Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts


Go Back   Vanguard News Network Forum > News & Discussion > General Discussion
Donate Register Multimedia Blogs Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Login

 
Thread Display Modes Share
Old December 2nd, 2009 #1
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,495
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default Christian Science: A Fascinating Study in Non-Dogmatic but Pure Liberal Cultism

Christian Science makes for a fascinating study. It's got a pure WASP pedigree - formed by a woman, but not just a woman, a disagreeable woman, a WASP, a Northeasterner, if I'm not being doubly redundant. CS is non-dogmatic, but just as crazy and bizarre in its channeling of mentation as its extremely dangerous and much better known big sister, political liberalism.

Sometimes a slight remove can help us see something more clearly for what it is. That is just the case with CS. Because there aren't any overt politics, and so our fur doesn't get up, we can see very clearly one bizarre way of taking the world vs the one dominant here.

The following is from The Mother Church forum. CS's "mother church" is in Boston. Apparently this headquarters has become new age-y over the years. That's background.

A poster lays out a problem:

Want to help my best friend who is struggling
My best friend is having some really hard times right now in her personal life. Her parents are constantly yelling at her, she fights with her mom all the time, and it is at the point where she thinks that once she leaves for college next year everything at home will be better because she will be gone. It hurts me so much to see her going through this. She is a good person with so much to offer the world. But her parents make her feel like an awful person and she feels like nobody cares and she gets really down on herself. I need help with what to say to her! I really want to help her somehow, I just don't know what to say.


Someone responds:

Your desire to help comes from God, divine Love, so I encourage you to keep listening to Love for guidance. In situations like this, where someone seems to be going through a hard time, I find it can be so helpful just to start within one’s own thinking acknowledging what is true – that despite what the material picture seems to be saying God is still with that individual and that no material cirmcumstance can have the last say as to their well-being. Our prayers might inspire us to say something, or to do something for them. The wonderful thing about prayer is that it brings answers just right for the situation.

You haven’t mentioned if this individual has already any knowledge of Christian Science. Perhaps you’ve considered talking with her about her unchanging relationship with God, or sharing Science and Health with her. Your prayer will lead you.

We can always trust that as we correct our own thought about the situation that we are contributing in a positive way. I recall a while back a family I know were having a difficult time because of an inharmonious relationship within the family. I prayed to be clear in my own thought so as I was sure that I was seeing those individuals in their true light, as God’s children. I didn’t feel led to say anything in particular, but I knew the importance of keeping my own thought uplifted. It was lovely to see the situation turn around. I’m not saying it was just my prayer that did that, but I think we can always trust that as we correct our own thought about a situation then we are contributing in a positive way to circumstances changing for the better.

This last is the essence of liberalism - getting a model of how things SHOULD be in our heads - and force-fitting the real world to that model. that's the ultimate reduction here, don't be fooled by the wording, because any liberal worth her salt will claim that hers is the real reality. But evidence and experience are on our side.

Notice the focus on "correcting" one's thought. The focus is not on perceiving accurately, and letting reality drive our response, but on taking whatever comes into our head, and filtering it to fit our ideal, paragon, model for how the world works.

The Christian Scientist sees more or less what all of us see, but because she has been taught that matter is unreal, and that everyone is a reflection of god, ie a reflection of perfect love, then the reality is that there's nothing really wrong here - just a bunch of thinking that needs to be corrected, starting with our own. It's really bizarre, when you think about it. It goes against all instincts. You almost have to be white to be a liberal, because there's a convoluted process that has to go on, rather than, as in football, a read and react. It doesn't take brains to be wrong, any nigger can do that, but it does take brains to be wrong in an intricate way. What the CS can't admit to himself is that there's probably a reason he has to correct his thinking. The reason is that his first thoughts are incorrect. And notice the use of the word - exactly the same as what the marxists use. There is no formal relation, it's just that a similar process has to be undergone. It should be a major sign to the CS believer that the world itself is not enough, but has to be correctly interpreted. It is obvious, from the repetition in the quotation above, that there is a substantial risk of backsliding because the need for "correct" thinking is omnipresent in CS literature and commentary. It is a great effort, then, to keep up the liberal facade, or keep the liberal mentality running - nigs and other muds are not known for effort, they're in liberalism for spoils. Only whites can be liberals because it takes too much work and brainpower. Presumably it gets easier after a time, as a horse infected with just a bit of snake venom builds up resistance. Presumably it gets a little easier to "correct" the evidence of one's senses after years of practice. Thus, in political liberalism, you have a nigger shoot four cops in cold blood, and 10,000 Huffington Post-ers demand gun control, and mods censor any call for nigger control. There may be a great practical distance between bloodthirsty PC communists starving villages to death and the type of hapless, up-with-people positivity of the post above, but the underlying mentalities are similar. CS is like a harmless mutation of the mental virus that produces the ebola of communism, with its Politically Correction.

