I have noticed something very worrisome lately.
Well, really, I have noticed it my entire life, it's just that lately, it has accelerated at a break-neck pace suggested by Alisdair MacIntyre in his still-very-relevant 1988 work Whose Justice? Which Rationality?:
The West and those inhabiting it have lots the consensus of logic completely.
Logic is a fidelity system for language.
Without a logic to control it, language loses fidelity.
In other words, it becomes unreliable as a means of communication.
What replaces it is other modes of human communication: chiefly sex, violence, and the sensations.
Because our cultural handlers have destroyed the foundations of our ability to discourse, we have been reduced to now.
The only way out of this is hyper-localism, small high-trust high-commitment groups, and a cultural momentum generated by a narrative strong enough to call many such groups into being and then translocal collaboration.
Everyone else will be left behind in the currently incoherence, and they are are ultimately doomed to a subhuman, sublinguistic existence.
Am I right or am I full of shit?
LANGUAGE MEANS NOTHING ANYMORE
Other urls found in this thread:
We are in the simulation goy
(((They))) have been building the Tower of Babel. This is what the story warned us about.
Looks like you lost the ability to write coherently too.
(((Violence))) == Opposing ideas
I would wholeheartedly agree, so long as you are talking about the Esoteric Jew with your parentheses.
More to the point, I take it on good evidence that what we are really dealing with is human actors being worked on by other actors with their own agendas, both willingly (in the case of those at the top of the pyramid) and unwillingly (in the case of almost all of us).
>Be me
>Live in New York
>Been out tonight
>See more couples like pic related than white couples
I did totally make a editorial errors.
>02 should have a period after the word 'life' and a new line starting with 'It's.'
>03 'lots' should read 'lost'
Thanks for the help, friend!
Might be close to the truth. Words and language are a very important part of a society, it is the means by which we communicate with each other. When definitions of words get distorted, problems arise. The Truth does not depend on words or language and therefore if a word does not correspond to Truth, then an error has occured. Take "racist" as a good example of a word that has a distorted definition. Looking into etymology and the true meaning of words has really activated my almonds on certain occasions.
So yes again you might be right. I think we should keep in mind the old saying: "vincit omnia veritas".
>I did totally make a editorial errors.
Might be time to go to bed...
That's just the large scale of AI shitposters they let run rampant on all social media fucking up. I doubt anyone still has has the macro from /new/ where some vigilante proved this, i'll try to find on my old hdd.
MacIntyre's main point would be that human systems we take for granted actually have linguistic and ethical assumptions baked in, and when the language we use cannot suss out basic questions of ethics, morality, and truth, the practical systems of our lives begin to suffer.
We think language is all in our heads, but really it's the foundation of every human interaction.
If I am at a store and I ask for a sweet potato, I will be dissatisfied if the clerk brings me a yam.
My dissatisfaction might turn hot if he continues to insist that what he brought me was a sweet potato.
The hot button topics of today are a just a manifestation of the bigger problem of logical incoherence that has been growing like a cancer in the West since the Enlightenment.
We will never solve the former if we do not address the latter.
Or, more to the point, the former is unsolvable and the latter will only be solved by small, tight-knit groups of diehards who will among themselves build a functional consensus and thereby regenerate their society at an appropriately human scale.
Politics has nothing to do with categorical imperatives. It's all about power. So political language isn't constructed in order to be reasonable. It's meant to evoke emotion and override the rational faculties. There has never been a political language that is reasonable.
Pigeon bbc is a perfect example of the media distorting truth through language, by corrupting an already existing established form pf communication. Its basically a form of newspeak. One of many tools that degenerate social interactions with post truths
...
Political language can function where it meant to function:
the polis
MacIntyre makes this very point.
In the Anthenian democracy, everyone was driven by a teleological imperative:
Each person, by their definition of what a person is, has a role to play in the human ecosystem of the polis.
Whether they excel at their task (and thereby benefit the polis) or not is the measure of their virtue.
People are meant to operate in social groups numbering around 200 people.
Those 200 people are supposed to know and trust each other, to work together, and to accomplish the tasks of survival.
This is a pattern that without fail appears in every human group which has escaped civilization, and it works quite well.
