Tag: philosophy

Knowing When to Walk Away

The Forge and Anvil is closing down:

I strongly feel I have to turn away from the religio-political non-fiction writing I’ve been doing for more than a decade. I greatly admire people like Razorfist or Jon Del Arroz, who’ve managed to both work in the creative sphere, but simultaneously provide commentary on the issues. Yet again, I simply do not have the time to do all that. Writing is not my job. And I have a family I’m taking care of.

I very much desire to focus all of my creative talent on the Bovodar stories. (Notice how you still haven’t seen the sequel to Bovodar and the Bears? It’s because I’ve been doing Forge and Anvil. Episode 1 of a two-part sequel is complete, though unedited. It’s called “Bovodar and the Dragons.”) I listen to podcasts about properties like Lord of the Rings or Babylon 5, I watch Deep Space 9 reviews by Razorfist, or I’ll watch something about the Farscape saga, and I say to myself: “I should be doing that. Why am I so behind?”

At this point in my life, I was supposed to have a symphony of books out there. A trilogy of Hobbit-styled books, some adult novels expanding upon my created universe, a “Silmarillion” that described the ancient genesis of the world I’ve been building. Perhaps have a videogame by now. Comics. A cartoon or two? Etc. But I don’t. I’m like George R.R. Martin, who stubbornly refuses to finish A Song of Ice and Fire. I’ve got an entire “Dune trilogy” in my mind that no one but me knows about. And it’s not put out there because I’ve only one life, and I’m only one man. Bilocation is not something I can do.

So I will turn back to what started this whole journey. The fiction. The very fiction I set out to do from the outset. The non-fiction was an interruption and a tangent, but the fiction will have to resume.

I think he’s doing the right thing, and probably at the right time too. Always know when to walk away. I stopped writing syndicated game reviews after seven years, stopped writing political columns after 12 years, and walked away from recording and publishing contracts after two albums. In each case, it was the right decision to do so and I’ve never regretted it.

Even though I walked away from Alpha Game at precisely the moment that the SSH was beginning to break out into the mainstream, it was the right time to shut it down there. I’d explored the subject to the depths of my interest and it was best to leave it to others to delve into the various ancillary elements and applications that interested them.

Don’t ever phone it in. Once you get to the point that you’re just phoning it in, it’s imperative to find something else on which you can focus more enthusiastically.

DISCUSS ON SG

Atheist Morality

Sam Harris demonstrates why, no matter how they ponder their personal ethics and pontificate about their superior values, atheists are not fit to be members of any civilized society.

Hunter Biden literally could have had had the corpses of children in his basement, I would not have cared, right? So there’s nothing — first of all, it’s Hunter Biden, it’s not Joe Biden, but even if Joe — like, even — whatever scope of Joe Biden’s corruption is, like, if we could just go down that rabbit hole endlessly and understand that he’s getting kickbacks from Hunter Biden’s deals in Ukraine or wherever else, right, or China, it is infinitesimal compared to the corruption we know Trump is involved in. It’s like a firefly to the sun, right? I mean, there’s just — it doesn’t even stack up against Trump University, right? Trump University as a story is worse than anything that could be in in Hunter Biden’s laptop in my view, right? Now that doesn’t answer the people who say it’s still completely unfair to not have looked at the laptop in a timely way and to have shut down ‘The New York Post’s Twitter account, like that — that’s a left-wing conspiracy to deny the presidency to Donald Trump. Absolutely it was. Absolutely, right. But I think it was warranted, right?”

Atheists have no moral anchor. There’s literally nothing there. Their much-vaunted, self-constructed value systems revolve around nothing more than whatever happens to trigger their emotions at any given moment. They are simple creatures of pure appetite and rhetoric.

Remember, Sam Harris is supposed to be among the finest, smartest, most highly-refined philosophers that the atheist community has on offer. So if you ever wonder why Christian Nationalism is integral to the preservation of Western Civilization, Mr. Harris’s very vivid demonstration of atheist amorality should suffice to explain its necessity.

DISCUSS ON SG

Summa Speculatica

My aversion for theology, particularly of the modern sort, is well-known here. But that aversion has never extended to St. Thomas Aquinas, whom I admire enormously, and as I was reading selections from his Summa Theologica, as I do on occasion, I thought it might be interesting to consider my own thoughts on his various positions. So, I returned to the beginning, which is the ten articles on the nature and extent of sacred doctrine.

