Donnadogsoth

What about false principles, by which we mean arbitrary patterns of decision-making by human beings? Such as: The FALSE OLIGARCHAL PRINCIPLE, the idea that we should be ruled by elites (not necessarily the best for the job) who have managed to subjugate the rest of the population into a condition of cattle-like subservience. This false principle, embedded in governments throughout the world, and in the religion of Islam, should be familiar in essence to any regular listeners of Freedomain Radio. The FALSE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE, the idea that, in Lindybeige's words, "we should always assume the worst and act accordingly, even if the feared danger is spectacularly preposterous," and the proposed cure worse than the imagined disease. The FALSE WHITE GUILT PRINCIPLE, the idea that the descendants of traditionally European peoples, especially if they are male, heterosexual, or Christian, are responsible for the world's problems and therefore owe deference, submission, reparations, and self-erasure to the coloured, female, rainbow-sexual, and non-Christian peoples of the world, on pain of the fear of being shamed and cast out from polite society.

Why women should sleep with me "The follow-up to my video "Another terrifying video". I vent my frustration with a pernicious piece of daft rhetoric that has become accepted even in semi-respectable circles like governments, which is the 'precautionary principle' which in short is the idea that we should always assume the worst and act accordingly, even if the feared danger is spectacularly preposterous. "One point I'd like to add here is that choices are presented as if they are between a risk, and no risk, whereas in fact of course they are between one risk (such as the world's heating up due to carbon emissions) and another, different risk (such as attempts to lower emissions leading to climatic disaster of a different sort)."

The femiblob-secreted alchahest (universal solvent) continues to eat white history, white culture, bit by bit, piece by piece, with no lower limit of what will remain. What is the alcahest? Guilt. Whites have been addicted to guilt, and are terrified that if they don't feed this guilt by dismantling their own culture, they will be subjected to a personal holocaust of SHAME. Guilt is the universal solvent, that is eating apart everything. Stop being guilty! You are innocent of the charges, but your children WILL condemn you. College Takes Down Historical Paintings Because They Might Traumatize Students http://dailycaller.com/2016/08/07/college-takes-down-historical-paintings-because-they-might-traumatize-students/ "A public college in Wisconsin is moving two historic paintings out of the public eye after the school’s Diversity Leadership Team warned they could be psychologically devastating for American Indian students. "Since 1936, two large murals by Cal Peters portraying early Wisconsin history have dominated the common area of Harvey Hall at the University of Wisconsin-Stout (UW-Stout). One mural shows French fur traders and American Indians traveling down the Red Cedar River by canoe, while another portrays a wooden fort constructed by the French. Neither painting shows any violence at all."

Defining male vs. female natures, shirgall. What societies traditionally call wayward members of the respective sexes offers insight into those sexes' natures. Also a bastard is by definition illegitimate, and so outside the code of male honour, not true to his word, and envious.

Communist Party unites behind Hillary http://www.wnd.com/2016/08/communist-party-unites-behind-hillary/ “If that sounds hyperbolic to you, just stop reading right now and pull up the CPUSA’s website,” he added. “Spend some time reading and digesting it. Try to discern any major differences between the Communist Party’s concerns, sensibilities and solutions – on issues from ‘gay’ rights, to unfettered immigration, to renewable energy, to wealth redistribution, to condemning cops as racist, to universal health care – and those of today’s Democratic Party.”

By this I do not mean, "warlock" or "wizard" or the like. I mean a word that has the same negative connotations for men, as "witch" does for women. A young girl who is acting hysterical can be chastised by calling her a witch. A manipulative young woman who is political, harbours a resentiment regarding the male sex, and is the opposite of complaisant might be termed a kind of "witch". "Witchery" seems to be a kind of curdling of the female nature. What analogous chastisement is there for boys?