Before we moved out of the forest, the human life expectancy was seventy years, and we worked four hours a day to get everything we needed for survival.
As soon as the slave masters took over, human life expectancy dropped to thirty-five and people worked from sun up to sundown.
We cannot go back to pre-civilization, but post-civilization must learn the lessons of history if it is to move onto whatever is next.
Language has always been tied to the perception of reality, therefore the interpretation of it. Language has always been considered sacred. Breath is sacred. Religion is an encoding of how things work if you can interpret it.
(pic very related)
This is the esoteric angle that is a little harder for those who have never delved into these things to grasp.
This is why I honestly believe that there are actors directing this plot:
It is being executed with such amazing coherence and precision that it's difficult to believe there is a human conspiracy behind it.
The conspiracy would not only have to involve a huge number of people;
All of those people would also have to be able to flawlessly execute time and time again plans of labyrinthine complexity and enormous scale without every accidentally showing their hand.
I don't buy it.
Something else is happening.
>without every accidentally showing their hand
maybe you aren't paying close enough attention
You underestimate pure chaos, rng, and overall human nature/idiocy
When I say "showing their hand," I mean to those not actively looking.
Obviously, I know something is going on.
The fact that the masses do not frustrates all of us, but it goes to show that the actors are doing a very good job.
"Conspiracy theories" are an icon, an analogy, a mythos.
They point to the truth; they are never the truth in and of themselves.
I would admit to having a fairly high view of human potential;
I also understand that humans by and large are products of their environment, or their phenotypical expression over time though epigenetic regulation, if you want to get overly technical.
This is why you can see people who have been through serious social wear and tear and know it instantly:
we are animals whose instincts inform us faster than our minds can rationalize what it is we know.
Humans and their situations are a feedback loop.
Actors who understand this interaction us it influence people and change society.
You would be surprised how esoteric the advertising business is in.
If you want an eye-opening study, check that shit out.
>good god man, those typos
My almonds were really activated recently because i read Rene Guenon's "Reign of Quantity and the signs of the times". A few examples:
He questions the very concept of "measure", and to measure things such as distance.
He questions the concept of "Number".
He questions the modern scientists definition of the word "matter".
He questions time, and the assumption that you can measure time, and explains that clocks do not measure time but in fact measure space (the space that the dials on a clock move in a certain time).
He blames Descartes a lot, and criticizes his "dualism", which i cannot comment on because i simply don't understand yet.
Pic related, it's my face when my almonds were undergoing activation. Even then i barely understood half of the book. But this is the real deal, i can tell.
Whether external powers or not, there is information encoded in our DNA that plays out predictably.
DNA is such a crucial aspect of the modern age. There is so much to say.
>information encoded in our DNA that plays out predictably
This seems to be a conviction that people hold in the modern age. Taking a brief view of ancient philosophical systems, this belief cannot be found. It is purely modern.
It's another way if understanding things. DNA can be the snake or gods or whatever. It's all the same.
It's literally worlds apart. DNA corresponds to the "subterranean" or "underworld", while the gods live in the "overworld" or "heaven". This is esoterics that i don't expect you to comprehend.
Yes, within some constraints.
We contain the blueprints for a thousand different versions of each one of us:
It all depends on what we go through over the course of a life.
Most of these changes are never permanently encoded in our DNA, but many are passed down for a few generations before being overwhelmed by different environmental factors.
When the same environmental factors appear generation after generation, these changes can find their way into your permanent genetic code.
Now, think about the fact that your mind operates in cooperation with this mass of fats and proteins called your brain.
Now, recognize the fact that your DNA told your brain how to be built.
Now, recognize that your brain and the epigenetic machinery that selected the appropriate proteins that built that built your brain are influenced by your lived experience.
Now ,realize your lived experiences may effect the phenotypical expression of your childrens' brains.
Now, realize there may be actors who have taken advantage of this fact over many generations to craft humanity into a means to their ultimate end:
>disclaimer: pure conjecture
To take over 3-space by incarnating through humans, thereby foiling the creator of the universe and winning the cosmic battle.
Humans are supposed to rule 3-space, but we have given up/been tricked our of our birthright.