Last edited by Alex Linder; December 2nd, 2009 at 08:05 AM.
 
Old December 2nd, 2009 #2
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,495
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

CS beliefs and attitudes towards reality:

"Stand porter at the door of thought. Admitting only such conclusions as you wish realized in bodily results, you will control yourself harmoniously." (Eddy, 1906, p. 391)

[The above is quoted over and over. It is used on the sick, to encourage them to "correct" their thoughts, which in turn will alleviate their condition, since disease is not the product of germs or some other external cause but the product of erroneous material thinking.]

http://www.calpoly.edu/~dswanson/cs.htm

[The following is repeated at CS services as a sort of creed.]

The "Scientific Statement of Being," which is read at every church service:

There is no life, truth, intelligence, nor substance in matter.
All is infinite Mind and its infinite manifestation, for God is All-in-all.
Spirit is immortal Truth; matter is mortal error.
Spirit is the real and eternal; matter is the unreal and temporal.
Spirit is God, and man is His image and likeness.
Therefore man is not material; he is spiritual.
(S&H 468)

[I can recall reciting this a thousand times.]

The truly odd thing is that CS is genuinely non-dogmatic. Most of its members go in for glasses and dentistry. This doesn't really bother anyone, nor is anyone kicked out for it - even though it runs directly against the tenets above. One is simply not advanced enough in practice to be able to heal oneself of errors that...per the above...don't exist in the first place. Before you laugh, remember that VNN is a direct product of the above teaching. As I've said, "Everyone is a teacher, but not everyone realizes which subject." Things are quite as likely to produce the reverse as what they're intended to produce.

What is odd and as far as I can think unique is that CS is not dogmatic. You're teaching people basically that reality is an illusion, it's pretty hard to keep up that charade without beating people back in line, like most cults do, but CS truly doesn't do that. There is not even any social sanction against those who visit doctors. It doesn't make sense any which way you look at it. Every other form of liberal insanity, that begins and ends in denying reality, tries to burn anybody heretic who rejects its cult. Political liberalism is just like the sicko who commandeers the bus in the Dirty Harry movie and forces all of us poor children to sing "merrily merrily merrrily merrily, life is but a dream" as we drive into the bridge abutment.
 
Old December 2nd, 2009 #3
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,495
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

What I have said many times, but WN thinkers have not paid attention to, is that a race with unique intelligence and creativity...is also going to produce uniquely perverse and high-quality evils. Our perverts are more pernicious. It is clear that we have failed to develop or make dominant a mentality and morality that can protect our race without shackling it. Mere reality is never good enough for the perverted system builders like CS lewis. Nothing can ever be here-and-now-and-us, it has to be absolute, fitting eskimos 25000 years ago and pygmies tomorrow. Universalism has failed. It is a perversion.
 
Old December 2nd, 2009 #4
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,495
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Concepts of ideals, higher things, higher senses - these are much more dangerous than they appear, but they are like catnip to many of our intelligent men. The CS posts above show the attraction, even to mediocre minds, of systems in which mere reality doesn't cut the mustard. We just stuff it into our mental Easy Bake oven and turn it into god's own apple pie. Too many white people just don't seem to be that interested in what's going on outside their heads. Reality impinges on them lightly. They prefer the world they've invented in their head, which goes by morality or ideals or spiritual truth. They grow angry if we point out their foolishness, and, depending on their personality, either smile at us condescendingly or swipe the sickle across our throat.
 
