLUTION| Abrahamism > (Adding Platonism) > Judaism > Christianity > Islam > (Dark Age Theology) > Marxism > Postmodernism > Feminism > Denialism: “APMPFD”.
7) |LONG CYCLE OF HISTORY|
Male Evolutionary Territorial:
Demonstrated by: Fast Scientific Western > Medium Rational Eastern > Slow Narrative Indian Indian
Female Devolutionary Migratory:
Demonstrated by: Supernatural Semitic counter-evolutionary strategy.
Africa, Americas and Pacifica Lagging, and (it appears) Australian-NZ regressing.
All Critique Is Lying
Critique is simply the technology invented in the Levant for the purpose of ‘selling’ the monotheisms to the underclasses as a revolt against the great civilizations of the ancient world – but this time in pseudo-scientific (ashkenazi marxist) and pseudo-rational (french post modern ) prose.
We are all gene machines. Hence why the language of science(due diligence), and natural law (reciprocity) are so important to speech, and why literature and literary argument are always and everywhere – like most of intellectual history – attempts at some form of fraud.
Abrahamism is hostile to civilization.
Which is why Jews cannot produce trust, capital, and hold territory and have been repeatedly pushed to near extermination, muslims could use surplus population to conquer, destroy, and rule, but immediately declined into mysticism, dysgenia, tribalism, and poverty, and christianity drove the west into ignorance and poverty from which they only escaped by the reintroduction of scandinavian pagans, germanic law, and greek thought.
The lessons of the Byzantines that were used to canonize christianity are very simple:
1 – Extirpate hatred from the human heart.
2 – Extend kinship love to non kin (Exhaust interpersonal Forgiveness)
3 – Devote time effort and wealth to interpersonal charity.
4 – Use political intolerance for those who do otherwise. Personal tolerance political intolerance.
And by the logic and the science we know that this is the optimum prisoner’s dilemma strategy that overcomes both incentive for cheating and incentive for altruistic punishment, and as such, it produces maximum possibility for integration and cooperation.
There is nothing else to be learned. Nothing. ZERO.
Those Who Would Defend the Sophism of Postmodernism with The Sophism of Critique
“The Sophism of Critique.”
It does not matter ‘what you intend’ or ‘what you mean’ it matters what changes in state occur (consequences) because of your display word and deed (actions and consequences).
If I speak in poetry (loading/framing), or code (symbolism/parsimony), or science (existential description), I can say the same things in different terms and frames. If I act according to the instructions or consequences of deductions and inferences therein, my actions are what are caused by the prose.
The Grammar of Postmodernism (semantic content and limits; its’ consistency, correspondence, non-operational prose; coherence; its rules of continuously recursive disambiguation) are simply a continuation of the evolution of the Sophisms of:
Pilpul (justification,obscurantism), Critique (Ridicule, Straw Manning), Suggestion(appeal to cognitive bias), Overloading (of cognition), and Obscurantism (untestability);
… used in:
The Abrahamic (and other) religions >
… Platonism (Idealism/Obscuring one’s ignorance) >
… … Rabbinical Judgement (Pilpul/Justification) >
… … … Christian Justificationism (theology) >
… … … … Rousseauian (French) Moralism (Justification) >
… … … … … Kantian Rationalism (Pilpul/Justification) >
… … … … … … Jewish Pseudoscience and Sophism – Marxist/Freudian/Boasian/Frankfurt Pseudoscience, Justification, and Critique > and
… … … … … … … French Jewish Postmodernism (Critique).
These Grammars are all forms of sophistry. What they are not is math(measurement), logic (internal consistency), empirical (externally correspondent), scientific(warranty of due diligence), economics(rationality), law (reciprocity), and history(evidence), that is commensurable and testable because it is consistent, correspondent, operationally stated (existentially possible), consisting of rational choice, limited to reciprocal actions, coherent, fully accounted (against cherry picking, and complete in scope (against cherry picking).
Critique Consists in: disapproval, shaming, ridicule, gossiping, rallying, straw manning, reputation destruction, of enemies, and heaping of undue praise of allies, and a failure to address the truth or falsehood of the central arguments, and their outcomes, rather than proposing an alternative, superior, competitively superior, solution that is actionable, and produces superior outcomes and externalities.
Peterson cannot say in his venues anything sufficiently complex that he would lose the relatively mainstream audience. I can. Because it’s my specialty to debunk sophism (psedorationalism: pilpul, critique, loading/framing/overloading/obscurantism), supernaturalism, pseudoscience, and deceit.
Postmodernism is yet another sophism in the long line of deceits that evolved through history to compete with testimonial truth in law, and the evolution of the tools by which we limit one another to that which is testifiable, rational, and reciprocal, and therefore a truth candidate.
In other words, Postmodernism is just another cult-of-lies. Like Marxism before it. Like Rationalism before it. Like Theology Before it. Like Occult before it: a means of coercing the simple to conform to the demands of the Herd. Whereas speech that is testifiable, rational, reciprocal, and stated in operational (existentially possible) prose, like all the grammars of testimony (math, logic, empiricism, science, economics, law, and history) is and always has been, and always will be the means of DECIDING between differences of argument and opinion.
Postmodernism, Critique, and Pilpul: Hicks, Macdonald, and Doolittle
Understanding of Postmodernism spreads via Hicks. Critique by Macdonald. And I (Curt) do the history of Pilpul (sophism), Critique(gossip), the Fictionalisms (pseudoscience, pseudorationalism-sophism, and supernaturalism-occultism) and their use as vehicles for loading, framing, overloading, and suggestion for the purpose of generating moral hazard that can be profited from by fraud.
This includes Abrahamism, Marxism, Postmodernism, and Feminism. Now, we know what the left does now and how they do it – and we have produced a science out of testimony to stop it.
The only challenge left is extending the law of involuntary warranty from goods and services to speech – thereby limiting public speech to that which is warrantable, and restoring defamation. This will reverse the century and a half of the industrialization of lying.
We Know Quite Well What Postmodernism, Communism, and Abrahamism “are”: Lying.
In response to a criticism of Hicks’ Postmodernism:
—“Hicks …. When you don’t know what communism or postmodernism is.”— Anon
Which I’ll counter with “When you know exactly what Abrahamism, Communism, Postmodernism, and Feminism consist of: Counter-Revolutions Against Truth and Reason.”
The Three Grammars of Coercion:
There are only three means of coercion:
1 – Violence,
2 – Remuneration, and;
3 – Ostracization (Shaming/Endearing (Gossip)).
We have invented:
1 – Law and War for Violence.
2 – Markets and Corruption for Remuneration,
3 – and a host of grammars of persuasion for inclusion (insurance) versus ostracization (risk).
The Middle East vs The West
THEM (MIDDLE EAST) VS US (WEST) Face ..................vs Truth Reasonableness ........vs Decidability Pilpul ................vs Construction Critique ..............vs Falsification Authority .............vs Market Equality ..............vs Hierarchy Proportionality .......vs Reciprocity Herd ..................vs Pack. Feminine ..............vs Masculine
The Law of Speech
1 – The only rational reason to cooperate is because it is more rewarding than both non-cooperation AND predation.
2 – The only rational terms of cooperation that are more rewarding than non-cooperation and predation are those of reciprocity.
3 – Reciprocity is only possible because of truthful (fully informed), productive, warrantied, voluntary transfer, free of externality.
4 – The only grammars of truthful speech are the operational.
5 – If You do not speak in operational grammars then you do not speak truthfully, with warranty, particularly of warranty against externality.
6 – If you did not speak then we could merely avoid one another.
7 – And ergo, if you speak in critique (deceit, fraud, hazard) there is no reason to refrain from predation, since you have both voided boycott and cooperation.
Abrahamism, Communism, Postmodernism vs Technology, Markets, and Truth.
We see the evolution of law of western peoples:
1 – Sovereignty, (individualism is incorrect).
2 – Tort, and thang, court, senate,
3 – Martial Truth (Military ‘Reporting’), and the demand for speaking martial truth regardless of the consequences to the dominance (competency) hierarchy.
4 – Reason, rationalism, empiricism, and science as a consequence.
5 – Markets and competing intellectual disciplines rather than authority and mono-disciplines (ie: religion).
These choices are the consequences of mixed, metalworking, agrarian, cattle herders, requiring large well defended territories, that must self finance their military capability, because they lack any means of concentrating capital and taxation cheaply as did the irrigationist in the flood river valleys. They developed ‘Contractual Civilization’.
But we also see:
1 – Abrahamic fiction and supernaturalism of the pastoralists against the reason and realism of the agrarians and metallurgists;
2 – Pseudoscientific Communism as a restatement of Jewish separatism using class warfare; and;
3 – Postmodernism as a pseudo-rational restatement of marxism-communism using ethnic warfare.
1 – Superstition (Judaism, Christianity, Islamism)
…. evolved into ==>
2 – pseudoscience (w Jewish Critique)
… evolved into ==>
3 – pseudo rationalism (w Jewish Pilpul) (French > German > Jewish),
Each time increasing in rhetorical complexity but using the same techniques in each of the sophisms:
1 – Justification (Pilpul) and Poisoning the Well by Straw Man (Critique) then adding incremental techniques of:
… a) Fictionalism (Fictional History > Mythology),
… b) Supernaturalism,
… c) Pseudoscience, and;
… d) Pseudo Rationalism, and at present
… e) Simple Denialism. (Race, IQ, Homogeneity, Markets)
LYING BY SUGGESTION
It took me less than a year of relatively hard work to disassemble the techniques into grammars and enumerate and articulate all of them. But no matter the depth of analysis, lying by art of suggestion by overloading is still lying by abuse of the human process of continuous recursion in streams of memory producing what we call Meaning, and our suggestibility and suspension of disbelief in that state.
DEFENSE AGAINST FALSEHOOD
Realism, Reason, Calculation and Computation in all their forms, are defenses against this suggestion, loading, overloading by the use of correspondence and operational possibility, but take disciplined training and a minimum intellectual ability. Because we have a host of cognitive and moral (reproductive) biases that influence our choices without the discipline and training to prevent them from doing so.
RULES OF ORDER
The Ancient World civilizations each produced means of producing sufficient meaning (rules) for local preservation of cooperation:
Rome (Realism), Athens (Idealism(abstract)), Anatolian (lost), Babylon (Ideal Monotheism(supernatural)), Jerusalem (Authoritarian Reactionary Monotheism), Beka Valley (Authoritarian Expansionary Monotheism), Memphis (Pragmatic Ritual Polytheism), Indus (Pragmatic Narrative Polytheism), and Yellow River (Confucian Rationalism, hierarchy and harmony), Lao Tsu’s “balance and reasonableness”, and the utility of Buddhism in Ritual. With only the Japanese
THE GREAT CONFLICT OF HUMAN HISTORY
The homogeneous masculine eugenic pack of hunters and farmers were able to produce high trust commons, versus the heterogeneous feminine dysgenic universalist herd and herders were unable to produce high trust commons. (Cain and Able is the literary example of the Pastoralists hatred of the wealthier and urbanized Agrarians and Metalworkers).