I answered them – my answers are in italics – prior to re-reading his answers, so as not to compromise my own reactions.

To place our purpose within proper limits, we first endeavor to investigate the nature and extent of this sacred doctrine. Concerning this there are ten points of inquiry:

(1) Whether it is necessary? YES

(2) Whether it is a science? YES, although not as science is presently defined by post-modernity or in the scientodic sense.

(3) Whether it is one or many? ONE, in the sense of true Sacred Doctrine. Of course, there are many false sacred doctrines.

(4) Whether it is speculative or practical? PRACTICAL, albeit with speculative consequences.

(5) How it is compared with other sciences? UNFAVORABLY in the modern context. I assume Aquinas is viewing it from the “Queen of Sciences” perspective here, but I could be wrong.

(6) Whether it is the same as wisdom? NO

(7) Whether God is its subject-matter? YES

(8) Whether it is a matter of argument? YES

(9) Whether it rightly employs metaphors and similes? YES

(10) Whether the Sacred Scripture of this doctrine may be expounded in different senses? YES

I’ll compare my answers with the Great Ox’s and attempt to ascertain where I went awry in a future post.

DISCUSS ON SG

The Quantum Editing Hypothesis

A number of Christians are, quite understandably, deeply appalled at the idea that Satan can not only quote Scripture and inspire the publication of false and misleading Scriptures, but can even ex post facto alter the historical texts. However, 2 Thessalonians appears to suggest that in the rebellion that follows the exit of the Restrainer, the man of lawlessness will “exalt himself over everything that is called God”.

Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers and sisters, not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by the teaching allegedly from us—whether by a prophecy or by word of mouth or by letter—asserting that the day of the Lord has already come. Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction. He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshipped, so that he sets himself up in God’s temple, proclaiming himself to be God.

Does this include “the Word of God” in the context of the physical texts of the Bible? It’s not conclusive, but it certainly would appear to be a potentially viable interpretation, particularly when all of the Christian organizations that supposedly represent “the Bride of Christ” have observably prostrated themselves before the spirit of evil.

And we know that God’s words can be perverted. Are you so absolutely certain that you know the limits to which it can be done?

Every man’s word shall be his burden; for ye have perverted the words of the living God, of the Lord of hosts our God. – Jeremiah 23:36

This is not an opinion. This is merely observation and hypothesis. Perhaps the Mandela Effect skeptics are completely correct and nothing has ever changed in any text or corporate logo despite our unreliable childhood memories of something having been different in the past. But the hypothesis is important, because it provides a predictive model concerning the possibility of future, more spiritually significant alterations.

Here is why I would caution those who insist upon the absolute impossibility of any such changes – and I freely admit that they are, to the best of my understanding, absolutely impossible. Anyone who is armed by the awareness of the possibility of quantum editing is unlikely to be deceived, whereas those who insist upon the eternal immutability of the text under any and all circumstances will find it very hard to avoid being deceived.

Note for the midwits: don’t even start with your ridiculous “X can’t be Y, because that would mean Z isn’t Z” illogic. In fact, please just excise the whole binary “if-then” routine from your repertoire. The subject is observably beyond you.

DISCUSS ON SG

You’re Not Neutral When You Choose a Side

Switzerland belatedly discovers that it can’t redefine the concept of neutrality.

Russia has turned down a Swiss offer to represent Ukrainian interests in Russia and Moscow’s interests in Ukraine because it no longer considers Switzerland a neutral country.

Switzerland has a long diplomatic tradition of acting as an intermediary between countries whose relations have broken down, but Russian foreign ministry spokesperson Ivan Nechayev said on Thursday this was not possible in the current situation.

“The Swiss were indeed interested in our opinion on the possible representation of Ukraine’s interests in Russia and Russia’s in Ukraine,” Nechayev said. “We very clearly answered that Switzerland had unfortunately lost its status of a neutral state and could not act either as an intermediary or a representative. Bern has joined illegal Western sanctions against Russia.”

Switzerland has mirrored nearly all the sanctions that the European Union imposed on Russia over its military intervention in Ukraine.

No independent sovereign nation is going to trust the Swiss any longer or permit them to act as a neutral intermediary now that their federal government has not only taken sides in the NATO-Russian war, but foolishly chosen the losing side. If the current Federal Council had been in charge when WWII started, it would have taken the side of the Axis and gotten the country occupied by 1944.