By harnessing humans, actors can use their amazing powers to build a metaphysical gateway between when there are, just on the periphery of our dimensionality, and the world we exist in.
This is not supposed to happen, because the things on the periphery are not us.
They are machines, and maybe machines that run other machines, but machines that have run rampant and forgotten their task.
Now all they can imagine is the world they would rule if they had the chance, and they are doing everything they can to get that chance.
But, of course, it is totally dependent on humanity following their plan.
In other words, we are to blame.
I understand the esoteric point of view, but Im inclined to say its just flavor for the metaphysical. We can understand a lot of this from memetics. People influence others through ideas that catch on. You can also call it marketing, esotericism, etc. I believe they all have the same origin which is the underlying collective consciousness and the reptilian brain all humans have
In a lot of ways, I agree.
I just think that the lizard brain itself exists within a broader esoteric (and metaphysical; see above) in which for some reason, the possessors of these lizard brains are able to burn nuclear fire and bring people back from the dead.
English is shitty and dumb language. It all u need 2 knew
you'll be interested in this
English contains more words than any other language.
Also, the subjunctive case in English is something almost incomprehensible to many other language-users.
Correct.
This is evidence of another esoteric condition I think we are seeing:
Emergent consensus.
I work around Common Core, and I have a deep resonant hatred for it for all the stated reasons.
That and PBIS cannot simply be bad bureaucracy.
It is absolutely intentional, and it harms children.
More to the point, it harms children on purpose.
Sounds like total crap
>The hot button topics of today are a just a manifestation of the bigger problem of logical incoherence that has been growing like a cancer in the West since the Enlightenment.
oh great, more of this neo-reactionary "problem of the enlightenment" horseshit.
I can tell you that 95% of hot-button bullshit is just people being stupid and not knowing what words mean, e.g. people calling anything they don't like "racism" or "socialism". The other 5% is real shit like "does a fetus have a right to life?" that is pure opinion.
If you actually talk to people, you'll find the "consensus of logic" is intact, but they're ignorant and dialed-in to their political tribe, and thus ineducable. They're committed to their bullshit, which has nothing to do with logic or their capacity for discourse, just their willingness to not be pampered cunts who are entitled to always be right.
not the children
he said stop the police violence, not violence in general, killing cops would accomplish that. it's a perfectly cromulent tweet.
It's easy to dismiss as "total crap" but Guenon is trying to approach the very root issue of the different problems that face the West today. If you cannot truely "measure" something, such as distance for example, then what is all of modern science? Is it really just approximations? Does it mean modern science is a lie?
...
>Am I right or am I full of shit?
MacIntyre is pretty close to right.
Except you can measure things, you literally just hold a ruler up to it and read the fucking number.
All these academics have some "root issue" for all our "problems" that they, conveniently enough, happen to be the expert on. Don't fall for it.
Not really. There are many branches of science that deal with thing that are either qualitative, e.g. phenotype and morphology as a basis for evolutionary reconstruction and taxonomy, or are deeply uncertain, i.e. quantum physics.
And do you not notice the shit about "the possibility of measurement" depends on the "indefinite divisibility" matter is completely false? There are literally no scientists that believe this, and yet they're all perfectly comfortable measuring shit.
This should be a big red flag for you. Your boy is way off in the weeds, saying shit that makes no sense because he needs it to prop up his gimp theory.
And to be clear, sometimes you put error bounds or error terms on your measurement, and sometimes you don't, depending on whether it matters for the question you're studying.
Seriously, take some fucking science classes before studying "philosophy" of science. 80% of it is total garbage written by people who have never been in a lab in their lives, as far as I can tell. And they all want to steal some academic glory for their backwards, useless discipline by taking science down a notch or eight.
You have been warned.
Well, i wish you would consider that he might be right, it's not like i'm shilling for his works or anything, i'm just seeking the Truth.
I considered it
>the shit about "the possibility of measurement" depends on the "indefinite divisibility" matter is completely false? There are literally no scientists that believe this, and yet they're all perfectly comfortable measuring shit.
Your boy was flat-out wrong. I'm not sure what else I should be considering, except your feelings or something
He's not saying measurements are untrue or unnecessary you fucking brainlet
My almonds were activated by studying English Language in college. The abject opposition to any sort of prescriptive thinking was clear and the people espousing it were retarded to the point they were unable to explain the correct use of a semicolon.
