The ultimate test of moral character
I know of only one reliable test of the moral character of people: how they would react when you disagree with their beliefs. I have traveled and lived in many countries, and the pattern is roughly the same everywhere; people are generous and kind if you fawn over their culture and customs, but if you would raise any objections or express disagreement with their beliefs, then claws, spears and pitchforks come out. Nothing confesses the lack of moral character more then the refusal to deliberate, the unwavering conviction that you are in possession the truth and anyone who disagrees is not to be reasoned with because they are ‘sick in the head’.
The only means that humanity possesses to peacefully resolve disagreements is via rational deliberation, where both sides try to understand one another and together evaluate the reasons for and against a particular view, not aiming to defeat the other and defend one’s belief at any cost, but to discover the truth of the matter, and overcome error. The enemy is then not the person expressing a controversial view, but error itself. I call this attitude ‘Good Faith’, which incidentally coincides with the ancient usage of the Greek word ‘Pistis’, nowadays translated as ‘Faith’, or worse, misrepresented as ‘Belief’. The laws of Reason are the only pacifier, and everything else ultimately leads to murder. It is therefore more than a figment of religious imagination to equate God with Logos. Only Logos leads to Love, and everything contrary to Logos leads to suffering and ultimately destroys itself.
I know of only one reliable test of the moral character of people: how they would react when you disagree with their beliefs. I have traveled and lived in many countries, and the pattern is roughly the same everywhere; people are generous and kind if you fawn over their culture and customs, but if you would raise any objections or express disagreement with their beliefs, then claws, spears and pitchforks come out. Nothing confesses the lack of moral character more then the refusal to deliberate, the unwavering conviction that you are in possession the truth and anyone who disagrees is not to be reasoned with because they are ‘sick in the head’.
The only means that humanity possesses to peacefully resolve disagreements is via rational deliberation, where both sides try to understand one another and together evaluate the reasons for and against a particular view, not aiming to defeat the other and defend one’s belief at any cost, but to discover the truth of the matter, and overcome error. The enemy is then not the person expressing a controversial view, but error itself. I call this attitude ‘Good Faith’, which incidentally coincides with the ancient usage of the Greek word ‘Pistis’, nowadays translated as ‘Faith’, or worse, misrepresented as ‘Belief’. The laws of Reason are the only pacifier, and everything else ultimately leads to murder. It is therefore more than a figment of religious imagination to equate God with Logos. Only Logos leads to Love, and everything contrary to Logos leads to suffering and ultimately destroys itself.
Free energy oxymoron
Free energy, or perpetual motion, requires the Universe to be bigger than itself, because the input must be greater than the infinite (free) output, due to inefficiency of any emergency-conversion system. It also implies that the source of energy (X) is not depleted in any amount after it has given-off a quantity of energy: X-a=X, where a is not zero. But this is absurd, therefore free energy, or perpetual motion devices, are impossible. The idea is akin to the Universe reaching infinite temperature by itself, or creating something out of nothing, which violates the law of non-contradiction. https://culturalanalysisnet.wordpress.com/2018/05/21/proof-that-emergence-of-something-out-of-nothing-is-impossible/
Another, perhaps a simpler way to prove the point is that ‘free energy’ violates the fundamental laws of sense, it is an oxymoron, like an ‘infinite container’ (a container is defined by its limits, by a closed boundary that ‘contains’ something, so without limits it is not a container). Energy is a relation, a difference between state A and state B, and every relation requires limits that define the relata; the infinite does not have limits and therefore does not relate to anything, which is to say, it is not compatible with the meaning of ‘energy’.
Free energy, or perpetual motion, requires the Universe to be bigger than itself, because the input must be greater than the infinite (free) output, due to inefficiency of any emergency-conversion system. It also implies that the source of energy (X) is not depleted in any amount after it has given-off a quantity of energy: X-a=X, where a is not zero. But this is absurd, therefore free energy, or perpetual motion devices, are impossible. The idea is akin to the Universe reaching infinite temperature by itself, or creating something out of nothing, which violates the law of non-contradiction. https://culturalanalysisnet.wordpress.com/2018/05/21/proof-that-emergence-of-something-out-of-nothing-is-impossible/
Another, perhaps a simpler way to prove the point is that ‘free energy’ violates the fundamental laws of sense, it is an oxymoron, like an ‘infinite container’ (a container is defined by its limits, by a closed boundary that ‘contains’ something, so without limits it is not a container). Energy is a relation, a difference between state A and state B, and every relation requires limits that define the relata; the infinite does not have limits and therefore does not relate to anything, which is to say, it is not compatible with the meaning of ‘energy’.