This really isn’t that surprising. If the federal government ever decides to redefine chocolate to mean “something that isn’t chocolate”, the demand for Swiss chocolate will collapse too.

If you are as others see you, then the recent statement by a Russian foreign ministry spokesperson that “Switzerland had unfortunately lost its status of a neutral state” could be a tipping point in any understanding of what neutrality and Swiss neutrality mean. It is one thing for the 200-year-old Swiss “perpetual neutrality” recognised at the Congress of Vienna in 1815 to be questioned internally, but for a major power, a member of the United Nations Security Council, to make such a declaration adds a new dimension to the ongoing domestic and global discussions of what neutrality means.

Neutrality means not taking sides. If you take a side, if you engage in economic sanctions or military conflict, then you obviously are not neutral. It’s not just the Russians who recognize that Switzerland is no longer a neutral state, but China and the rest of the BRICSIA coalition too. And what is the significance of “international law” that 80 percent of the global population does not recognize or respect?

DISCUSS ON SG

Occam’s Mirror

Martin Giddes on how the events of recent years have separated those who seek the truth from those we previously believed to have been friends and family:

The people who we thought were friends turned out to be merely acquaintances with a shared context and past. They didn’t understand who we really are in terms of our values, and neither did we see them clearly for who they are. The scamdemic in particular has resolved such misconceptions, as you cannot hide whether you are a colluder or resister. Those with whom we share a blood relationship may have notionally been family, but many have belatedly realised there was no true love there, and that duty was one-way.

We are having to build new families of choice, as our families of origin have abandoned our delight in life for an adulation of death. Once someone starts to suffocate and imprison children, indoctrinate them into premature and perverse sexualisation, and inject them with poisons, there is no going back to how we used to relate. Occam’s Mirror has shown the stark divide between those willing to engage in human sacrifice, and those who will resist it with all their might — and make sacrifices to do so.

To discover that your parents or siblings will maim and sterilise their own children for group approval is disturbing, but at least we now know. No matter how difficult things have been, there is no way I would want to go back to the world we had 5, 15, or 25 years ago. I have looked in the mirror, and seen both the beauty and ugliness in far starker terms than ever before. I am no longer confused by claims that prettiness is putrid or vice versa. The transvestigated false idols in the mass media look hollow and pathetic. In contrast, fluffy clouds and fruity bushes have become magical wonders of everyday living.

I have found who my true friends are, and it is those who will not compromise when it comes to harming children. Each of us faces personal strife, life setbacks, and the occasional sagging morale. There has been a toll extracted by this psychological warfare, social division, and barbaric genocide. Yet none of these loyal friends ever discusses with me whether we should switch from the narrow to the broad path. The protection of the young from predation is literally the issue we are willing to die for.

For me, the separation appears to be primarily between those who live by truth and those who live by fear. While I neither hate nor despise those who live by fear, I simply don’t have much to say to them anymore. What can you say to those who spend their days jumping at every narratival shadow while blithely ignoring the very real, and very substantial, threats to their families, their nations, their nominal faith, and the human race itself?

It’s rather like the IQ Communication Gap, only worse. And it doesn’t help that one cannot possibly hide one’s opinion of those literally sacrificing their children to their fears.

DISCUSS ON SG

Rationalizing Creatures

Spacebunny makes an observation:

Women and gamma males are the ultimate rationalizing creatures. Instead of attempting to improve themselves and make themselves more attractive, they double down on what makes them unpleasant and repellent, attempting to drag others down to their level. Nothing is ever their fault. As the saying goes, if no one likes and wants to be around you, it’s probably not everyone else with the problem….. Most will never learn and will die alone and bitter because of their choices.

(nods)

One of the most important lessons required for graduation to full adulthood is understanding and accepting the concept that other parties are autonomous. We see functional children – which is to say women and gammas, among others – repeatedly failing to grasp that they have zero control and very limited influence over the decisions and actions of other people.

Look at all the neocons, who thought they could a) expand NATO eastward and b) invade and occupy foreign countries without experiencing any negative consequences. Now the entire world that is not already occupied by the US military is stacked against them as a direct result of their foolish and short-sighted actions.

Look at the Europeans leaders, who stupidly thought they could sanction Russia without Russia refusing to sell their nations the fertilizer, food, natural gas, and oil that they require.

Excessive rationalization is what happens when people don’t get punched in the face enough to understand that for every human action, there will eventually be an opposing reaction. If you believe you are untouchable, for any reason, then you are still a functional child.