Old December 2nd, 2009 #5
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,495
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Another poster responds:

Maybe you can affirm in your prayer that no matter what the material picture is trying to tell you, the truth is that there is only one God, which is the one and only reality of the situation: the only true fact. And your friend, her mom, and her dad can not be outside that harmonious, peaceful, loving all.

https://tmcyouth.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3312


"No matter what the material picture is trying to tell you" - this mentality will forever be foreign to me. I never believed in CS as a child, not for a single minute. It reinforced my probably genetic urge to pay especially close attention to the only reality that exists - the one that stubs your toe when you kick the rock.

CS is very much like those horrible glamour photos people take, where the subject is misted and gauzed up until even the fat-n-uglies become beauty queens. I don't understand why anyone would want to play make believe with reality when the consequences can be fatal. But that's, perhaps, the genius of businesswoman Eddy: the consequences tend to be carried out on the kids, rather than the parents. It's not the parents or the CS practitioner who died with an obstructed bowel, it's the tot. Although the material picture may suggest that shit has backed up in the poor kid's system until it's coming out her mouth, the real reality is that she is a perfect reflection of God, and God, as is well known and attested by every religious magnate every heard of, does not have an obstructed bowel.

David and Ginger Twitchell appeal from their convictions of involuntary manslaughter in connection with the April 8, 1986, death of their two and one- half year old son Robyn. Robyn died of the consequences of peritonitis caused by the perforation of his bowel which had been obstructed as a result of an anomaly known as Meckel's diverticulum. There was evidence that the condition could be corrected by surgery with a high success rate.

The defendants are practicing Christian Scientists who grew up in Christian Science families. They believe in healing by spiritual treatment. During Robyn's five-day illness from Friday, April 4, through Tuesday, April 8, they retained a Christian Science practitioner, a Christian Science nurse, and at one time consulted with Nathan Talbot, who held a position in the church known as the "Committee on Publication." [n. 3] As a result of that consultation, David Twitchell read a church publication concerning the legal rights and obligations of Christian Scientists in Massachusetts. That publication quoted a portion of G.L. c. 273, § 1, as then amended, which, at least in the context of the crimes described [p. 116] in that section, accepted remedial treatment by spiritual means alone as satisfying any parental obligation not to neglect a child or to provide a child with physical care. We shall subsequently discuss this statute in connection with the defendants' claim, rejected by the trial judge, that the spiritual treatment provision in G.L. c. 273, § 1, protects them from criminal liability for manslaughter. [n. 4]

From Boston Globe article:

In Massachusetts, 2-year-old Robyn Twitchell died of intestinal obstruction at home (vomiting "excrement and portions of his bowel before he died"); his parents, Christian Scientists, were acquitted of wrongdoing in 1993, though they watched him suffer over five days.

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ma...e_soul/?page=6

Can you imagine how strong your ability to "correct" reality must be to watch your son puking up shit and bowel...OVER FIVE DAYS...without doing anything about it - oh, except calling some faggot to do nothing (ie, pray) about it?
 
Old December 2nd, 2009 #6
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,495
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Again, CS is a very good example of the kind of perversion and insanity that only whites are capable of. Other races do dumb things because they're dumb. We do dumb things because we're smart. This black side of our superior abilities has not been written or thought about enough by WN.
 
Old December 2nd, 2009 #7
Kievsky
Senior Member
 
Kievsky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,229
Kievsky
Default

Quote:
Mere reality is never good enough for the perverted system builders like CS lewis.
Hehe, "mere reality." There's a book title for ya!
 
Old December 2nd, 2009 #8
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,495
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

[Is this not a mild and comparatively innocuous form of insanity?]

I made up a game that is sort of a variant of the Jar Game and played it with my Sunday School class many years ago. We called it the Porter Game, from Mrs. Eddy's statement, "Stand porter at the door of thought..." (S&H 392:24). This is how it worked. We created some kind of doorway, say with two chairs spaced apart. One student would be the porter. The others would take turns being ideas that presented themselves at the door of thought looking for a way in. It was the porter's job to decide whether or not to let the thought in. The kids really enjoyed the play acting and got into it.