But the question is not Athens vs Jerusalem, since both ideal democracy and supernatural universalism have been the greatest failures of all of the world civilizations, causing the destruction of every great ancient civilization and bringing about the Abrahamic Dark Age and it’s 750M dead; as well as the current 150 Year attempt at recreating another Abrahamic Dark Age — this time by Rousseau, Kant, Marx, Boas, Freud, Cantor, Adorno and co., and their 100M dead. Followed by the inventiveness of the French and their conspirators: Derrida, Foucault, Rorty et al. And the feminists that followed from them: each trying to produce a monopoly as a means of avoiding markets for cooperation, because they are unable to compete in those markets for pareto optimums, only nash equilibriums
In the ancient world, overextension of the empires to eliminate local frictions (taxes, rents) on trade, and profit from those efficiencies, produced travel, communication, trade, and infrastructure that made possible the jewish and christian invasion of the western empire; intentional fomenting of underclass resistance against the aristocratic civilization; and then Byzantine forcible conversion of the entirety of the population in order to end Reason, Law, and Aristocratic Rule.
The same technique is being used in this current era: invade, rebel, rally underclasses, import underclasses, and then seek power by numbers, using fairy tales desirable by those underclasses using the sophisms those underclasses are defenseless against, and which the Aristocracy tolerates or finds useful until the society has been destroyed by it.
Gobekli Tepe is the oldest Temple complex we find to date, and predates all other monolithic works by thousands of years. It is also just south of one of the world’s greatest hunting gardens teeming with life at the origin of the Euphrates – an Eden if there ever was one.
As far as we know, from there, at the nexus of the continents, near the center of trade between them, on the highways of the main rivers, the idea spread from the monoliths of the Atlantic peoples to the advanced stone of the egyptians.
It was an early and effective tool of social order. Most likely because it predicted seasons. Once those skills existed, the construction revolution bloomed.
THE WEST THAT THE REST REBELS AGAINST:
While Myth, Ritual, and Oath are necessary components of demand for neural economy (computational efficiency) in the production of rules of social order, how we communicate those rules, the group evolutionary strategies in those rules, and the outcomes that are produced as externality by those rules, are not only means of internal persistence, but external competition. Only one set of those rules produces reciprocally beneficial outcomes:
Western Truth, Duty, Reciprocity, Sovereignty, Reason, Science, Rule of Law, and Competitive Markets in Everything gave the world nearly everything that raised man out of ignorance, superstition, poverty, hard labor, starvation, disease, suffering, child mortality, early death, and the dangers of nature.
Western Civilization consists of The Continuous Calculation by Competitive Trial and Error, of our Ascent into the Gods we imagine. Western civilization was and until recently, was organized to continuously produce Agency at the cost of eugenia, whereas the middle civilizations were organized to limit agency in exchange for dysgenia.
Without Manorialism and Markets (East Asia, Europe) the dysgenia defeats all attempts at preservation of gains. It is not malthus’ numbers that cause dark ages. It is the end of eugenic limitations, let loose by unregulated innovations, that feed regression to the mean, and brought about the Bronze age, Iron Age, and the present Steel Age collapses.
That is why the enlightenment project failed to create either an aristocracy of everyone (british), a middle class of everyone (french and german), or an underclass of everyone (jewish and russian). In europe and east asia, after more than a thousand years of manorialism, war, disease, and extremely aggressive criminal prosecution, the consequential upward redistribution of reproduction led to distributions that allowed pareto organization of populations where the ratio of the middle and upper was sufficient to produce surpluses necessary to concentrate capital in multipliers (commons).
But both hindus (which have yet failed in their project), east asians (who succeeded under our pressures), and westerners (who succeeded because of our tradition of empirical law), had an advantage. The chinese conquered and colonized all border people. The Western Indo Europeans conquered (exterminated) and colonized all border people, and both europe and east asia produced homogenous eugenic, agrarian, metalsmithing societies.
Either one is eugenic or dysgenic. The red queen cannot be defeated by any other means. It takes 95 to follow simple instructions, 105 to repair a machine, 115 to learn on one’s own by reading, 120 to design a machine, 130+ to synthesize and communicate ideas, 140+ to invent new ideas. Everyone below that who cannot be put into labor that does not require continuous learning and adaptation.
This is social science. Everything else is religion.
European Truth vs Levantine Critique
Once you grasp that Cosmopolitan (Marxist-Socialist, Libertine, Neoconservative) Critique is an attempt at exclusionary authoritarianism – a modern restatement of the technique applied in Jewish argument and law – it becomes fairly obvious why the combination of (a) desire for obscurant arguments to be true, (b) emotional and intellectual investment in the truth of these obscurant arguments, and (c) hostility to refutation, are so pervasive: 1) psychological utility obtained from intuitional moral ‘righteousness’, 2)group unity in that moral conviction, and 3) ostracization of non-believers on the other, are precisely what ‘separatists’ require of a religion.
However, this modern set of religions is pseudo-scientific and pseudo-rational rather than legal, mystical and monotheistic in verbal construction. But the verbal construction is merely a technological advancement over monotheistic mythology, and jewish dual-ethics-law.
Northern europeans used truth, property and fighting as the binding commitment to one another, not belief. We used opportunity to join success in a hostile landscape, and they used threat of ostracization in among hostile tribes. We are all the product of our ancient geographies.
The strategies of the weak and small in number, versus the strong and small in number. Both Jewish and Germanic systems of thought evolved for use by small populations.
You will take notice which strategy leads to the construction of vast civilizations, technology, art, science and medicine, and what the other led to – near extermination.
Biological Origins: How Much Agency Do We Have?
Women and men demonstrably think very differently because of the difference between utility and truth, and between proportionality and reciprocity, and between dysgenia and eugenia. Why do we assume that this same cognitive bias is limited to gender rather than a balance between the genders, and that different groups don’t just demonstrate the male cognitive bias or the female cognitive bias?
Truth, Reciprocity, and Physical Violence that Ends when Ended, VERSUS Fraud, Proportionality, and Reputation Destruction that Never Ends until Destroyed.
Violence and Threats VERSUS Shaming, Ridicule, Gossip, Straw Manning, Rallying, and Reputation Destruction. Those are the Male versus female competitive strategies.
HERD <————–——> PACK
Utility <———————> Truth
Proportionality <—–—> Reciprocity
Equality <——————> Meritocracy
Dysgenia <—————–> Eugenia
r <—————————–> K
There is nothing in mankind that is complicated other than the lies we tell ourselves and others in order to achieve our desired ends.
Male and female reproductive strategies are at odds. And we have little agency in the choice of those strategies, at the individual, group, civilizational levels. Everything else is a consequence.
We are just another self-domesticating animal.
Some of us more successful at it than others.
Nothing more complex is at work.
The Solution to Kevin MacDonald’s Question of How and Why the Culture of Critique
1) Ashkenazis succeeded in reversal of gender bias in cognitive ability, while maintaining pastoral aggression. (We can easily measure this, and all data I’ve seen supports it.)
2) The result has been adoption of the female group social strategy,
3) … and the Female primate’s reproductive strategy for constraining alphas.
4) Female Humans seek systemic free riding and parasitism upon the commons (force the tribe to pay the cost of her offspring), control reproduction and leadership by undermining, and undermine using disapproval, shaming, ridicule, gossip, straw manning, heaping of undue praise, and spreading of undue criticism. They poison(pollute) the informational commons. All female behavior evolved to either control children at the lowest cost, obtain rents from men and the commons at lowest cost, and to increase the cost of her sex, affection, and political support (positive gossiping), by both scarcity of it an constant undermining in the absence of it. ( It’s a very simple algorithm really.)
5) So, Ashkenazi behavior and its damage to all host civilizations is just Instinct, common interest, common strategy, and not conspiracy: Neither women nor Ashkenazim know that they do. They both destroy unless their behaviors are severely limited. And the lesson is that males that cannot constrain their females (or their proxies) from undermining are too weak to rule (defend). Evolution does its work if men do not.
6) In other words: The Culture of Critique is just the Female Group Evolutionary Strategy making use of each innovation in “distribution” writing, traveling and preaching, printing, mass media, the priesthood and the academy, the entertainment industry and the media rallying women and the underclasses against the aristocracy (white males).
8) The Technological History is: Gossip > Monotheism(writing) > Pseudoscience(printing) > Industrialized Lying (major media)
7) This is the answer to MacDonald’s mystery. “They are all female” and act accordingly out of intuition to undermine at all opportunities, and to seek parasitic rents on the commons.
8) Our only mistake was ‘free speech’ rather than free warrantied (ie: truthful) speech. And our means of correction is quite simple. Extend the involuntary warranty we impose upon goods and services to that of speech (information); restore Defamation, (Libel, Slander), and physical retaliation for insult (fighting or ‘the judicial duel’);
We let loose the industrialization of lying under the premise of false speech under the assumption that our high trust people and our high trust habits were universal to man.
But they are not only unique to westerners, but unique to western males who aggressively police their honor (reputations) by the aggressive physical and legal suppression of falsehood, and the universal duty to do so.
White males are the human race’s aristocracy and developed aristocratic technological civilization using heroism, truth, sovereignty, reciprocity( empirical law of tort), markets in everything, including a market government between the classes, and markets for information in multiple disciplines.
Only the most competitive people can use meritocracy. The weak cannot. They will lose. Hence why no other civilization evolved what the west did. Truth, Testimony, Sovereignty, Natural Law of Reciprocity: Tort, Markets in everything as a consequence, and competition, reason, empiricism, and science to resolve differences between those markets.
So excellence and superiority are not a question. They’re measurable. We pay the high cost of truth and duty regardless of the cost to the signal hierarchy (dominance or competence hierarchy). We invented truth reason empiricism science, market civilization because only we could – because only the most competitive can succeed under meritocracy.
Understand the Enemy’s Genetic and Non-Rational Way of War
- GENETICS: The Female Way of War(Undermining)
- OLD WORLD: Abrahamism(Sophisms of false Promise, Pilpul and Critique)
- MODERN WORLD: Marxism (Pseudoscience) -> Postmodernism (Pseudorealism) -> Feminism (Denialism).
The Laws of Nature, and the Natural Law and the Organized application of science, law, and violence to force correspondence with them, in order to complete the transformation of man in to the immortal gods mastering nature that he imagined.