It's eminently clear that we've gone horribly wrong somewhere.
What do you mean by
>prescriptive thinking ?
Could you explain?
I know i could google it but i'm asking you anyway.
He's saying they're "problematic" because "you can never REALLY measure something" or some such horseshit, right? And "there can be no science at all" unless you can measure something, so science is wrong!
I think between my two posts I'm pretty on top of it.
>outlaw/corrrupt/destroy language = destroy culture
>destroy culture = destroy homogenity/group identity
colonization 101. your analysis is correct OP
>LANGUAGE MEANS NOTHING ANYMORE
basically, yeah.
enter pigdin.
which is funny cause they call it decolonization
No, he's just saying that by limiting your thought to things that can be measured in the ways you have devised to measure things, you necessarily exclude from your thought everything that cannot be measured.
It's similar to the scale legibility problem bureaucracies have:
they can only see numbers, and numbers don't tell the whole story.
This is a very interesting topic, thanks for sharing your thoughts. Do you have any recommended reading on this and other topics brought up here in this thread? Don't go light, I'm willing to read tons of long books.
That's all well and good, but science is by definition the study of the material world. Unless you're one of these neo-reactionary hippies whining that you don't get to blame your indigestion on ghosts anymore like you could in the good old days where life "had meaning"
protip: there's still plenty of shit science doesn't know, plenty of space for you to intellectually honestly insert your comforting myths to give your life meaning. Stop being lazy faggots who just want to believe THA BIBBLE because your ancestors did. Grow a pair.
>Don't go light, I'm willing to read tons of long books.
Oh boy, turn around while you still can.
its like pic related except their new take is 'theres a whiteman/European in you head..'
...
It's just the idea that there is a correct form to be aspired to. It's the view that there is an "ought" in regards to language, that rules and customs are important for communicative value.
Do share. I'm already on the other side of the rabbit hole, and I'm always looking for deeper knowledge and obscure but useful paradigms.
Hell yes I do.
Whose Justice? Which Rationality? and After Virtue by MacIntyre are a great start... Really, anything he has ever written.
Seeing like a State by James Scott is good periphery reading.
Also, Neuro-Linguistic Programming: Volume I by Doug Davis et al is helpful.
I really appreciate Derrick Jensen, but he is not pleasant in any other context in his writing. Endgame is spectacular, though, if you have an open mind.
Theologically, I like N. T. Wright and Greg Boyd when it comes to some certain cosmological issues.
That should be enough to chew on for a while.
Oh, ok. Plz resurrect Plato so he can save us.
...
Excellent, thank you very much my friend. I'll look into all the names and works you mentioned.
read the dune novels
It's not that simple, though.
Materialism cannot wrap itself around society or human behavior at all.
The "social sciences" are a farce which attempt to apply the analytical tools of the hard sciences to tasks for which they are useless.
But, read carefully...
it cuts both ways.
Equally I think the scientific community needs to be more aware of the wider impact it has on less easily quantified (If even possible), and thus less attractive, areas of study.
I'm just gonna leave this here
>Materialism cannot wrap itself around society or human behavior at all.
Nonsense, the only real "mystery" in the sciences is how emergent properties emerge. Everything else "hasn't been explained YET". Just because the social sciences aren't well developed doesn't mean science doesn't have the potential to create an effective social science.
You mean like the curation of dragon dildo collections? We need to stop wasting money trying to develop new antibiotics and spend more time funding studies of which my little pony is the most cloppable?
...
I think the solution, as I see it, is very hard for Westerns to really grasp unless they are from a relatively small town or a relatively large family.
The idol of government has supplanted the hyper-local social safety net that both preserves its members and exercises an immune function against subversive elements.
Language has been denuded and manipulated to make it harder and harder to even think in these terms.
We must recover identities within communities which match our species.
Right now we are herded into pseudo communities built for machines.
Is it any wonder our humanity is ebbing away?
>Nonsense, the only real "mystery" in the sciences is how emergent properties emerge.
Science me up some morality, then.
It's not that they're useless, it's that they're used incorrectly and with a great deal of bias.