As the teacher, I often took a turn as a thought. One time I approached the door crawling/dragging myself across the floor. When I got to the door I begged for them to let me in. I told them I was hungry and thirsty and homeless and I needed their help. Not surprisingly, the porter let me in. I then shocked the class by stating that the porter should not have let me in. I reminded the class that I represented a thought and not an actual person. So the decision should have been to shut out the thought that any of God's children could go without what they need. I also mentioned that they could shut out the thought without shutting out the actual person. It was a wonderful (and fun!) teaching moment. After that, the children all had even more fun trying to stump the porter.


http://tmcyouth.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1948

This sounds goofy and ridiculous, but then you remember (non-CS) the quintessential WASP liberal statement of Barbara Bush on some talk show about not troubling her "beautiful mind" with worries about the corposes piling up in Afghanistan.

"Why should we hear about body bags and deaths," Barbara Bush said on ABC's "Good Morning America" on March 18, 2003. "Oh, I mean, it's not relevant. So why should I waste my beautiful mind on something like that?"

Reality is declasse to these self-righteous, self-regarding assholes like Bush.
 
Old December 2nd, 2009 #9
Kievsky
Senior Member
 
Kievsky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,229
Kievsky
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder View Post
Again, CS is a very good example of the kind of perversion and insanity that only whites are capable of. Other races do dumb things because they're dumb. We do dumb things because we're smart. This black side of our superior abilities has not been written or thought about enough by WN.
I've thought about the black side of our superior abilities. Unfortunately this is what dominates nowadays. To get away from it, I had to immerse myself in Eastern stuff like yoga and qigong. Those practices celebrate the body rather than deny it. You move in ways you never would have in normal life, and do so on a regular basis. This greatly loosens all the joints of the skeleton, which allows energy to flow, and you get all light-headed, in a good way. Third eye opens.

I can see you are on a roll of inspiration, and what Bog sends, Alex. That's good -- I get those episodes a few times a year too. usually a change of season thing, and I'm getting one right now too. Like a quickening -- history has just hit accelerator.
 
Old December 2nd, 2009 #10
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,495
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kievsky View Post
Hehe, "mere reality." There's a book title for ya!
I harbor a special loathing for that cunt Lewis. Mere reality is an obvious twist on his 'Mere Christianity,' and yes, it would be a good title. Lewis, carrying on Jesus's anti-intellectual campaign, says flat out in Screwtape Letters and elsewhere that asking why is the devil's question.
 
Old December 2nd, 2009 #11
Zenos
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 3,514
Zenos
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder View Post

There is no life, truth, intelligence, nor substance in matter.
All is infinite Mind and its infinite manifestation, for God is All-in-all.
Spirit is immortal Truth; matter is mortal error.
Spirit is the real and eternal; matter is the unreal and temporal.
Spirit is God, and man is His image and likeness.
Therefore man is not material; he is spiritual.
(S&H 468)
This sounds very similar to Catharism.
Catharism Catharism
 
Old December 2nd, 2009 #12
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,495
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kievsky View Post
I've thought about the black side of our superior abilities. Unfortunately this is what dominates nowadays. To get away from it, I had to immerse myself in Eastern stuff like yoga and qigong. Those practices celebrate the body rather than deny it. You move in ways you never would have in normal life, and do so on a regular basis. This greatly loosens all the joints of the skeleton, which allows energy to flow, and you get all light-headed, in a good way. Third eye opens.
I'm sure any movement is good movement! What interests me is whether or not a means or system can be devised to train minds in their proper use, thereby to shrink to the lowest possible level the dangers posed to the rest of us by radically creative mental perversion. If we train people to eat and to exercise, can't we train them to use their minds correctly?

Quote:
I can see you are on a roll of inspiration, and what Bog sends, Alex. That's good -- I get those episodes a few times a year too. usually a change of season thing, and I'm getting one right now too. Like a quickening -- history has just hit accelerator.
I'm just fascinated by the varieties of liberalism - what they have in common and where they differ.
 
Old December 2nd, 2009 #13
Rick Ronsavelle
Senior Member
 
Rick Ronsavelle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,006
Rick Ronsavelle
Default

The "higher abstraction" mentality is known as Platonism.
Immanuel Kant, famous German philosopher, splits the world into the phenomenal, and the noumenal, the latter being the abstract "higher" world. The regular world is called "mere appearance", and is inferior to the noumenal "real" world.
This in Kant's Critique of Pure Reason. This developed into German Idealism- the exported version is called American Pragmatism.