LAW OF WAR: You must fight wars on your terms, not the enemy’s but you must defeat the enemy on his terms not yours.
The Grammars of Deception and Addiction
the purpose of christianity is subjugation (submission)
the purpose of judaism is subjugation (submission).
the purpose of islam is subjugation (submission)
Abrahamic grammars of pilpul and critique are simply well constructed lies that through repeated use produce an addiction response, the same way that membership in (submission to) the pack or tribe produces an addiction response.
It’s a brilliant hack really.
Evil as hell.
The Abrahamic Method of Civilizational Destruction
I refer to Abrahamism as a group (judaism->undermining, christianity->submitting, islam->conquering) because analysis of any SINGLE sub-religion obscures the function of the group of abrahamic religions as a force of destruction.
Because those are the three stages of Abrahamism’s method of conquest of the aristocratic peoples by conversion and conquest of women and underclasses (those yet not ‘domesticated into agency’).
Stage 1 – Small external population (vanguard) undermines the main by straw man criticism and ridicule of the organization and its categories relations and values (Judaism – GOSSIP: Reputation Destruction)
Stage 2 – The population is undermined into submission by sale of a false promise – the verbal equivalent of a physical drug (Christianity – FRAUD: Selling a false promise ).
Stage 3 – The major external population conquers the submitted through raiding the trade routes, immigration, conversion, and conquest and population replacement. (islam – FORCE).
The consequence is the reversal of civilization of the hierarchical pack and the restoration of primitivism of the equalitarian herd.
Only the west subsaharan africa, and the far east were able to resist the regression due to rates of underclass reproduction and raiding on aristocracy (judaism), culture (christianity), population and economy (islam).
Understand the ancient enemy of mankind.
Fear of being Left Behind > False Promise > Sophistry > Critique > Pilpul > Supernatural.
Women are the most vulnerable because they evolved to be irrationally dependent upon the ‘cover’ of the herd. The underclass as well. the less capable classes out of utility. The middle class out of profit from it, and the upper class replaced by a priesthood (frauds) rather than a military (science).
IT IS A VERY SIMPLE PROCESS ONCE UNDERSTOOD.
European vs Semitic Weaponization of Gender Reproductive Strategies
EUROPEAN VS SEMITIC(MESOPOTAMIAN) WEAPONIZATION OF GENDER REPRODUCTIVE STRATEGIES
I would argue that just as IE weaponized the male reproductive and persuasive strategy (aristocracy, heroism, truth, duty, reciprocity, law of tort: the Trial of Achilles), the Semites weaponized the female reproductive and persuasive strategy and produced a counter-revolution (heroism of submission, suffering, fictionalism, proportionality, conformity: the trials of the jews, the trials of jesus). Iteratively producing an intellectual vanguard (rabbinical judaism), revolt (christianity), and conquest by raiding (islam) producing the Abrahamic Dark Ages.
And that Rousseau-Kant-Hegel are a rationalist counter-revolution against the anglo empiricists, and that Marx-Boaz-Freud-Cantor-Adorno (pseudoscience) produce a parallel counter revolution against the Scientific and Industrial Revolution of Darwin-Maxwell-Menger-Spencer-Nietzsche, and French POMO/Derrida-to-Rorty a reformation of Marx/Boaz/Freud produce a sophistry of denialism. All of which science is overthrowing at present, but not as fast as immigrants are being pumped into the system as replacement populations. (This analyzes the method of argument – or ‘grammars of argument’ – used by each party, rather than their claimed intentions.)
3) Mathematics-Mathematical Sophism/Innumeracy
Female Conflict Strategy: disapproval, shaming, ridicule, rallying, gossiping, straw manning, and reputation destruction without end (destruction).
Male Conflict Strategy: Argument, Threat, Violence, Conspiracy, ending with sortition (knowing one’s place) (oddly, males are actually closer and more loyal after fighting if ending in submission not ‘beating’.)
In general, females never stop. Males stop.
Abrahamic religions, continental rationalism, marxism-freudianism-feminism, french-anglo postmodernism rely on Pilpul (justificationary sophism), Critique (female conflict strategy of straw manning etc), producing relations inconstant, inconsistent, and incoherent with reality, but sufficient for pre-cognitive resistance at the cost of agency.
This is in competition with European literature, philosophy, history, economics, law, science, logic, and mathematics of relations correspondent consistent and coherent with reality, sufficient for the production agency, and as a consequence of continuous recursive innovation.
Abrahamism: The Source of Ignorance and Deceit
NOT JUST ISLAM BUT ABRAHAMISM: THE INFORMATION DISEASE: THE SOURCE OF IGNORANCE AND DECIET
Um. No. Islam’s destroyed almost all the works of the greeks and romans that they could find. And the reintroduction of greek and roman literature into europe occurred as the academics who were about to be persecuted by the muslims fled to the west for safety.
Islam, the Black Blague from China, are followed by communism, the mongol golden horde, as the greatest dealers of death. That means that between Abraham’s Judaism, Christianity, and Islamism, and Abraman’s new religion: the Cosmopolitianism of the Ashkenazi (Boaz, Marx, Freud, Cantor, Mises, the Frankfurt School, and) that Abrahamism is the most deadly plague every to face humanity. Even MORE SO than the black plague.
A disease of the mind – from ‘polluted minds’, and a disease of the body (‘from polluted lands’), together are more deadly than any combination of wars in history.
If we can struggle to end physical diseases, why do we not equally struggle to end informational diseases?
We can. Natural Law’s Testimonial Truth.
Abrahamism as The Manufacture of Ignorance: Informational Dysgenia
(ending freedom of false religion, along with ending false speech, of which religious dogma is a member.)
We tend to look at the demonstrated verbal superiority of the Ashkenazi, their long history of literacy, writing, law, hermeneutic interpretation, persuasion, and consequent success in occupations that require a combination of the estimation of others ability, the accumulation of textual information, and the exercise of persuasion (or coercion).
But we forget that their group success is dependent almost entirely on eugenic reproduction, in which the community contributes money to the Professor (Rabbi)so that he may bear extra children, and that the community outcasts members who cannot perform to standard, and reduces the rates of reproduction through poverty of those that cannot perform to standard. So just as the european nobility redistributed to the middle and upper classes, the production of the underclasses, the Ashkenazi, redistributed the production of the host peoples to their upper genetic classes. And both the Ashkenazi and Europeans then specialized in self transcendence by (beneficial) suppression of the reproduction of the underclasses, and the redirection of energies to the upper classes.
However, lets have a look at what Europeans (Aryans) achieved when they were literate, and what the Ashkenazi (and jews) accomplished when they were literate. Or lets ask it differently: what did Aryans and Jews accomplish when they practiced Abrahamism, versus before adoption and after departure from Abrahamism.
Or put another way, what have the Aryans and Jews accomplished under Aristotelianism (European Aryanism), versus what have they achieved under Abrahamism.
Moreover, what had the north africans, the Levantines, the Byzantines, and the Persians accomplished before Abrahamism? What did they accomplish under the long term effects of Abrahamism?
Lets bring in the Indians. What did the Dravidians (Hrappans) achieve before Supernatural Aryanism. What did they achieve after Supernatural Aryanism? What have they achieve since the introduction of Aristotelian Aryanism?
What did the Chinese achieve having never encountered Supernatural Aryanism, or Jewish Abrahamism?
What occurred when the Chinese resisted Aristotelian Aryanism? What occurred now that the Chinese finally adopted Aristotelian Aryanism?
Jews accomplished literally nothing despite being the most literate people in europe. Islamists accomplished nothing except the selective import of classical, persian, and indian thought, and upon consumption of those parts of those civilizations that they could consume, declined rapidly into even lower trust, even greater ignorance after 1200, even while invading europe for centuries to come, and spreading islamic ignorance from which spain and the southeast of europe seem challenged to recover from due to both cultural and genetic devolution.
We tend to make excuses by justifying intentions. But if we look at the historical record, Supernatural Aryanism was used to educate if not subjugate the ignorant, and let to the eradication of the Supernatural (Iranian) Aryans.
There is no greater crime than Abrahamism in human history. There is no greater source of ignorance and deceit than Abrahamism. No greater source of poverty. No more severe limitation transcendence.
There has been no greater source of murder, death, starvation, than the combination of Third Generation Judaism in the form of Marxism, Socialism and the first jewish empire: the Soviet Union, and the French reformation of it into Postmodernism and the necessary reactions to it including Fascism; Nor and the Second Generation of Arab Abrahamism(islam), in which the tactics of Arab expansion of Arabic Abrahamism (Islam) which relies on intellectual seduction of the underclasses and women, raiding of capital and trade, and decentralized warfare, to obtain sufficient power to conduct conventional warfare internally and externally, to impose Abrahamic Ignorance upon people, and devolve them into increasingly ignorant, and unintelligent peoples.
Just as freedom of speech must end, and be replaced by freedom of truthful speech. Freedom of religion must end, and be replaced by freedom of truthful religion.
That is the less on of history.
And all that prevents us from it, is abandoning our malinvestment in that branch of Abrahamism that perpetuated our dark age: Christianity, and its lies.
The only value of christian teaching is the extension of kinship love to non kin thereby increasing the investment cooperation by which we train ‘cheaters’ that it is better to cooperate morally than ‘cheat’.
A lesson we must understand, is not present in Judaism or Islam since both explicitly advocate asymmetrical polylogical ethics. (Lying, cheating, against non-members).
Truth is enough. Save the West. Save mankind.
End the unlimited, require limits.
Require the limit of truthfulness.
Require the limit of reciprocity
Require the limit of full accounting.
Deny the devolution of Abrahamism to our people, and man.
END IT FOREVER.
How Can We End Abrahamic Deceit Forever?
It’s quite simple. We already prohibit false speech in commerce, regarding products, services, and information. We Need only extend that demand from the MORE immediate goods, of products, services, and information, to that of the less immediate goods, services, and especially information.
Especially that information that while perhaps imaginable and preferable, purports to be possible, “good” or True that is neither possible, nor good, nor true.
HOW? INVOLUNTARY WARRANTY OF TESTS OF DUE DILIGENCE
1 – Categorical consistency
2 – Logical consistency
3 – Empirical consistency
4 – Operational consistency
5 – Rational consistency (incentives of a rational actor)
6 – Moral consistency (perfect reciprocity)
7 – Scope Consistency (Limits.)
8 – Full accounting of content and consequence within those limits.
White this might seem difficult to you at first blush, it is not something that courts will have difficulty with, and within a decade and certainly a generation, the body of law will evolve into common practice.
And all the culture along with it.
And all of mankind as a consequence.
End the invention of lying.