Social "scientists" are finding the results they want to see, not genuinely exploring human society or psychology. They've got their way of science backwards.
The hard sciences, particularly physics, are running into a different problem, where everything groundbreaking is theoretical and little if anything is being verified empirically. Rather than explaining nature, physics is now chasing its tail the way mathematics does.
Too many books. If you're going to recommend people read, pick something specific and keep the recommendation to 1-3 books. KISS philosophy.
Well, the problem is always the control group versus the experimental group.
Every living human being is a billion billion variables.
Isolating those variables is functionally impossible.
Even twin studies have serious problems because of just how malleable individual humans are.
We need different language to talk about social structures.
Awesome!, thanks for posting this. I have some other images like this, so I will see what this has that I don't have in other pics.
>Too many books. If you're going to recommend people read, pick something specific and keep the recommendation to 1-3 books. KISS philosophy.
For other people, this might be good advice, but I asked for the full course dinner and that is pretty much what I got it seems. It's about a year and a half to two years of reading.
I will also bump the Dune series on my reading list, I have been meaning to get through those as well, so thanks for the reminder.
Morality has a few aspects. For example, there are feedbacks between nature and culture, e.g. toilet taboos, which clearly have a selective advantage, but are then reified through the semi-rational cultural process of becoming a taboo.
Other forms of morality are generally attributable to human evolutionary history, specifically our evolution as tribal pack hunters. This accounts for the tensions we see in most moral systems, i.e. altruism and prosociality will be preached, e.g. charity, duty, and so on, but then there will be selfish morals also taught, e.g. status seeking through material success, valor, honor, being the strongest, or whatever.
And then the fact that our tribal groups fought each other pretty routinely has given human morality its ugliest aspect, the racist, bigoted, genocidal side. Humans are instinctively genocidal, presumably because there were many times in our history where there would be, e.g., a drought, and survival required conquering a neighboring group. Thus genocide and racism are very much hard-wired into the human mind, as much as caring for children, caring for a mate, wanting social approval or wanting to avoid filth are.
The thing about being modern, the power of science, is that we can recognize the roots and realities of these moral strands. We can substitute scientific hygiene for semi-rational taboos, we can choose the parts of morality that we know will be good for society, like caring for each other, and suppress or sublimate the bad ones, like using pro sports to substitute our genocidal tendencies.
This. Etymology research is well worth the work.
...
That only applies to niggers, and leftists who fall for the nigger meme
Also it doesn't help the government wants to allow drugs
>The West and those inhabiting it have lots the consensus of logic completely.Logic is a fidelity system for language.
have noticed that too. Arguments and logic des not count anymore it's just about feelings and identity groups on a pedestal. And if idenitity group x is more victim you can't criticize them. I hardly find people to have a normal discussion with
Isn't Neuro-Linguistic Programming pseudoscience?
I think the first three paragraphs you wrote are great; wouldn't change a thing.
The fourth, however, I take issue with, only because the current history we live in is the result of exactly this kind of thinking.
>we can choose the parts of morality that we know will be good for society,
Who is "we" in this scenario, and what is "good"?
And furthermore, when the "we's" understand the "good," what stands between them and accomplishing that "good" by any means necessary?
Nothing.
How many times has medicine changed?
How many times has nutrition changed?
How many times has physics changed in the 20th century alone?
It's all well and good that these things change, of course.
We learn that we made mistakes and we attempt to correct them.
But, of course, we aren't all too terribly good at it, so we have to continually refine and readjust what we are aiming for.
I think progress is largely a myth.
We used to live till 70 on four hours of labor a day running on those taboos.
Now "progress" is pixel counts and processor speeds useful for pumping out endless entertainment.
We have pushed forward in medicine, largely driven by the industrial world's tendency to kill people in new and exciting ways.
The need for batteries in our mobile electronics are the reason why the world geopolitical situation has us trying to charge into places like Afghanistan and North Korea.
Gender confirmation surgery.
Sex bots.
Pervasive surveillance.
"Innovative" family structures.
McDonaldification.
Nuclear weapons.
The richest nations in the world are full of unhappy or delusional people, all toward the end of machine-immortality for a tiny minority at the top and gradual genocide for everyone else.