As this "higher" world is the real deal, everything must be force-fit into it.

"Dualism: The Phenomenal and Noumenal Realms. Platonist frames of thought draw a dividing line between two realms. One realm, the inferior of the two, is the material, physical world of sense experience. It is the "phenomenal" world, the world of objects, of the body, of immediate perception. The other, superior realm is the world of the immaterial, the spiritual, the world of realities not accessible to the body's senses, the world known by intellect or spiritual sense, the "noumenal" world. Scholarship written in English variously refers to this world as the realm of ideas, of ideals, or of forms, with the terms, particularly the last, often stimulating considerable debate (which I shall shun ).1 The phenomenal world is the world of entities possessing lesser degrees of reality. The noumenal world is the world of the higher realities, including the Highest Reality and its various manifesting aspects, usually referred to in English as the Universals or, less often, the Transcendentals. Particular assessments of the phenomenal world and of the relationship between the two realms vary greatly. It is helpful to distinguish between "pessimistic" and "optimistic" Platonisms on these points. 2 Pessimistic Platonisms define the material world as not simply less real than the noumenal world but as morally inferior, indeed, in the most extreme varieties of pessimism, as thoroughly evil. The only response of the illuminated human spirit to such a material world is to reject it, condemn it, and try to escape from it morally, spiritually, intellectually, and, sometimes, through philosophically motivated suicide, physically. Optimistic Platonisms admit that the material world is greatly inferior to the noumenal world in its moral value as in all other ways (the principle of the unity of Universals, discussed below, makes this admission inescapable), but by one means or another the material world has received within itself a portion of the noumenal and this noumenal presence manifests itself behind or within material phenomena. Material phenomena, therefore, because they offer an opportunity for revelation, become fit objects for human contemplation and even for appropriately calibrated human love. There is good in the world, and this good mediates between the separate realms of the phenomenal and the noumenal, between the material world and the world of ideas. In some optimistic Platonisms, especially those influenced by Christian notions of divine incarnation and immanence, the noumenal presence in the material world is a power by which the material is not only overcome but in fact transformed and redeemed. Whether or not a particular form of optimistic Platonism goes as far as that, it does see the dualistic breech between realms as capable of being bridged, whereas pessimistic Platonism sees that breech as permanent. Whether a particular version of Platonism is in this sense optimistic, pessimistic, or a mixture of the two has great influence on its assessment of eros, and, of course, in particular, its judgment concerning the physical dimensions of eros. Later in this overview, I develop this topic somewhat more fully."

http://www.warren-wilson.edu/~dmycoff/plato.html

It has been said that there are only three great philosophers in the West- Aristotle (champion of common sense), Plato, and Immanuel Kant. Kant admitted that The Critique was written to save faith from reason.

"Immanuel Kant (German pronunciation: [ɪˈmanuɛl kant]) (22 April 1724 – 12 February 1804) was an 18th-century German philosopher from the Prussian city of Königsberg. Kant was the last influential philosopher of modern Europe in the classic sequence of the theory of knowledge during the Enlightenment beginning with thinkers John Locke, George Berkeley, and David Hume.[1]

Kant created a new widespread perspective in philosophy which has continued to influence philosophy through to the 21st century. He published important works on epistemology, as well as works relevant to religion, law, and history. One of his most prominent works is the Critique of Pure Reason, an investigation into the limitations and structure of reason itself. It encompasses an attack on traditional metaphysics and epistemology, and highlights Kant's own contribution to these areas. The other main works of his maturity are the Critique of Practical Reason, which concentrates on ethics, and the Critique of Judgment, which investigates aesthetics and teleology.