The principle of SUFFICIENT REASON, the idea that everything has a reason for being the way it is and not another way. For example, why does A=A? Because God wished the Universe to be intelligible to reason. The principle of SELF-OWNERSHIP, the idea that to not own one's body and be responsible for the effects of one's actions contradicts the responsibility and right one has to live and interact with the world. The principle of UNIVERSAL GRAVITATION, which says that all bodies are governed by a force of mutual attraction. The principle of POSITIVITY, the idea that looking "on the bright side" of any situation can reveal opportunities, dividends, or solaces otherwise invisible to the negative mind; we can, in a sense, "make our own luck." The principle of PRINCIPLES, the idea that substance is efficient cause; efficient cause, substance. Thus everything that exists as a noun is also a verb. E.g., a cup must be cupping, at least potentially, to be a cup; a singer must be singing; a cat must be cat-ing. Nothing is static, even though everything retains its identity. The principle of, e.g., A=A, is a verb (all is A=A-ing) and a noun (a subject of experience). Principles govern the sensory world. The principle of PLATONIC FORMS, the idea that all nouns (subjects of experience) are characterised in the experience of other nouns, by adjectives. E.g., the bottle is green, the leaf is green, the sea is green; all are nouns (bottle, leaf, sea) characterised in an observer's experience by the adjective "greenness". Here, greenness is a species to which the bottle, etc., are members. Another term for species is "Platonic form."

I'm having trouble with this idea. Where are you getting this from? Maybe if I read more to the source I will better see what you are saying.

I know that the Bible is really sneaky and slippery, but that's not the reading I've gotten. According to the Skeptics Annotated Bible: 3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: In other words, as I wrote earlier, they did not know good from evil, but merely obedience from disobedience. They were dogs in the vineyard, so to speak. Only after eating the fruit did they "become as one of us, to know good and evil."

(1) Correction: In the story's literal (not allegorical) terms, the purpose was to groom humanity to the point where it could receive the revelation of the knowledge of good and evil obediently and thus live forever in paradise. Instead man, as a kind of rational animal knowing only obedience and disobedience, not good and evil, failed the test and was forced to experience the torments of history while prey to the temptations of Satan. But this is NOT what junglecat means. He means that the thinking mind must never make final judgements about the world, both on the level of the physical universe AND the level of human worth. On neither level can we know fully what we are dealing with and therefore our understandings are ad hoc. The first, physical level tells us we must always be open to new paradoxes in our understandings our resolution of which rewards us with a new physical principle which we can put to use in our quest for survival. The second, moral level tells us that we are not perfect and therefore cannot condemn anyone for being imperfect without that standard of perfection justly destroying us in turn. (2) You don't think they tried? Anything less than WMDs could never have collapsed global civilisation. Only parts of Terra, like the great massacres in China or the environmental degradation of Easter Island or the Black Death in Europe, could have been affected. No matter what people tried in the past, there was always a huge rump of survivors left to repopulate Terra. But now hydrogen bombs are literally capable of sterilising the planet of humans.

(1) It's a metaphor, Shirgall. (2) The potential for total violence is greater than at any time in history. Prior eras couldn't wipe out mankind with nuclear weapons.

St. Paul was talking about judging another person's moral standing. The mentat must balance between habit<-->novelty. Too much concentration on habit, he stops thinking. To much concentration on novelty, he stops thinking. The former is a lattice that freezes him amidst his limited stable of principles and facts; such a collection of knowledge is always going to be incomplete and therefore cannot be relied upon in all ways and at all times. The latter is the apprehension of the pure blooming, buzzing chaos of existence, which drowns him in questions and demoralises him with the thought that nothing is answerable. What junglecat has been saying is the direction to avoid being eaten by predators, not the way to the reverse.

It is common in these "progressive" days for people to have no sympathy for the plight or perspective of their forefathers. "I would never have participated in slavery! Slave-owners were evil!" they say with relished spite. Oh, really? It bespeaks a blinkered and privileged existence, and it leads to Year Zero thinking, the idea that we should condemn and ignore anyone and anytime not politically correct enough. But of course today's liberal is tomorrow's conservative, who awaits condemnation by tomorrow's liberals.

The responses to junglecat's posts are sad. Junglecat is talking in metaphor, not in literalness. It's like none of you have ever contemplated myths as harbouring psychological truths. You're so busy looking for “Gotcha!” logical fallacies to shore up your political philosophy that you have sawn down the tree of knowledge thinking to build yourself a shelter from the Big Bad Theist. The Taoist farmer story is a metaphor for the tree of the Genesis story. The real stumbling block here is the definition of “philosophical death”. The death referred to is the death of the mentat, of the thinking, processing mind as it grapples with change as the only constant in the physical universe. Such a mind, to remain active, must remain open, remain non-finally-judgemental. The Taoist farmer is the mentat, who sees past the ephemera of physical phenomena to the eternal, higher truth of the principle of mentathood itself. The tree in the Genesis story represents the temptation of the mentat to partake of final judgements.