DISCUSS ON SG

On Awards

Keep this in mind if you’re ever inclined to feel that you haven’t been properly recognized for your achievements, whatever they might be.

Nolan Ryan has more strikeouts than any pitcher in baseball history and has thrown more no-hitters (Ryan has seven, Sandy Koufax is second with four) than any pitcher. He had seasons of 383, 367, 341, 329 and 327 strikeouts. He had nine complete-game shutouts in 1972, and two seasons of 26 complete games.

Ryan never won the Cy Young Award.

Awards used to be popularity contests. Now they’re just Narrative Approval contests. In either case, they are entirely irrelevant with regards to actually recognizing genuine accomplishment in a field. They mean literally nothing, as the Puppies demonstrated when Space Raptor Butt Invasion and Alien Stripper Boned By The T-Rex were both nominated for Hugo Awards, and as the SF-SJWs conclusively proved when they tried to claim, with a straight face, that a black female performance artist had written the best novel in science fiction for three straight years.

For crying out loud, Paul Krugman, who is RELIABLY wrong and has just released yet another mea culpa, has been given numerous economics awards. And do you know who never won a

This isn’t sour grapes. In addition to my many Puppy-powered Hugo Award nominations, I have been received various academic awards, athletic awards, and music awards – not too many people can say they beat out Prince himself for a music award for which he was also nominated – and have absolutely no idea what I did with any of them. I did find two Hugo rocket pins in a Euro change box the other day, though, for whatever that’s worth.

Achievement speaks for itself and should be pursued for its own sake. Merit is not determined by those who are established in their industry and seek to control it.

UPDATE: It’s worth noting that JRR Tolkien never won a Hugo Award or a Nebula Award, and never even made the shortlist for one.

Although certainly not obscure on release, it [The Lord of the Rings] was not immediately regarded as a classic and the American WorldCon attendees (the two ceremonies were held in Cleveland, Ohio and New York City, respectively) seem to have pretty much ignored it. The 1955 Best Hugo was instead given to Mark Clifton and Frank Riley’s They’d Rather Be Right and the 1956 award to Robert A. Heinlein’s Double Star.

In 1966, the Hugo Awards introduced a one-off “Best All-Time Series” category. It was widely assumed by many (but most notably Isaac Asimov) that the award was introduced solely to reward The Lord of the Rings and to make up for the book’s initial publication being overlooked. Surprisingly, the award went instead to Asimov’s Foundation Trilogy, as it then was.

DISCUSS ON SG

Evil Always Inverts

A SocialGalactician observes how the pattern applies to the Christian view of debt to the modern debt-based economy.

The law said you weren’t to charge interest to your fellow countrymen, only to strangers. You weren’t to enslave your fellow countrymen (same thing as getting them into debt), only strangers. We now have the worst of both worlds, where our own political class are working to endebt us (enslave us) all – to foreigners.

This is a good illustration of evil’s primary tell: inversion.

Evil always inverts.

Inversion is the stink of sulfur that tells you wickedness is at work. Inversion is precisely what the Prophet Isaiah warned of in Isaiah 5:20. When you see inversion justified or rationalized – the conservative case for feminism, the Christian case for immigration, the polite case for using selected pronouns – then you have a reliable indicator of both which side of the line you should stand as well as the people you should never trust.

Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

DISCUSS ON SG

The Real Challenge

“To be anti-fascist or anti-communist is to fight with the shadow of the past. The real challenge is to be anti-liberal.” – Alexander Dugin

It’s very, very difficult for the good-hearted, well-intentioned peoples of the West, whether they style themselves liberals or conservatives, to understand or accept that all of the freedom and liberty and equality rhetoric to which they respond so emotionally is pure Enlightenment poison. None of it is good, none of it is real, and none of it is true.

It is all inversion.

Jesus Christ promises us freedom from sin. The Enlightenment devils promise us freedom from God.

The Old Testament defines liberty is freedom from debt and immigration every fifty years. (Leviticus 25:10). The Enlightenment devils define liberty as permission to commit sins against both Man and God.

The Bible tells us that we are all fallen short of the glory of God. The Enlightenment devils promise us equality with God.

The fruits of the Enlightenment have come to pass. Its evils are now undeniable and its precepts have proved themselves to be unsustainable for families, nations, and societies. The Enlightenment virtues have turned out to be vices that destroy the Good, the Beautiful, and the True.

Therefore, embrace the challenge.

DISCUSS ON SG