Kant suggested that metaphysics can be reformed through epistemology.[2] He suggested that by understanding the sources and limits of human knowledge we can ask fruitful metaphysical questions. He asked if an object can be known to have certain properties prior to the experience of that object. He concluded that all objects about which the mind can think must conform to its manner of thought. Therefore if the mind can think only in terms of causality – which he concluded that it does – then we can know prior to experiencing them that all objects we experience must either be a cause or an effect. However, it follows from this that it is possible that there are objects of such nature which the mind cannot think, and so the principle of causality, for instance, cannot be applied outside of experience: hence we cannot know, for example, whether the world always existed or if it had a cause. And so the grand questions of speculative metaphysics cannot be answered by the human mind, but the sciences are firmly grounded in laws of the mind.[3]

Kant believed himself to be creating a compromise between the empiricists and the rationalists. The empiricists believed that knowledge is acquired through experience alone, but the rationalists maintained that such knowledge is open to Cartesian doubt and that reason alone provides us with knowledge. Kant argues, however, that using reason without applying it to experience will only lead to illusions, while experience will be purely subjective without first being subsumed under pure reason.

Kant’s thought was very influential in Germany during his lifetime, moving philosophy beyond the debate between the rationalists and empiricists. The philosophers Fichte, Schelling, Hegel and Schopenhauer each saw themselves as correcting and expanding the Kantian system, thus bringing about various forms of German idealism. Kant continues to be a major influence on philosophy, influencing both analytic and continental philosophy."



Immanuel_Kant Immanuel_Kant
 
Old December 2nd, 2009 #14
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,495
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

The regular world is called "mere appearance", and is inferior to the noumenal "real" world.

That's exactly where the trouble comes in. People dismiss ordinary reality in favor of an imaginary, a concocted reality that fits their tastes or their ideology. When the real world and other people refuse to comply, the ugly-dreamers taser them into compliance. The solution is to quite worrying about imaginary horseshit and concentrate on the real world as we all commonly find it. We still don't understand that one, we're still discovering new species.

Last edited by Alex Linder; December 2nd, 2009 at 07:51 PM.
 
Old December 2nd, 2009 #15
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,495
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Basically, a lot of high-IQ fools have invested huge amounts of time to try to trick people that (a nigger) isn't really (a nigger). But it is. Imaginations are for fiction or daydreaming, not for trumping real facts and the lessons of experience. How are people going to pay attention to the real world at the end of their nose if the most celebrated philosophers are shitting on 'mere reality'?
 
Old December 2nd, 2009 #16
Kievsky
Senior Member
 
Kievsky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,229
Kievsky
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder View Post
I'm sure any movement is good movement! What interests me is whether or not a means or system can be devised to train minds in their proper use, thereby to shrink to the lowest possible level the dangers posed to the rest of us by radically creative mental perversion. .
Creative mental perversion is nothing new:



The qigong and yoga stoke the internal fires, and give you the self control to either stoke vanity, or cool it off. It's the choice one makes every day. Stoking it is exhilarating, though.
 
Old December 2nd, 2009 #17
Rick Ronsavelle
Senior Member
 
Rick Ronsavelle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,006
Rick Ronsavelle
Default

"Every man is born an Aristotelian or a Platonist. I do not think it possible that anyone born an Aristotelian can become a Platonist; and I am sure that no born Platonist can ever change into an Aristotelian. They are two classes of man, beside which it is next to impossible to conceive a third."

Samuel Taylor Coleridge (1772-1834), English Poet
 
Old December 2nd, 2009 #18
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,495
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Ronsavelle View Post
"Every man is born an Aristotelian or a Platonist. I do not think it possible that anyone born an Aristotelian can become a Platonist; and I am sure that no born Platonist can ever change into an Aristotelian. They are two classes of man, beside which it is next to impossible to conceive a third."

Samuel Taylor Coleridge (1772-1834), English Poet
No, it's entirely possible to conceive a third, and in fact most people do not fit into those two classes, they exhibit a mixture.

The right way to do it is to focus on the real world - to observe as closely as one can, and always be alert to what is new, or where one's perceptions might be in danger of being fooled. That's observation.

Then there's thinking. Thinking is used to detect patterns arising from the observed evidence. Occasionally, due to inspiration from music or some other source, some radical new theory might pop up. The source doesn't matter. The mind might be intrigued by it, but the properly managed mind will treat it all theories the same - by recognizing that, no matter how strong their appeal, they are nothing, and must be discarded, if the evidence contradicts them.

The love of imaginary worlds over the real one, and the desire to force theories onto reality, are emotional or character problems. The willful refusal to perceive, the willful rejection of evidence is a personal problem that can easily become, in the aggressive and obnoxious, a general political problem.