The Essence of Europeanism Over Abrahamism
—“Our ancestors took great men and turned them into Gods so that we could follow their example and rule ourselves. Abrahamism took God and anthropomorphized him so that we are better able to follow his commands and be ruled over.”— Andy Lunn
The middle east slaves and shepherds under the despots of the flood river valleys versus the european militia under chosen kings of the farmers and cattlemen of forest and plain.
NO MORE LIES. Europa Juris: the cult of non submission.
The Baltics Survived Abrahamism the Longest: And They Preserve Our History
—-“Based on historical data, it is estimated that there are around 2500 sacred natural sites in Estonia, the largest of them covering up to 100 hectares. Although rather exceptional among most of the technologically developed countries, in Estonia both the sacred natural sites and indigenous customs connected to them are still in use.
Therefore, the heritage that is connected to sacred natural sites has great importance to the national identity and environment of Estonians.
In collaboration between followers of Estonian native religion (Maausk) and governmental ministries, a national plan was prepared in 2008: “Sacred Natural Sites in Estonia: Study and Conservation 2008–2012″ which includes about 550 hiis (sacred groves). The National Plan on Sacred Natural Sites consists of a historical overview about sacred natural sites in Estonia, a current situation analysis, and several concrete conservation measures and instructions on how to apply them. The coordinating steering committee of the Conservation Plan consist of Environment, Agriculture, Internal Affairs and Education and Research ministries, National Heritage Board and MK. The University of Tartu is the implementing agency. Measures of the Conservation Plan are designed to handle natural sanctuaries and values connected to them in all aspects.
The Conservation Plan foresees creating a database which supports researching and managing natural sanctuaries. The database would consist of folkloric, archaeological, natural, historical and other data on sacred natural sites and provide information on the exact location, condition and form of ownership of each site.”—-
Abrahamism: Contending with And Rejecting Aristotle
All three major religions have had to confront the ideas of the great Greek philosopher, Aristotle. Averroes tried to integrate Aristotle with Islam. Maimonides tried to integrate Aristotle with Judaism. Aquinas tried to integrate Aristotle with Christianity. All necessarily failed. Rationality cannot be integrated with faith; nor reason with anti-reason; nor, in philosophy, fact with fantasy.
In conquering parts of the Byzantine Empire, Arabs encountered Greek thought. Muslim scholars studied and were fascinated by the writings of Aristotle and translated them into Arabic. Avicenna and Averroes were superlative Aristotle scholars. The Arabs learned the method of observation-based rationality and, in a true golden age, made superb contributions to medicine, astronomy, mathematics, literature, and other fields.
But it did not last. Due to the influence of Al-Ghazali and other reason-rejecting theologians, as well as a fundamentalism firmly entrenched in Islamic culture from its outset, faith ultimately crushed freedom of thought. Under orthodox Islam, the books of Avicenna, Averroes, and other great thinkers were burned in the 12th century. For eight hundred years since, the Islamic world has wallowed in a dark age.
When Christians reconquered from the Muslims large areas of Spain, they had access to the Islamic centers of learning in southern Spain. In the 12th century, Archbishop Raymund I of Toledo supported Catholic, Jewish, and Muslim scholars in another great translation movement, mirroring that of Baghdad three centuries earlier, but this time translating Greek masterpieces from Arabic into Latin, the language of European scholars. Predictably, as it had done centuries before, the Church resisted study of Greek philosophy. In 1210 a Church council at Paris forbade the reading of Aristotle’s ‘metaphysics and natural philosophy.
But this time the Church failed. Leading European minds, although still Catholic, were determined to gain a greater understanding of the natural world—and nobody, at that point in history, had attained a knowledge of nature equal to Aristotle’s.
In one of history’s great and tragic ironies, in the late Middle Ages Aristotle became the patron Greek philosopher of the Catholic Church. Many of that era’s thinkers, the Scholastics, were Christian Aristotelians.
But a critical and often overlooked point is that, in the centuries following Albertus Magnus and Thomas Aquinas, they too often rejected Aristotle’s method and clung to his specific conclusions as dogmatically as they did Biblical myths.
Aryan Myth, Abrahamism and The Beginning of The European Cultural Neurosis
The Indo-Europeans introduced not only practical techniques for the appropriation of the physical and biological world but also, above all, a new technique for organising socio-political and juridical relationships. It developed concepts such as ‘genos,’ ‘polis,’ and ‘imperium’—in their classical, medieval, or modern translations—and this constituted the difference that came to define Indo-European identity when confronted with other populations, cultures, and civilisations.
Such a way of organising society derived from a particular Weltanschauung. This world view, expressed in all fields of human activity, gave birth to a cosmogonic myth, around which Indo-European man understood, explained, and organised the universe and history. Its unique character is better perceived when contrasted with the mentality and culture of the Book of Genesis. The latter narrative, in its religious and secularised forms, continues to obsess contemporary Western civilisation.
What is most striking when studying Indo-European cosmogony is the solemn affirmation, found everywhere, of man’s primacy. Indo-European cosmogony places a ‘cosmic man’ at the ‘beginning’ of the current cycle of the world. It is from him that all things derive: gods, nature, living beings—and man himself as historical being. In the Indian world, the Rig Veda names him Purusha; his name is Ymir in the Edda; and, according to Tacitus, he was called Mannus among continental Germans. For the Vedic Indians, Purusha is the One through whom the universe begins (again). He is ‘naught but this universe, what has passed and what is yet to come.’ In the same fashion, Ymir is the undivided One: and by him the world is first organised. His own birth results from the meeting of fire and ice.
Kalidasa’s poem Kumarasambhava—one of the summits of Indian poetic reflection on the traditions of the Vedas—marvellously explains the allusions of the Indo-European cosmogonic myth. The opposition between Purusha (cosmic man) and Prakriti (which corresponds, approximately, to natura naturans) is revealing. Through being able to see without depending for this on Prakriti, Purusha is at the origin of the universe.
Since the universe is but indistinct chaos, devoid of any sense or significance, it is only by means of the outlook and word of cosmic man that the multitude of beings and things may emerge—including man fully realised as such. Purusha’s sacrifice is the Apollonian moment at which is affirmed the principium individuationis—‘cause of all that exists and shall exist’—until that time when the world will crumble: the Dionysian end that is also the condition of new beginning.
The universe does not derive its existence from something not part of it. It proceeds from the being of cosmic man: his body, his gaze, his word—and his consciousness. There is no opposition between two worlds—between created being and uncreated being. On the contrary, there is incessant conversion and consubstantiality between beings and things, between heaven and earth, between men and gods.
In such a Weltanschauung, the gods are themselves a quarter of the cosmic man. They are superior men in the Nietzschean sense; in a certain way they perpetuate the transfigured and transfiguring memory of the first ‘civilising heroes’: those who brought humankind from its precedent stage—and truly founded, by ordering it into three functions, human society, Indo-European society. These gods do not represent ‘Good’—neither do they represent ‘Evil.’ Insofar as they represent sublimated forms of the good and evil that coexist, as antagonists, within life itself, they are both good and evil. Hence, each presents an ambivalent aspect—a human aspect. This explains why mythical imagination tends to split personality: Mitra-Varuna, Jupiter-Dius Fidius, Odin/Wotan-Tyr, etc. In relation to present humankind, which they have instituted as such, these gods correspond indeed to their mythical ‘ancestors’ and ideal models. Legislators, inventors of social tradition, they remain present, are still active. However, they also remain subject to fatum: destined in a very human way to an ‘end.’
In brief, we are referring not to creating gods, but rather to creatures—human gods who are, nevertheless, organisers-orderers of the world: ancestral gods for current humankind; gods who are great in both good and evil and who place themselves beyond such notions. On Olympus, says Heraclitus, ‘the gods are immortal men, whereas men are mortal gods; our life is their death and our death their life.’
What are labelled ‘Indo-European people’ correspond to a society which came to the fore at the beginning of the Neolithic Age and whose cosmogonic myth was organised by a new perspective gained at this historical juncture—a perspective allowing reflection on the prior belief system and its revolutionary reinterpretation.
If belief in a ‘supreme being’—not to be mistaken for the one god of monotheism—was common to ‘primitive humankind’—that is, to the human groups who lived at the end of the Mesolithic Age, the Indo-European cosmogony is a reformulation of that idea—or rather a discourse that explodes and overcomes the language and the ‘reason’ of the preceding period. It is legitimate to consider that, for the Mesolithic ancestors of the Indo-Europeans, the supreme being has become none other than man himself; has become, more precisely, a ‘cosmic projection’ of man as holder of magic power. Similarly, one may conclude that this particular Indo-European idea of the supreme being was not shared by the other human groups who descended from the Mesolithic Age.
The classical Middle East has ‘reflected’—imagined and interpreted—the same set of Mesolithic beliefs in a manner diametrically opposed to the one taken by the Indo-Europeans. The Judeo-Christian Bible—summa of the religious Levantine Weltanschauung—stands at the antipodes of the Indo-European vision.
Yahweh has not extracted the universe by subdivision and ‘dismemberment’ of himself. He has created it ex nihilo, out of nothing. He is not the coincidentia oppositorum: the ‘Undivided Self,’ the place where all relative oppositions meet, melt, and surpass themselves. He is not simultaneously ‘being and non-being.’ He is being only: ‘I am that I am’ (Exodus 3:14).
Entirely alien to the world, Yahweh is the antithesis of all tangible reality. He is not an aspect, sum, level, form, or quality of the world. ‘The world is entirely distinct from God, its creator,’ the First Vatican Council of 1870 reminds us. Consequently, since the created universe cannot be identical to the creating god, the world lacks essence. It has existence only. More precisely, it is a being of ‘inferior degree’—imperfect.
Indo-European polytheism is the complementary ‘reverse’ of what might be defined as mono-humanism or pan-humanism: man is the law of the world (anthropos o nomos tou kosmou) and the measure of all things. In contrast, Jewish monotheism appears to be the conclusion of a process of reabsorption: reduction to unity of a multiplicity of non-human deities (personified natural forces) operated by Elohim-Yahweh. In short, it is the outcome of a mental speculation that also leads the plurality of things back to a single principle; not man, in this case, but matter and energy: ‘nature.’
From being the one and only god, non-ambivalent, Yahweh evidently represents absolute Good. It is understandable that he often shows himself to be cruel, implacable, jealous. Absolute Good could only be intransigent against Evil. What is less logical is the biblical conception of evil. Not deriving from absolute good, evil should not exist in a world created from nothing by a god who is ‘infinitely good.’ The Bible tries to solve the problem by explaining away evil as the consequence of the revolt of certain creatures—notably Lucifer—against the authority of Yahweh. Hence, evil seems to be the refusal of a creature to play the role assigned by Yahweh. The power of evil may at times seem considerable. However, as compared to the power of good (Yahweh), it is nothing of the sort: the final outcome of the struggle between Good and Evil is never in doubt. All problems, all conflicts are already solved before they take place: history is pure decay, the effect of the blindness of impotent creatures.