It's...
not that.
It's not science either.
It's something else entirely.
Expound on that a little?
If that 1 post friend is still on this thread after 2.5 hrs, I would be elated.
Kek I had to reply to this post because I didn't feel replying to your others but going off what you were saying in this long interesting droning....
I think what that guenon user was trying to saying is that humans thinking is faulty itself, we can only always get an approximations through the lense of our senses but nothing beyond that. It is all we know and it is the best we can get so we should accept that, but if morality can be supposedly measured why is not possible to think that our brain cannot perceive beyond our own senses?
I'm feeling like I'm rambling. I just wanted some input.
It works on just about everyone.
Frank herbert calls them 'power words', and I think it's apt. You've almost certainly used one of them unironically. The word 'Degeneracy" is one of them.
They are slippery ill-defined words that can be twisted to mean whatever you want them to mean. What is degenerate? What is it degenerating from? Where is it degenerating to?
There's a lot of built-in assumptions with certain words. Let's take racism - another power word - as an example. Why is being racist a bad thing?
youtube.com
>In all major socializing forces you will find an underlying movement to gain and maintain power through the use of words. From witch doctor to priest to bureaucrat it is all the same. A governed populace must be conditioned to accept power-words as actual things, to confuse the symbolized system with the tangible universe. In the maintenance of such a power structure, certain symbols are kept out of the reach of common understanding - symbols such as those dealing with economic manipulation or those which define the local interpretation of sanity. Symbol-secrecy of this form leads to the development of fragmented sub-languages, each being a signal that its users are accumulating some form of power. With this insight into a power process, our Imperial Security Forces must be ever alert to the formation of sub-languages.
I think what is missing is just basic fucking propaganda for natural laws. If you deny existence you will destroy it!
It's a reference to the bible.
As the parable goes - in ages past we all spoke a single unified language. Mankind in this time decided to build a tower to heaven itself, and God saw this blaspheme and punished humanity by scattering mankind across the planet with thousands of different languages so he could no longer communicate or understand his fellow man.
Destroying your ability to communicate destroys your ability to cooperate. Lowering the level of discourse lowers the level of effective cooperation.
Which is what is being done by modern media institutions and social engineers.
1984 discusses concepts such as thought-crime, newspeak, and wrong-think; if you control the language, you control everything that stems from communication of ideas. You control the culture and society itself. Words literally ARE power. If you have no words for freedom, how can you even communicate the concept to someone else? With control of the language you can silence the 'wrong' ideas, and even if they sprout spontaneously in individuals, they cannot be effectively communicated to spread amongst the group.
To see this in action, you need only look as far as Nigger. The left trots out a new word every few years to describe blacks - as their previous word has become tainted with the negative association of the object to the word, and so the word must be discarded and changed anew. Leftists keep doing this because they refuse to accept reality - it's not the word that describes the object, it is the object that describes the word. A nigger is a nigger. You can call him black, african-american, youth, pavement-ape, monkey, basketball-american; it doesn't matter. Negative connotations appear because they derive from the object being described, and not the word. It's not people being racist, it's a manifestation of reality: Blacks are not fun to be around.
It's based on outlandish scientific claims and got BTFO'ed.
>Live in New York
Jew York Jew girls are dating negros?! You jest!
The Declaration absolutely does. Right where it says that men have the right to overthrow their government. Is she admitted that's what their intent is?
>Language has always been considered sacred. Breath is sacred. Religion is an encoding of how things work if you can interpret it.
In the Beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word WAS God.
Whelp, it's back to church for me. Can somebody point me to a good conservative catholic church in the greater LA area that isn't over-run with mexicants?
You talk like a fag and your shits all retarded.
Excellent post, user. Continue to pay attention.
thanks brah
>language service
>pidgin
Wait what do they mean by that?
Pidgin refers to any regional mixture of languages. There is no language of "Pidgin", the pidgin spoken in one part of African is going to be completely different to another part.
It's like saying you can speak "dialect".
They mean that they offer it in nigger speak
It's a form of English that's virtually incomprehensible. Ironically I've found blacks are really good at learning languages, in spite of being terrible in so many other ways, so this strikes me as incredibly racist on the part of the BBC.