Someone will probably discover that the propensity to reject the world in favor of fantasyland is genetic. As is the propensity to visit one's hallucinations on others.
 
Old December 2nd, 2009 #19
Kievsky
Senior Member
 
Kievsky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,229
Kievsky
Default fantasists versus realists

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder View Post
No, it's entirely possible to conceive a third, and in fact most people do not fit into those two classes, they exhibit a mixture.

The right way to do it is to focus on the real world - to observe as closely as one can, and always be alert to what is new, or where one's perceptions might be in danger of being fooled. That's observation.

Then there's thinking. Thinking is used to detect patterns arising from the observed evidence. Occasionally, due to inspiration from music or some other source, some radical new theory might pop up. The source doesn't matter. The mind might be intrigued by it, but the properly managed mind will treat it all theories the same - by recognizing that, no matter how strong their appeal, they are nothing, and must be discarded, if the evidence contradicts them.

The love of imaginary worlds over the real one, and the desire to force theories onto reality, are emotional or character problems. The willful refusal to perceive, the willful rejection of evidence is a personal problem that can easily become, in the aggressive and obnoxious, a general political problem.

Someone will probably discover that the propensity to reject the world in favor of fantasyland is genetic. As is the propensity to visit one's hallucinations on others.
Fantasists get rewarded, so they will continue. Look at the wealthy televangelists, and many other examples. So long as "it$ a living" there will be fantasists.

Hopefully we are entering a historical period where realists get more social rewards. People will always want fantasy, though, and even realists will be tempted to use some fantasy or other to dominate the masses.
 
Old December 2nd, 2009 #20
Oy Ze Hate
We're the Good Guys
 
Oy Ze Hate's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Pediatric Burn Unit
Posts: 4,776
Oy Ze Hate
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder View Post
Again, CS is a very good example of the kind of perversion and insanity that only whites are capable of. Other races do dumb things because they're dumb. We do dumb things because we're smart. This black side of our superior abilities has not been written or thought about enough by WN.
It is difficult and odd to look at one's race and ask "What the f is wrong with these people?"

Revilo Oliver gave it some thought. Here's an excerpt from his magnanimous essay What We Owe Our Parasites. It's my belief that we could achieve a white utopia...if we didn't have to live around a bunch of niggers, jews, and various assorted non-whites who look at us with scorn because we're so gd nice to them all the time.

The excerpt:

We Americans, you know, are regarded with supreme contempt by our enemies, who describe us in private and sometimes in public in the most contumelious terms. You may remember that some years ago a man named Khrushchev was the manager employed on the conspiracy's estate in Russia. He was invited to this country by his pal Ike, and he toured our land, honored and applauded by the press and even by some Americans. Soon after he returned, he told newspaper reporters in Vienna, "The Americans? Why, you spit in their faces and they think it's dew."

That delicate phraseology reminded me of what I had been told by an acquaintance in Washington during the Second World War. This man, a veteran journalist, held a position of importance in one of the lie-factories operated by the Roosevelt regime to keep the boobs pepped up with enthusiasm for sending their sons or their husbands to a senseless slaughter. At one policy conference, this man objected to a proposed lie on the grounds that it was so absurd that it would destroy public confidence, with the result that Americans would soon cease to believe anything that the agency manufactured. There was a great deal of debate over that question in this policy conference until it was ended by the agency's great expert in such matters. He was a man who, by the way, for some reason or other, had left Germany a few years before and come to bless the United States with his presence. This expert, being a bit ruffled by the debate, finally took his elegant little cigar from his mouth and said decisively, "Ve spit in ze faces of the American schwine!" And that settled it. The master had spoken.