In this way, from the start, history is devoid of sense. The First Man—the first humanity—has blundered in giving in to a suggestion from Satan. In consequence, he has declined the role Yahweh had assigned to him. He has picked the forbidden apple, and entered history.
Creator of the universe, Yahweh has also played—in relation to the ‘current’ human society—a role entirely antithetical to that played by the Indo-European sovereign gods. Yahweh is not a ‘civilising hero’ who invents a social tradition. Rather, he constitutes an omnipotence that opposes Adam’s ‘fault’—the sort of human life the latter wished to enjoy: a post-Neolithic urban civilisation—implicitly referred to, in the Book of Genesis, in the story of the Tower of Babel. However, long before this, Yahweh had refused the land’s produce offered by the farmer Cain, and ‘had regard [only] for Abel and his offering’ (Genesis 4:3–5). Abel is not a farmer; rather, he is but a nomad who has abandoned hunting and survives from carrying out razzias. He extends the Mesolithic tradition into a new society—born of the Neolithic Revolution—and rejects the new way of life.
Subsequently, the mission of Abraham—the nomad who had deserted the city of Ur—and that of his descendants, will be to negate and reject, from the very interior of the world, any form of post-Neolithic civilisation, since its very existence perpetuates the memory of the ‘revolt’ against Yahweh. After Abraham, Moses maintains this commitment. Just as the people of Israel were able to escape captivity in Egypt, the whole of humanity is called upon to escape the ‘captivity’ of history. The law of Yahweh, handed down at Mount Sinai, is presented as the means of rescinding, once and for all, Adam and Eve’s transgression.
Man, in relation to the ‘god’ of the Bible, is not really a ‘son’; rather, he is a mere creature. Yahweh has made him, as any other living being, just as a potter models a vase. He has made him in ‘his own image’ (Genesis 1:27) in order to have his steward on Earth: the guardian of Paradise. The power man holds over the world is a power by proxy: a power entrusted to him that he may use only on the condition he not use it fully. Adam, seduced by the Devil, challenged the role that Yahweh had wanted him to play. But man will forever remain God’s servant (‘And said unto me, Thou art my servant, O Israel, in whom I will be glorified,’ Isaiah 49:3). The superiority of man over beast is as nothing—for all is vanity. ‘All go unto one place; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again’ (Ecclesiastes 3:20).
Man, according to the teachings of the Bible, has to remember unfailingly that he is dust; that historical existence has the sense only of that implicitly ascribed when history is actively rejected.
‘Roman’ Christianity, born with the Constantinian arrangement, was from the start an attempt to establish, within the ‘ancient’ world transformed by Rome in orbis politica, a compromise between the Indo-European Weltanschauung and the Judaic religion, adapted to Roman imperial civilisation by the alleged efforts of Jesus. The one and only god became, through dogmatic ‘mystery,’ ‘one god in three persons.’ The old trinity that the Vedic Indians called Trimurti has been integrated and, broadly, these ‘persons’ have assumed the three functions of Indo-European society, now in an inverted, spiritualised form. As creator and sovereign, Yahweh nevertheless continues to reject the dual aspect of reality: evil is the exclusive province of Satan. The new name ‘Deus Pater’—‘eternal and divine father,’ revered by the Indo-Europeans—is substituted for the old name given by the Bible. Yahweh is father only of his ‘second person’: a son sent to Earth to play a role opposed to that of ‘founding hero.’ He is a son who decides to become alienated from this world in order the better to show a way to the world beyond, and who, if he renders unto Caesar what is Caesar’s, does this only because to him what belongs to Caesar is of no value at all. He is a son, finally, whose function is not to ‘make war,’ but to preach a jealous peace that will benefit only the ‘men of goodwill’—the adversaries of this world—those to whom is reserved the only nutrient of eternity: the grace administered by the third ‘person,’ the Holy Spirit.
Man, as a creature—and as a created being—is the serf of God’s serfs: ‘excrement’ (stercus, as Augustine of Hippo put it). However, at the same time, he is also the brother of the incarnated son of Yahweh, which ‘almost’ makes him a son of God—provided he knows how to will and deserve it, something that depends on the grace the Creator administers according to unfathomable criteria. The day shall come when humankind will be definitively and eternally divided between the saints and the damned. There is a biblical Valhalla: the Celestial Paradise, but it is now reserved for the anti-heroes (In To Have or to Be? (New York: Harper and Row, 1976), Erich Fromm observes: ‘The [Christian] martyr is the exact opposite of the pagan hero personified in the Greek and Germanic heroes. . . . For the pagan hero, a man’s worth lay in his prowess in attaining and holding onto power, and he gladly died on the battlefield in the moment of victory’).
The others belong to Hell.
This compromise has for centuries moulded the history of what is called ‘Western civilisation.’ For centuries, according to the deepest affinities, ‘pagan’ and ‘Levantine’ man has been able to see—in the ‘one and threefold’ god—his own respective divinity. This explains the numerous confusions that have always characterised historical Christianity. The coexistence of two antagonistic spiritualities—often confronting one another, even in the hearts of the same individuals—eventually crystallise into a veritable neurosis of the European mentality.
Today we can confidently state that the Constantinian ‘arrangement’ arranged nothing, and that the day the motto ‘In hoc signo vinces’ was proclaimed had detrimental consequences for the Greco-Roman and Celto-Germanic world. Until recently, the Church of Rome particularly, and the Christian churches in general remained, as organised secular powers, attached to the appearances of the old compromise. However, in more recent times they began to recognise the authentic essence of Christianity. Hence, Yahweh, finally casting off the mask of luminous and celestial Deus-Pater, was rediscovered and proclaimed anew. In 1938 Pope Pius XI declared: ‘Through Christ and in Christ we are the spiritual progeny of Abraham. Spiritually, we [i.e., Christians] are all Semites.’
However, long before the churches reached that point, ‘profane’ (demythicised and secularised) Christianity, i.e., egalitarianism in all its forms, had found its path according to biblical truth. This was marked by the rejection of history; the proclaimed will to ‘step out of history’ in order to return to ‘nature’; the tendency to reabsorb human specificity into the ‘physical-chemical’; all determinist materialisms; Marcuse’s condemnation of art on the grounds that by integrating man in society it would betray ‘truth’; finally, the egalitarian ideology that wants to reduce humankind to the anti-hero model: the chosen one, hostile to any specific civilisation in that he wishes to see in it nothing but unhappiness, misery, exploitation (Marx), repression (Freud), or pollution. All this has invariably restored—still continues to restore today, at that precise moment when a new technological revolution is inviting us to overcome old ‘forms’—that motionless, ‘eternal’ (if there ever was such) Judaic vision: an unequivocal ‘No’ to any present pregnant with a future.
Saying ‘Yes’ to history—ever-becoming, ever re-proposing new foundations—implies assuming new forms and content. Saying ‘Yes’ is creation, the work of art. ‘No’ exists only by denying any value to such work. The Indo-European cosmogonic myth reassures us that saying ‘Yes’ is always possible. In a different world, arising from the ruins of the old, the mission of ‘civilising heroes’ is eternal, and it assumes, serenely, the splendid and tragic destiny of one who creates, gives birth to himself, and accepts, as condition of any historical adventure, of any life, the idea of his own end.
Grammars of Civilizations Tell Us All We Need to Know
Sorry. But it’s not open to debate.
1 – Aristotle Wrote Proto Empiricism: Reason, Naturalism, Proto-empiricism, Law, Calculation. (TRUTH)
2 – Sun Tzu, and Confucius wrote WISDOM LIT. Lao Tzu crossed the line into the questionable. (WISDOM)
3 – The Indians wrote both mythology and wisdom literature, bordering on political science (WISDOM)
4 – The Persians wrote supernormal and supernatural wisdom literature. (UTOPIAN UNIVERSALISM)
5 – The Egyptians wrote RITUALISM Supernatural (Animism, Anthropomorphism, heathenism ) Doctrine and Ritual.
6 – The Abrahamists wrote Mythology, Rebellion, and Lie and Destruction of all of the above. (UTOPIAN LIE)
Abrahamism is a cancer upon mankind.
The Axial Age (civilization Formation) Anchored Us All
It’s just a fact that the ‘wisdom literature’ of each civilization (a) relies upon the grammar, (b) relies upon the argumentative methodology of the law, (c) relies upon the mythos.
This is inescapable.
There is a reason jews appropriated Babylonian history, and integrated greek idealism to create Pilpul (justificationism in theology that relies upon the same techniques as justification in astrology and numerology) … and predictably enough, the same argument you are making (critique – the via-negativa of pilpul’s via-positiva).
Just as there is a reason Confucius couldn’t solve the problem of politics an the chinese speak in contrasts (riddles).
Just as there is a reason westerners speak in law, evidence, and testimony.
The ‘Axial Age’ anchored us all.
Abrahamism Is the Greatest Cancer Ever Invented by Man
Our common-law tradition and the militia built the west. We escaped Abrahamic religion, and immediately restored our ancient trajectory. The reason for degeneracy is the reintroduction of Abrahamic Religion in pseudoscientific (marxist) and peudorational (postmodernist) prose.
Sorry. I have spent extraordinary effort in testing our most cherished beliefs: and Abrahamism created the dark ages. Jews did nothing. We did very little. And muslims destroyed the four great civilizations of the ancient world – dragging them backward into inescapable ignorance.
Every civilization needs literature, oaths, and festivals for the intergenerational propagation of general rules of decidability that express their group competitive strategy. No civilization needs lies, and Abrahamism in word and form is just lies.
The Jewish Century: Marxism-Socialism, Libertarianism, Postmodernism, Feminism, Neo-Conservatism,
The Counter-Revolution Against Anglo Legal-Empiricism, and German Rational-Science
Utopian Promise upon Achieving Monopoly Consensus + Straw Man + Pilpul and Critique:
Rousseau (Feminine Subjective) + Schopenhauer, Hegel et al (Conflationists) + Kant (Masculine Analytic)
Marx, Cantor, Freud, Adorno (Working and Underclasses)
Mises, Friedman, Rand, Rothbard, (Middle Classes)
Foucault, Derrida, Rorty (Priestly-Feminine Upper Middle)
Friedan, Firestone, Dworkin (Feminists)
Strauss-Neocons (Political/Military-Masculine – Upper)
The gradual attack on Aristocratic Civilization from the bottom up.
COMPARE TO JUDAISM > CHRISTIANITY > ISLAM.