We start as embryos faced with the undifferentiated chaos of the world-flux. As babies we descry discrete objects. As children we develop the ability to perceive the Platonic forms as they incarnate into object-arrays. Finally, as adults we discover principles governing the behaviour of the physical world, biota, and the human mind. Without principle we are lost in an immature state of existence. It would therefore seem felicitous to create a list of principles, for everyone's benefit, so that we can familiarise ourselves with principles others have discovered, and hopefully lead ourselves to discovering them for ourselves. Principles really are the stars in the night sky, guiding the sailing ships of our souls. I'll begin. The principle of MIMESIS, the idea that virtually everything anyone learns, they learned it by imitating someone else. Why did Bobby start smoking? Because he saw someone else smoking and thought it looked cool. Why did the Orangutan do the laundry? Because it was imitating the laundry-woman. How do you learn to speak, to walk, to be cool? You imitate, imitate, imitate. How do you learn to be violent? You experience violence somehow and imitate it. The principle of LEAST ACTION, the idea that everything in nature does only the minimum needed to accomplish its task, and nothing else. This is not to be applied to thinking beings, which are capable of more playful and time-wasting activity, but would apply to ants, vegetation, and all inorganic physical phenomena. The principle of PREESTABLISHED HARMONY, the idea that the Cartesian mind/body dualism problem-of-influence can only be solved by rejecting natural causation entirely and accepting that no two things cause each other, but rather act harmoniously together to create the effect of seemingly being in a causal relationship. The principle of LEAST-TIME PROPAGATION OF LIGHT, the idea that light always chooses the route of least-time whenever it passes from one density of medium to another. The principle of NATURAL SELECTION, the idea that in a generational population, each generation is segregated by natural conditions into fit and unfit populations, the former going on to produce the next generation, the latter not. The principle of A=A, the idea that actual identity cannot be separated from essence.

Is this video telling us that we're fucked?

https://muslimstatistics.wordpress.com/2016/01/10/sweden-and-denmark-have-highest-number-of-sexual-assaults-in-europe-eus-flawed-muslim-migration-policy/

If White Privilege is real, then shouldn't the age of consent for interracial sex be higher on the coloured side? We wouldn't want whites to use their Privilege to take advantage of coloured partners, would we?

"Racism" is the one word that needs to die in the West. It needs to be flung about in accusatory ways so often and with such rancour that it just up and breaks, and people laugh at it, and mock the ones who use it.

You've got a good polar definition of fear and faith. I meant faith as belief. One needs to have some belief in order to function in life and not be perpetually gripped by fear that one will fall through the centre of the Earth, etc..

Wouldn't scepticism and faith be a mutually evolving balanced pair? People with zero faith and total scepticism would be insane with fear their chairs and automobiles would fall apart using them, that their senses were constantly deceiving them, that other people lacked minds. So evolution must select for a certain level of faith which translates into a level of gullibility.

It's not rational to pursue a goal that will lead to the destruction of your society, unless you plan on dying before that eventuality.

dsayers is a True Believer in his particular brand of ancap logic. Anyone who disagrees with him on anything--or even just phrases statements in a manner not to his liking--must be anti-free-society, illogical, etc..

You're not fighting an imaginary foe, Will, you're fighting a True Believer.

Hi Cruiser, Massive immigration, forced citizenship and the importation of an alien and hostile religion are already enormous violations of the NAP. Even if we view it as impinging merely on "the commons" those commons represent the collective property, as yet to be properly divided, of the native population. Mass deportation, stripping people of citizenship, and the banning of pernicious religions are within the scope of the NAP. If anyone thinks this is "Statist" all they need do is imagine that a freely-assented-to task force with the powers of an army is created to deal with the Moslem incursions. If we deny this, then we admit that "libertarianism" is hopelessly mired in small-scale thinking and will never attain to a grand strategy for dealing with those who certainly have a grand strategy for dealing with us.