Cultural Analysis & Philosophy
Proof that Emergence of Something out of Nothing is Impossible
A growing number of physicists working in the area of quantum cosmology express the view, to the dismay of some philosophers, that it is possible to create something out of nothing, although the ‘n…
People who are concerned about the prospect of nuclear war should not get excited about the idea of free energy devices, because it would pose a threat infinitely greater than nuclear weapons. In fact, it is cognitive dissonance to condemn the former and hope for the latter.
How to identify emerging Nazi movements
Some people think that Nazis must love Deutschland and the Aryan people, as if the same ideology applied to any other race or tribe would be morally different. If we separate the essence of Nazi ideology from any particular race, the following ideological features remain: a) nativist prioritarianism - the idea that the natives have absolute priority and inherently better rights than citizens of any other tribe or race (non-natives); b) The idea that races/tribes belong and have a sacred relationship to the land, so that nobody else can legitimately belong there. Although points a) and b) of themselves entail racial supremacism within the native environment, Nazis may promote c) some additional, more explicit marker of racial supremacy, some mythological or mystified biological feature that non-natives do not possess. This both amplifies and psychologically justifies the discriminatory demarcation and dehumanisation of non-natives.
Some people think that Nazis must love Deutschland and the Aryan people, as if the same ideology applied to any other race or tribe would be morally different. If we separate the essence of Nazi ideology from any particular race, the following ideological features remain: a) nativist prioritarianism - the idea that the natives have absolute priority and inherently better rights than citizens of any other tribe or race (non-natives); b) The idea that races/tribes belong and have a sacred relationship to the land, so that nobody else can legitimately belong there. Although points a) and b) of themselves entail racial supremacism within the native environment, Nazis may promote c) some additional, more explicit marker of racial supremacy, some mythological or mystified biological feature that non-natives do not possess. This both amplifies and psychologically justifies the discriminatory demarcation and dehumanisation of non-natives.
Unless you pay your doctor more than she is paid by the Pharmamafia, unless your doctor is more afraid of you than she is afraid of the Pharmamafia, she is not your doctor; she is their doctor, and you are the sucker.
Second-Order Propaganda
The opposite of an obviously false narrative is not the truth, but another false narrative prepared for those who pride themselves in being aware and better informed than the “sleeping masses”. This seems to be the primary vector of modern propaganda, a kind of reverse psychology, preying on your ego, self-conceit. They tell you a lie knowing that you will figure out that they are lying (everyone already knows they are lying most of the time), but they will also plant the seed of an equally false counter-narrative, and this counter-narrative is their primary objective. How else could they deceive people who already do not trust them, do not support them…
The opposite of an obviously false narrative is not the truth, but another false narrative prepared for those who pride themselves in being aware and better informed than the “sleeping masses”. This seems to be the primary vector of modern propaganda, a kind of reverse psychology, preying on your ego, self-conceit. They tell you a lie knowing that you will figure out that they are lying (everyone already knows they are lying most of the time), but they will also plant the seed of an equally false counter-narrative, and this counter-narrative is their primary objective. How else could they deceive people who already do not trust them, do not support them…
The alleged “removal” of vaccine mandates in S.A. is a public relations scam. The unvaccinated are still legally penalised, treated differently, therefore vaccine mandates remain, but were only modified. They are trying to trick you to believe that these are not mandates, but if you return to work under these conditions you are still acquiescing to medical coercion and the loss of the right to free medical consent, not just for yourself but for your children and future generations.
New World Fantasy
Here is a little fantasy, or perhaps even a far fetched hypothesis… Before anyone of us little people has heard about Covid-19, our rulers have already decided that the present order will crumble, that the present leaders will be sacrificed to make the transition meaningful and inspiring to the masses. All those government officials who pushed the lethal and unnecessary vaccines on children, those who unlawfully locked us down, coerced us to wear masks and to receive poisonous injections just to be able to work will go to jail, or themselves die from the vaccine. National parliaments will be purged by prosecutions for crimes against humanity, to the joy of those who resisted, who will join new political movements, freedom movements. But here’s the catch; the leaders of the new order, which is to be based on accountability, health and freedom, were also chosen before Covid-19 was even a thing. Any well meaning outsiders, no matter how competent and qualified, but uninitiated, will be politely sidelined, gently excluded, mostly ignored, passively discouraged. The painful change will thus be accomplished, and you will cheer and love the new leaders, your liberators, but sacrifices will have to be made; the economy will be gutted, industries destroyed, national debt astronomical, unpayable. To avoid a total sovereign default your loving leaders will agree to a deal, to use private wealth and real estate to pay the debt, but on very favourable conditions. You will get to keep your home, which you will technically no longer own, but you will have to pay rent, a modest rent, a bargain really… to begin with. In time, more adjustments will have to be made, to prevent governments betraying you ever again. New systems will be put in place to keep you safe from betrayal, from crime, and the price to pay for this will be practically nothing if you have nothing to hide. How do you like it?