Same Technique, Same False Promise, Same Catastrophic Consequences
The Last Few Shovels-Full in The Grave of Postmodernism
I’m happy to go into depth on this subject but the argument is quite simple, and was put forward by a commenter:
–“Postmodernists: question who controls knowledge and where it comes from”–
Yes, that is a postmodernist (sophist).
A Scientist: Truth (coherent, consistent, correspondent, rational, reciprocal, limited, and complete) is power independent. Either you are engaging in full reciprocity correspondent with reality or you are not.
Pomo is an attempt to circumvent (conduct a fraud) by casting power as arbitrary, truth as arbitrary, reciprocity as arbitrary when they are necessary, and a presumption of an arbitrary good (equality rather than evolutionary survival) as justification for the fraud.
Hicks‘ argument, is that POMO is an evolution of the (Marxist) means by which to circumvent reciprocity (science, economics, and law) by claiming power (science/truth, law/power, economics/necessity) is sentimental and psychological (arbitrary).
My argument, a bit more articulate that Hicks’, is that this attempt at fraud is not only from Marxism to Postmodernism, but from the long history of Pilpul/Critique, Abrahamic Law, Platonism, Abrahamic Monotheism, Abrahamic Theology, and Continental Philosophy (Rousseau/Kant)
And that under Pilpul(Justificationism) and Critique (Straw Manning, disapproval, shaming, ridicule, gossiping, rallying) any internal consistency (constant relations) can be argued (story or fraud constructed) to violate correspondence, reciprocity, limits, and completeness.
And that under Falsificationism (Survival) from tests of coherence, consistency, correspondence, existential possibility, rationality, reciprocity, limits and completeness (what we test in court) such Frauds (Lies to cover Thefts) are exposed. Leaving only truth candidates.
So while you merely made a list of STATED INTENTIONS, as scientists (and jurists) we measure the form of argument (lying) and the changes in state (thefts), and the means, motives and opportunity used (criminal liability) not the STATED INTENTION (lies) of the actor.
One is not liable for his intentions but for his consequences. One acts given the resources available(means), the institutions available (opportunity) to produce reciprocity (meritocracy) and therefore continuous eugenic evolution (survival from competition) or the opposite.
Ergo, Marx (econ/history), Boas (Anthro/Soc.), Freud(Psych), Cantor (math platonism), Frankfurt (Norms,Traditions,Habits,Institutions), the French Postmodernists (Reason Itself) sought to use the ancient techniques of overloading (lying) by pseudoscience (marx et al) and sophism (Derrida, Foucault, Rorty, Heidegger) to construct a disinformation campaign with Critique: poisoning the well with a straw man criticism) in order to perpetuate a fraud(theft) by attacking Poincare, Maxwell,Darwin,Menger, Spencer, Nietzsche, and the Eugenicists who were seeking to restate the successful group evolutionary strategy of western civilization (transcendence: by adaptive velocity ) using Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Truth and Duty, Jury and Tort Law, and Markets (empirical evidence of reciprocity) in everything including association, cooperation, reproduction, production, production of commons, polities, and defense(war), in scientific terms (The One Language of Truthful Speech, under the One Law of Reciprocity).
Because it was this group strategy (today called “OODA Loops” in military, and “innovation” in economics, technology, and science), that allowed western civ in the ancient and modern worlds, to drag mankind kicking and screaming out of superstition, ignorance, poverty, starvation, hard labor, disease, suffering, child mortality, early death, brutality, arbitrary rule, tyranny, and the vicissitudes of nature, in a universe hostile to life.
So your ‘list of excuses-of-intent’ by stating ‘quotes of intent’ are just attempts to perpetuate the dysgenic, defeatist, destructive, fraud, of using sophisticated lies (sophisms, supernaturalisms, pseudosciences) to appeal to sentiments as a means of obtaining power.
When your use of that power, as we have seen, is to destroy the modern world as the abrahamists (jews, christians, and muslims) destroyed the great civilizations of the ancient world, costing us more than a thousand years of dark age, and a billion deaths for no other purpose than pursuing dysgenia, destruction of capital, the manufacture of ignorance, in the 3500 year struggle of the primitive peoples (equalitarian poverty and ignorance) against the advancing peoples (meritocratic wealth and knowledge).
So I am not only calling you and other POMO’s Frauds, Sophists, and Thieves, but the Enemy of Mankind and the bringers of destruction, ignorance, poverty, dysgenia, and suffering. The only equality is poverty. The only wealth is differences (hierarchy). Because it is by hierarchy (Pareto, or Power Laws) that we can construct the voluntary organization of research, invention, investment, production, distribution, and trade, using the selfish incentives of man with the limited knowledge at his disposal, to seize the optimum opportunity at his disposal, such that together we defeat the dark forces of time and ignorance – despite none of us knowing more than a fraction of the existential knowledge we all possess.
19) And like I said, if you studied Physics, Genetic and Cultural Differences, Political Economy, and Law (the complete scientific method), then you would understand such things – instead of reading Sophomoric Political Fantasy Fiction.
20) Transcendence (Evolution), by Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Truth, Duty, The Natural Law of Tort, An Independent Judiciary (Nomocracy), and the only option remaining under all of the above: Markets for voluntary cooperation in all aspects of life.
— closing —
It is a well researched bit of knowledge that we claim a lie is performed by intent, but that we judge whether we lie by our preferences and cognitive biases. So we lie on behalf of our intuitions, not on behalf of the truth or falsehood of our statements.
Ergo, we lie not just by intention, but by failing to perform due diligence against lying by intuition in the absence of intention. We are not only liable for our intended actions, but failures of due diligence before taking actions.
We all self insure ourselves against falsehood.
Some of us specialize in the fraud of escaping self insurance, by escaping due diligence against ignorance, error, bias, and deceit.
— differences —
Doolittle (law), Taleb (statistics), Hicks (Intellectual history)
Why Do so Many Cultures Think the Jewish People Are Nefarious?
—-”Why does [insert group here] dislike Jews?”—-
Silly people talk about the six or seven usual justifications, all of which amount to claims of insubstantial difference, or mere psychologism, but as always people write justifications (fictions) rather than state the uncomfortable truth – which is always and everywhere, a matter of costs: normative, economic, cultural, institutional, political, and military.
Stated Causes (Psychologisims):
- Competition between Religions (Norms, Traditions, Laws)
- Banking (Usury)
- Separatism (Preservation of Identity)
- Success (Success + Separatism = Competition)
Material Causes (Predations):
Peoples everywhere dislike or have disliked, or persecuted Jews for the same reasons every group in Christendom that dislikes the Jews did and does so:
- Separatism (norm violation), and consequent Competition (predation and parasitism),
- Polyethicalism (immorality) – Specialization in Profiting from Hazard Creation, Privatization of Commons, Socialization of Losses.
- Truth Avoidance (Truth is what works regardless of consequences, not what is true including the consequences – what we call externalities)
- The Big Lies, and the method of constructing them: The development of the Sophisms of Pilpul (excuses) and Critique (Gossip, ridicule, shaming, rallying) and its use in creating Supernatural Abrahamism (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam – and the creation of the Abrahamic Dark Ages, Pseudoscientific Abrahamism, Marxism (Marx, Boas, Freud, Cantor, Lenin, Trotsky, Mises, Rothbard, Strauss, Adorno and the Frankfurt School.)
- Specialization in Parasitism and Undermining: Usury, Black Markets, Slavery, tax Collection, pornography, propaganda – judaism is hostile to commons and trust while western people specialize in commons and trust.
- Irreciprocal nepotism: damning european nepotism while practicing jewish nepotism. (Polyethicalism)
- Special Pleading (propagandizing) to cover polyethicalism and parasitism.
- Alliance with or use of the state against the people.
Silly people read what was OPINED about history. Smart people read about the data produced in history, not what people opined. The data produced in history consists of DEMONSTRATED not REPORTED behavior. By examining demonstrated behavior, we can determine the incentives that people followed when they seized opportunities of one type (moral or immoral) while not seizing opportunities of another (moral or immoral).
- The Fatal Embrace: Jews and the State: Benjamin Ginsberg … Ginsberg will go into historical detail of how the Jews organize with the state against the people until the people rebel against them.
- 200 Years Together: Alexandr I. Solzhenitsyn(This book is actively suppressed in the west but what is translated from Russian can be found on the internet – readily.)
- A People That Shall Dwell Alone: Judaism as a Group Evolutionary Strategy, with Diaspora Peoples by Kevin MacDonald
- The Culture of Critique: An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish Involvement in Twentieth-Century Intellectual and Political Movements by Kevin MacDonald
- Tribes: How Race, Religion, and Identity Determine Success in the New Global Economy by Joel Kotkin. His analysis of higher tribalism and how certain tribes are more successful than others in the global economy.
The Economic, Legal, and Technological (Propaganda) Evidence:
However, I’ll add my research to those criticisms, which is the result of the evidence of legal and economic history – not propaganda.
- Jews specialize in those occupations that host civilizations determine are immoral (because they are). Immoral meaning: irreciprocal. The various forms of Risk Avoidance, and Cooperation Avoidance, and Normative Cost Avoidance: Tax collection, Law, Finance, Advertising, Media, Entertainment, (Gambling, the porn industry, organized crime, and most commonly, slavery, privatization of the commons, or socialization of losses), where there is low if not zero accountability for promises made explicitly or implicitly. (Westerners specialize in reciprocity)
- This is because Jewish Law (their religion) is (a) polylogical, and (b) poly ethical (what’s good for us, needn’t be good for them) rather than (western) reciprocal, fully informed and productive (their ethical code does not require productivity, and permits blackmail for example), (c) requires only voluntary in the moment and unwarrantied, (“only two people to make a deal”) rather than warrantied against retaliation (they can hide behind our law). (Westerners specify in monological universal law and ethics)
- They use nepotism to concentrate the profits from specializing in immoral (parasitic, predatory, moral hazard creating, and risk externalizing) occupations to concentrate capital in investments that are non-productive (Rent Seeking): Same industries as above, but particularly hazard-creating finance, predatory finance and banking, moral hazard finance, tenement and landlording, and other real estate investments that are exploitable under the difference in their ethical model and western ethical models. (50% of pundit propagandists are Jewish and leftists). (Westerners specialize in meritocracy over nepotism)
- They use the profits and influence from finance, investment, rent seeking to fund groups that intentionally target undermining of American constitutional law, the germanicized christian (reciprocal) ethics the churches, and the demand for loyalty from the citizenry that westerners have practiced for 4000 years, as a militial (self defending) people of the sea, river, forest, and steppe. It is a conspiracy of common interest more so than outright conspiracy, to ‘make the world safe for jews’ despite the fact that ‘making it safe for jews’ means destroying the manners, ethics, morals, laws, institutions, and traditions, and even metaphysical assumptions that make (Unique) western high trust civilization possible. (Westerners specialize in complex high cost commons and high trust.)
- They use the profits and comforts of surviving upon the host to produce propaganda that covers their actions, or undermines the host society. The most obvious example being Christianity and Marxism, (a) revolt against the Western Aristocracy in the ancient world, and (b) revolt against the Western Aristocracy in the modern world:The restatement of reformed judaism (christianity) from supernatural to marxist pseudoscientific:‘
Yahweh = Dialectical Materialism
The Messiah = Marx
The Elect = The Proletariat
The Church = The Communist Party
The Second Coming = The Revolution
Hell = Punishment of the Capitalists
The Millennium = The Communist Commonwealth’
– by Bertrand RussellAnd:
The restatement of The Roman Conquest of Judea and the Diaspora as the Holocaust. The restatement of mesopotamian slavery and liberation as the Conquest and Diaspora.
- Yet it seems to never occur to jewish thought leadership that the reason they lost their territory, were enslaved, lost it again, and have continuously been persecuted and nearly exterminated everywhere except the west, is that (a) they don’t pay for the commons, particularly the commons of defense, and (b) *a world safe for jews is a world of immorality that repeats the failures of the jews as both landed and unlanded people*. You cannot specialize in immorality (predation, and parasitism) upon a people who practice Reciprocity and Productivity (material production) without them retaliating. This is why the Ukrainians did what they did to the jews as soon as the germans invaded. What the Russians have done to the Jews in the later soviet and post soviet era, what the germans did to the jews in the second world war, and the ongoing anti-semitism everywhere in the west.
- It’s not an accident or some form of psychologism that causes people to regulate, exit, or persecute the Jews throughout history, but the difference between jewish propaganda, teaching, and preaching, and the economic means by which they persist by parasitic and predatory relations upon a people.The jews have used superior verbal intelligence to create Pilpul (Justification), and Critique (Ridicule, Gossip, Shaming , Straw manning), which are two very elaborate sophisms (the equivalent of how socrates undermined athenian culture with criticism without solutions that would be somehow better, and how Plato used idealism rather than realism to propose totalitarianism – which the Jews copied in argument and the church referred to as an institution. Meanwhile it was Aristotle and the Stoics that made alexander, the empire, reason, roman law, and gave us the path to modern science. )They have used Pilpul and Critique to advance the pseudosciences: Boasian anthropology,Marxist economics, Freudian Psychology, Cantorian Sets (you won’t understand that one), Misesian Economics, The Frankfurt School’s Critique (anti-westernism), Rothbardian Ethics, Lewontin Genetics, and Gould’s Evolutionary Theories. They are also responsible for the transformation of our government from a republic to a democracy, the primary influence in the ‘65 Immigration Act by which they hoped (succeeded) to undermine our rule of law by immigrating underclasses that would support socialist policies. And the foundations they support have actively pursued cases that forced judicial discretion thereby bypassing the constitutional process of amendment.In other words, the Jews produced theology (pseudo wisdom literature), pseudoscience, pseudo-rationalism, as Propaganda, and distributed it by oral tradition, written tradition, printing, and now media.
- We are in an era, where, because of mass media, being articulate, and quickly articulate, is at a premium – more so than at any time in history – not because information is scarce, but because it is overwhelming. And this benefits the jewish people disproportionately. In other words, we are in an era where Propaganda distributed by entertainment, media, and academy is the MOST effective in history. And the Jewish people have specialized in propaganda (gossip) by pilpul (positive) critique (negative), and whatever technological means of distribution is available.
- In other words, while it’s not intentional, the Jews use the Group Evolutionary Strategy Of Women (defenselessness, Submissiveness) to obtain the benefits of women (Tolerance) while relying on the techniques of women (gossip, rallying, shaming, ridicule, propagandizing), to undermine the population (Dominant Males) it’s norms, traditions, and institutions, while they obtain the Benefits of Women (attempting to force the tribe to pay for them and their offspring), without offering the benefits of women (care taking, and reproduction.) Notice that this technique and Feminism are identical.Sophism, Victimhood, Undermining, begging for tolerance, and then incremental understanding of the current genetic, morphological, reproductive, developmental, endocrine, and psychometric information, is that the Ashkenazi Jews have used selective reproduction favoring feminine verbal traits and memory traits in males (reading, memory, recitation, argument), to transfer female verbal traits to the male – at the cost of doubling (or more) the rates of homosexuality.If this is correct, this explains the ‘Conspiracy of Common Interest’ among Jews, who simply intuit, as do females, their group evolutionary strategy – and repeat it everywhere they go.More research is coming out. But once you are aware of the difference between male and female cognition, male and female methods of argument, male and female means of aggression, the general verbal superiority of females, and the moral intuition of females (devotion instead of loyalty), it becomes rather obvious that the jews have specialized both culturally and genetically in ‘weaponizing’ the female reproductive strategy.
ie: they aren’t conspiring any more than women are. They’re just like the rest of us – following their intuitions. But they have a competitive advantage because they have achieved (albeit at cost) Early Modern Levels of european IQ (we have lost parity with the Jews through underclass reproduction). And cannot match them in verbal acuity without even higher IQ’s.This analysis of traits is an illustration of how much we can learn from the genetic differences and consequential expressions between the three elite groups: East Asians, Northern Europeans, and Ashkenazi jews.Important: Evolutionary excellences of groups can only be expressed as norms, institutions, and achievements when the lower classes are reduced. The principle reason for the success of the elite peoples is their elimination of the drag of the underclasses so that competitive excellences can be expressed. Ergo it is not as important to evolve high intelligence as it is to express existing traits and facets by the removal of negative traits and facets. This is counter-intjuitive, but it is the means by which we domesticated plants and animals.
There are a few of us who study this technique: weaponization of the female strategy. I am probably in the top handful because I specialize in western ethics (reciprocity, natural law, human rights) and legal, economic, cultural, and genetic history. And Jewish ethics and group competitive strategy are the polar opposite of the Western – and the vast contrast helps us understand each. But it has become very clear over the past few centuries that for the Russians and Germans in particular, and for westerners in general, our ‘years together’ are, as always, of benefit to Jews but vast harm to the host civilizations.
Truth is truth and truth is painful. Westerners have the burden of colonialism, but as a consequence have dragged humanity kicking and screaming out of ignorance, superstition, poverty, starvation, and disease in both the ancient world and the modern. Jews have the burden of undermining every host civilization throughout history, and having to pay the cost for it, and then creating propaganda under the pretense that they were persecuted without reason.
However, the test of a culture is purely empirical: despite being the most literate people in Europe, until integrated into western empiricism (Aristotelianism), they Jews contributed nothing to mankind for two thousand years, other than judaism, christianity, and islam, by which ALL the great civilizations of the ancient world were destroyed by the underclasses, and by which they are destroying western civilization at present. Small contributions that are not unique do not compensate for the destruction they have caused everywhere they have gone. 1B dead by Abrahamic religions, and 100M dead so far by Communism and Leftism worldwide: Abrahamism created the Abrahamic Dark Ages.
So we can all be cursed for our mistakes in history, but a failure to acknowledge them and to reform in the face of them, is evidence of malice.
The reasons are, always and everywhere, political, economic, and moral – and obvious. You just have to get past the propaganda and into the actions people take, which are left as records in law, the economy, and publications.
(Ps there is a lot I can add to this but I don’t want to write a book on it….)
Transparency: I worked exclusively for Jewish organizations in my early career, and later investigated and successfully participated in the prosecution of three jewish businesses for Racketeering, Churning, Fraud – and failed to take the time to prosecute a fourth. As a consequence, collected accounts of the means by which Jewish ethics justify criminality by principally by moral hazard – a form of fraud by which we bait people in disadvantageous or opportunistic circumstances to take risks they should not in order to obtain legal access to their assets without reciprocal productivity. So I have been working on this problem for decades.
Repeating – I Don’t Hate on People – the Jewish Question Answered.
- Propertarianism is a social science written in the grammars of law and economics. The product of that work is universal like all sciences. Any people can use it. It is easier for our people to use it because we have higher trust, lower corruption, and more experience under empirical truth and rule of law, because we have been a middle class or middle class organized polity for longer than all other peoples.
- I view the Ashkenazim as ‘ours’ – genetically they are half ours, and we’ve “bought and paid for their inclusion” in our polity so to speak over the centuries – at the costs of tens of millions of lives, vast abuse by extreme usury, undermining of every one of our nations, and cultures, and much of our great civil wars.
- But I view their problem as ours – our failure to adapt the law to prohibit parasitism upon the commons, false promise and baiting in to moral hazard, and the use of pilpul and critique, including the defense of all of the above by GSRRM.
- I view the problem of this kind behavior as relatively easily solved by law – law which I have produced, by accident really, as a byproduct of attempting to explain our own group strategy in scientific terms.
- I view the ending of the malincentives of the industries in which they employ false promise, baiting into hazard, pilpul, critique, and GSRRM resulting in continuous undermining of our civlization as relatively easy – using the law I have produced.
- I view restoring our high trust society, the civil society, the family, and the market between men and women, definancializing our society, depoliticizing it, de-programming it, cleaning the academy, the media, the government, and business, finance, economics, and law, of this behavior relatively easy – using the law I have produced.
I Don’t Avoid the Question – I Show You the Mirror
So, I don’t avoid the Jewish Question. I explain it. I answer it. I say how to productively solve it. And I do it without hating on anything except our traditional differences in group competition that like all differences must be ameliorated by incremental suppression of novel means of parasitism, by the incremental evolution of the common law of tort.
Is This a Civic Nationalist Position?
Well, I write LAW. Whatever government you want to produce, whether nationalist, civic nationalist, or globalist, and no matter what economic model you may want to produce, you can do it with P-LAW as long as you do it truthfully and transparently, without fictionalisms, lying, and GSRRM. So it’s an ethno nationalist, civic nationalist, or globalist position.
What About Ethnocentrism?
My position is scientific: (a) ethnocentrism is always and everywhere the optimum group strategy, (b) it is the optimum international order always and everywhere (c) scale is only valuable for (i) suicide by debt expansion, (ii) use of suicide by debt expansion in the production of industrial (Gen 2 and Gen 3) warfare, in an age where hand to hand, and rifle, and mechanized infantry, have been replaced by supersonic autonomous nuclear weaponry – all but eliminating the utility of population and scale from the equation.
What’s My Personal Opinion?
If you want my opinion (i) we are (at least our productive classes) incompatible with peoples who have practiced less self domestication (lower class size reduction, and neotonic evolution) without tragic cost to our future, to ourselves, and to our ancestors (ii) I ‘demand’ ethnocentric polity and (ii) no people or group of people have the right to deny it without conducting genocide, for which genocide is the only possible reciprocity. (iiii) I am willing to demand restitution for past and present lifetime crimes by those that attempt to make that decision for me and mine.