Here is a little fantasy, or perhaps even a far fetched hypothesis… Before anyone of us little people has heard about Covid-19, our rulers have already decided that the present order will crumble, that the present leaders will be sacrificed to make the transition meaningful and inspiring to the masses. All those government officials who pushed the lethal and unnecessary vaccines on children, those who unlawfully locked us down, coerced us to wear masks and to receive poisonous injections just to be able to work will go to jail, or themselves die from the vaccine. National parliaments will be purged by prosecutions for crimes against humanity, to the joy of those who resisted, who will join new political movements, freedom movements. But here’s the catch; the leaders of the new order, which is to be based on accountability, health and freedom, were also chosen before Covid-19 was even a thing. Any well meaning outsiders, no matter how competent and qualified, but uninitiated, will be politely sidelined, gently excluded, mostly ignored, passively discouraged. The painful change will thus be accomplished, and you will cheer and love the new leaders, your liberators, but sacrifices will have to be made; the economy will be gutted, industries destroyed, national debt astronomical, unpayable. To avoid a total sovereign default your loving leaders will agree to a deal, to use private wealth and real estate to pay the debt, but on very favourable conditions. You will get to keep your home, which you will technically no longer own, but you will have to pay rent, a modest rent, a bargain really… to begin with. In time, more adjustments will have to be made, to prevent governments betraying you ever again. New systems will be put in place to keep you safe from betrayal, from crime, and the price to pay for this will be practically nothing if you have nothing to hide. How do you like it?
You cant buy this kind of publicity. You can only be given this kind of publicity. Boosted! https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10670439/Leading-anti-vaxxer-reality-TV-wannabe-exhausted-struggling-movement-raises-8-09.html
#antipropaganda
The consumption of information is never value-neutral but, due to the unique purpose-oriented valency present in every expression, is implicitly instructive: it coordinates and defines the very purpose it purports to serve. The consumer of information who engages with its purpose-oriented valency in a dependent fashion, inadvertently activates and assimilates the symbolic relations embedded within language. The information we consume therefore does not merely affect the way we think about facts but simultaneously characterises the identity of those facts and modulates the identity of the consumer.
The consumption of information is never value-neutral but, due to the unique purpose-oriented valency present in every expression, is implicitly instructive: it coordinates and defines the very purpose it purports to serve. The consumer of information who engages with its purpose-oriented valency in a dependent fashion, inadvertently activates and assimilates the symbolic relations embedded within language. The information we consume therefore does not merely affect the way we think about facts but simultaneously characterises the identity of those facts and modulates the identity of the consumer.
How to deal with misdirection
If you ask a politician a question about the relation of X to Y and they would respond by talking about the relation of X to Z (as they routinely do), you can in turn respond “I did not ask you about X-Z, I asked you about X-Y. Are you not willing to honestly clarify X-Y?” This way of questioning neutralises the routine response that they have already answered your question.
If you ask a politician a question about the relation of X to Y and they would respond by talking about the relation of X to Z (as they routinely do), you can in turn respond “I did not ask you about X-Z, I asked you about X-Y. Are you not willing to honestly clarify X-Y?” This way of questioning neutralises the routine response that they have already answered your question.
“The ultimate test of our moral character can perhaps be revealed only when God is dead, when no one is watching, when we believe that there will be no judgement or metaphysical consequences for our actions. Only when everything is permitted we will find out who we really are, to what levels of depravity we are willing to stoop, or raise above.” https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3735301
Ssrn
Transcendental Theology for Non-Believers
Pope Benedict XVI argued that it is "necessary and reasonable to raise the question of God through the use of reason" and to understand "theology
People get angry because they fail to rationally prove the correctness of their ‘obviously correct’ view. What seems obvious to you may need to be rigorously defended from time to time, and most people who make a stand against trans-ideology do not seem to grasp this basic point. Some Australian politicians come to mind; they equivocate between logical categories but are too conceited or otherwise unwilling to accept that their simplistic traditionalist arguments are inadequate. It is also possible that some politicians and activists do not want to resolve this conflict but to sustain it, because they can profit from the enduring polarisation and adversity. Trans-ideology is easy to prove logically invalid: https://news.1rj.ru/str/NormalParty/70