Produce Incentives by Law – the Rest Will Follow.
There are no other people other than east asians that are sufficiently compatible with us because they are the only other people more self-domesticated than we are. And there is no need for population, particularly underclass population, in an era where labor is no longer competitive in the international market therefore producing a deadweight cost burden on us for eternity.
You Don’t Need to “Believe” the Law
People don’t have to believe in or agree with the Law. They just need to avoid it. They don’t need to be trained. Or educated. Incentives ripple through the economy and polity almost instantaneously. All that is required is incentive to report violations, and any violation of reciprocity that exposes anyone to risk provides incentive.
The Conflict of Civilizations Isn’t with Islam It’s with All of Abrahamism
See, you thought the Conflict of Civilizations was with Islam. It’s not. It’s with Abrahamism in all its forms. The problem is not only genes but content. And grammars convey the content. And Abrahamic grammar is nothing more than drug dealing for the human mind.
Your Adherence to Abrahamism Is Evidence You’re Still an Addict (NPC)
Well I think you don’t understand. The marxist/ postmodernist/ feminist pseudoscientific and sophist religion won over the NPCs in the current world, just as the supernatural and sophist Judaism/Christianity/Islam religion won over the NPCs in the Ancient World.
The fact that you don’t understand that if you’re trying to reconstruct monotheism in different prose, that you’re still an NPC is merely evidence of vulnerability of NPCs to those forms of suggestion.
No More Lies. No More Abrahamism.
a) there is no god other than the fictions we create as false appeals to authority that justify our ignorance. Gandalf is as much a god as zeus/jupiter, jeohva or allah – and noticeably of better character. Authur has been more influential on the common anglo man than jesus. In my understanding Aristotle is the father of western thought and his works (those that were not destroyed by the christians and muslims and jews) the only bible (book of wisdom) worth reading. The combination of aristotle, zeno, epicurious, and the stoics constitute the western tradition in rational form.
(b) there is no infinite regress, since time has no meaning outside of any given universe. As far as we know the universe(s) are just bubbles of space-time constantly in disequilibrium, and existence has no meaning outside of a universe. To state that the universe must be temporally intuitive to man contradicts the findings of the sciences – both at pre and post human scales.
We have consistently found that our presumptions of causality are counter to anthropological and anthropomorphic intuitions.
(c) natural law (reciprocity) is an evolutionary necessity for any species that evolves the capacity for sympathetic, voluntary, cooperation. All other strategies are contrary to survival.
(d) evidence is that all groups rely on reciprocity for the simple reason that it is universally decidable in matters of cooperation and conflict.
(e) ethnocentrism is the optimum group evolutionary strategy given all other known and hypothesized strategies.
(f) markets are the optimum group evolutionary strategy given all other known and hypothesized strategies.
(g) markets accelerate with the continuous expansion of the suppression of parasitism under the the natural law of reciprocity.
As far as I know these are logical necessities that have been demonstrated empirically (evidentially) in competition against alternatives.
No More. Never Again.
I’m trying to end the institution of lying forever, and the church as an institution of lying must end, just as every other institution of lying must end.
No more pilpul, no more critique, no more platonism, no more supernaturalism, no more pseudoscience.
Literature, history, law, science, and mathematics. Everything else is lying.
No More Lies. Lying is anti-western. We are the people who speak the truth and religion is nothing but lies.
We invented truth, reason, law, and science, and we escaped the evil of the religions until invaded by the semitic war machine against our people by intellectually (jewish) culturally (byzantine), and militarily (islam).
No more. Never again.
The Truth Is Enough to Restore the West
Truth is enough. End the lies. End The Entire Abrahamic Program of Lies: False Reality, False History, False Promise (Moral Hazard), Pilpul (via positiva sophism), Critique (via negativa sophism), Straw Manning, and the Dysgenic Strategy of the Herd fearing being left behind by their betters.
Ethnocentrism; Nationalism; Nature, Ancestor, and Monarchical Thanks (worship), and the inheritance that they have left us as Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Truth, Duty, Merit, The Natural Law, A Jury of our Peers, The Militia of Sovereign Men, Markets In everything, and the science and technology that has provided in the present, what Those Who Lie had promised them.
No More Lies. Restore Our Natural Law, and Our Natural Religion, to our Natural Peoples. We Must Rule, if Not for The Sake of All Mankind, but Out of Self Defense.
Sorry, But I Understand Religion Completely.
1) I don’t make mistakes. It’s my job not to.
2) Each social order (Wisdom literature), whether legal(western), rational(chinese) theological(Semitic), or literary(Indian), relies on criteria of decidability and method of argument in support those criteria.
3) We can train physical abilities, intuition-emotion, reason, and skills of transformation. We have developed ritual, religion, stoicism, and philosophy to train intuition & emotion and intuition, and developed calculation for reason, and techne for skills
4) Semitic argument consists of the sophisms of pilpul, critique, false promise, moral hazard, monopoly control of information, using threats of ostracization, disapproval, shaming, gossip, rallying and reputation destruction to impose a monopoly by suggestion and intimidation.
5) We call this combination of sophism (psuedo-rationalism), supernaturalism (occult), false history (pseudoscience) ritual indoctrination, false promise (fraud) to create a monopoly of conformity to falsehoods a “Religion” even though doing so is unique to the Semitic Religions.
6) This form of argument like mathematics, logic, writing, language or any other technology, is traceable throughout history as the incremental evolution of a technique of deception. It is used to produce natural neurochemical (opiate) responses and functions as an addiction.
7) So just as the Romans invented empirical law with the help of aristotle and zeno, the Greeks invented idealism and ideal argument, the semites invented the sophistries of pilpul and critique and threats of ostracization thus weaponizing the female group strategy in argument.
8) meanwhile the west produced hero-worship, civic ritual, the cult of the empirical law of tort, reason, rationalism, empiricism, science as an evolution of their criteria of decidability: individual sovereignty, with disputes resolved by law of tort, and a MARKET for ideas.
9) It’s not that I don’t understand religion. It’s that I understand it completely; how to replace its falsehoods completely; and that abrahamic religions were responsible for the dark ages, and the destruction of all the great civilizations in the ancient world – and modern.
Everything You Need to Understand About Religion
Religion consist of a category of education for the purpose of training the intuition (emotions), such that we are less dependent upon reason, calculation, and computation.
So just as we have:
|ANALOGIES| children’s stories, fairy tales, myths, legends > young adult stories > stories > novels > biographies > histories > the sciences and law > mathematics
and we have:
|ETHICS| Imitation of Parents > Hero Ethics > Virtue Ethics > Rule Ethics > Outcome Ethics
we also have:
|EDUCATION| Physical Training > Emotional training > Calculation training > Knowledge training > Professional Skills Training
And so we have developed these institutions to provide training:
|INSTITUTIONS| Play/Sports/Work(physical) > Church (emotion) > Primary School > Secondary School > College > University
What We Learn from Religion
What we learn from religion can be taught by many methods, and that abrahamic religions are one of the worst possible methods because they have a record of manufacturing ignorance. Despite being the most literate people in europe the jews contributed nothing to mankind for two thousand years until converted to Aristotelianism (Testimonial Truth). Christianity created order cheaply but maintained ignorance that cut the rate of literacy, learning, and innovation to near zero for over a thousand years. Islam destroyed the accumulated capital of every single great civilization of the ancient world other than india, china, and southern africa who were all geographically isolated from Muslim Raiders, and their continuous destruction of capital, and mandated ignorance through religiously enforced predetermination.
Of the major religions of Abrahamism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Ancestor and Nature Worship, and Stoicism, it is quite clear without exception that Nature and Ancestor Worship and Stoicism are the optimum methods – Particularly for the optimum group evolutionary strategy: ethnocentrism and nationalism. In fact, every other strategy is far worse than ethnocentrism. And only ethnocentrism leads to beneficial continuous eugenic evolution by resisting regression to the mean by continuous dysgenia of underclass reproduction.
That does not mean church(education and universal cults) and temples(banks and personal cults) aren’t a good thing. Church (communal ritual, of lesson, oath, and feast) is a good thing if it’s actually transmitting temporally useful content. (its not currently.)
But the lies of the abrahamic religions are horrificly destructive compared to the Trials of Achilles, hero, ancestor, and nature worship, or the continuous self authoring of virtues in stoicism and buddhism – and our original religions of nature, ancestor worship (thankfulness) and Stoicism (mindfulness)were far superior at making mentally healthy people who are able to adapt to constantly changing conditions – and possessed of independent minds: something the authoritarian semitic religions could not tolerate, and actively suppressed.
The Constitution of Religion
Religion Consists of:
|RELIGION| Mythos (strategy) > Debt > Repetition (ritual) > Recital (oath) > Feast and Festival.
But so does every other category of education:
|EDUCATION| Mythos (Logic) > Repetition/Ritual (Grammar) > Recital (Rhetoric) > Reward (Recognition of Achievement)
All education follows the same process:
|LEARNING| Logic > Grammar > Rhetoric > Success by accolade, application, or achievement.
All knowledge follows the same process:
|EPISTEMOLOGY| free association (+ test) > hypothesis (+ test) > theory (+test) > law ( survival).
All due diligence in the production of knowledge follows the same process:
|DUE DILIGENCE| identity > consistency > correspondence > demonstrated possibility > rational choice > reciprocity, coherence > limits > and completeness.
So, we have a rather odd misconception of ‘religion’ as something other than training the emotions such that we intuit values and relations that are coherent with our group evolutionary strategy (embedded in our mythos), which we rarely if ever understand – those rules of evolutionary strategy are obscured at the metaphysical level. This invisibility makes them sturdier because they are less vulnerable to argument and criticism and therefore more likely to persist due to simply imitation of myths and rituals that produces that strategy by externality rather than by direct apprehension.
Just Another Form of Education
There is nothing special about religion. If we look at the hierarchy of choice:
|REACTION| Physical Response (Automatic) > Emotional Response (intuition) > Rational Response(reason) > Calculated Response (calculation) > Computed Response (Computation).
… then EACH ONE OF THOSE STEPS allows for increase in precision in the PRESENCE of knowledge, and GRACEFUL FAILURE in the ABSENCE of knowledge.
This hierarchy means that at about every Standard Deviation in human mental (cognitive) ability, (75->150 IQ) there exists a grammar (methodology) of decision making from the base animal up to the most skilled professional.
Humans are very simple creatures. It’s the lies we tell ourselves that confuse us, and keep us mere animals, responding by intuition and automatic reaction, rather than possessed of agency and welding reason, calculation, and computation, such that we evolve into the gods we imagine.