Why do we receive and deserve such contempt? Unless we have simply degenerated into a race of imbeciles, unfit to survive in the world, there must be some ascertainable mental block that makes us so gullible. And, if so, we most urgently need to identify it. That's the real reason why I brought up the question of Senator McCarthy and what may have seemed history long past and otiose. That episode was obviously the antecedent of our present terrible plight. And when we try to look back at the obvious factors, such as the alien control of our channels of information and of our finances, we know there must be something back of that. And then we look at an obvious factor, of which many were made aware only recently by the shocking behavior of so-called students in so-called universities and by the far more shocking behavior of the administrative officers and faculties of those diploma mills. We now see that the gang of sleazy racketeers headed by John Dewey has attained its goal. We realize that the public schools have been for many years a vast brainwashing and brain-contaminating machine that has worked, on the whole, with great efficiency. It's a machine to which we send our children to have their minds filled with grotesque and debasing superstitions; to have their instincts of integrity and honor leached from their souls; to be incited to premature debauchery and perversion; to be imbued with thoughtless irresponsibility; and to be prepared for addiction to mind-destroying drugs and an existence below the animal level. The public schools have indeed been the most powerful single engine of subversion that our enemies have used upon us. The rest of this hour would not suffice even to enumerate the ways in which the self-styled "educators" have accomplished their deadly work.

When we go back to the affair of Senator McCarthy and look for a deeper cause, we can of course blame the schools, which were doing then, a little less openly, the work that they are doing now. But that leaves us with the question: Why did the American people fall for that racket? Why were they gullible enough to be so easily taken in by John Dewey's hoax?

Well, let us go back to 1917, when Dewey's fraud had gained control of only a relatively small area, and when the world was certainly a brighter and more pleasant place. That brings us, of course, to the time of Woodrow Wilson, another baleful figure in our history. I am not one of those who regard Wilson as entirely a villain. I think he was primarily a man who could intoxicate himself with his own words. And I think that he went through most of his life mistaking his hallucinations for reality, as surely as he did on that day in 1919 when he was driven in the early morning through the deserted streets of Washington, mechanically raising his hat and bowing to the applauding crowds that existed only in his feverish brain. I am therefore willing to believe that he believed a good deal of what he said. And although in his political life he was merely a marionette that danced and pranced on the stage as its strings were pulled by Jacob Schiff, Bernard Baruch, the Warburgs, and their agent Colonel House, the fact remains that Wilson ranted to the American people about "making the world safe for democracy" and "a war to end wars," and they believed him. Instead of calling a physician when he began to babble that arrant nonsense, they let him plunge them into a war in which they had no conceivable concern and to use the power of the United States to make the result of that war as disastrous in the long run for Britain as it was for Germany.

Now I admit that the notion of a warless world is a pleasant and attractive thought. But people who believe that there can be such a thing should ask it of Santa Claus, in whom they doubtless also believe.

Let us go back to 1909, when the American people were offered a plan for destroying nations that had been formulated again by a filthy degenerate named Mordechai, alias Karl Marx. Now it's true that the promoters hired a few journalists, liberal professors, and other intellectual prostitutes, to prove conclusively that the proposed income tax could never under any circumstances exceed four per cent. on the income of millionaires and could never affect anyone else, for the obvious reason that no federal government could possibly spend so much money. But the point is that a majority of the American people -- the inheritors of a free government based on the premise that government must be limited to essentials and must be tied down by the chains of a stringent constitution restraining the exercise of all powers except those deemed absolutely necessary for national defense -- those American people believed that hogwash. In effect, what the promoters were telling them in wheedling tones was, "Come, little boobies, put your heads into the noose and we'll do you lots of good." And the boobous little boobies stuck their necks into the noose, and so the country is now under the regime of the great White Slave Act, and that's why we are where we are today.

We could go much farther back, and if we had the time we certainly should go back at least to the 18th century, when the weird mythology of what is now called "liberalism," and all of the basic lies that are rammed into the minds of our children in the schools, were manufactured by a motley and bizarre gang composed of agents of Weishaupt's great conspiracy, many ordinary swindlers and mountebanks, and quite a bevy of "idealists" with buzzing brains and twittering tongues. But I think that we have said enough to see that we Americans are suffering from a chronic disease or tropism that has invariably placed us at the mercy of our enemies by making us incapable of taking thought for ourselves. There is in us a weakness, perhaps a fatal weakness, that makes us not only listen to the babble of self-professed do-gooders, but to do whatever they tell us to do, and to do it as mindlessly as though we were in a hypnotic trance and had surrendered our will to that of the hypnotist.

Now I believe that this strange weakness, unlike so many of our peculiarities, is not a single congenital and hereditary idiocy. If that were true, we would not be here: our remote ancestors would have been eaten long before the dawn of history. It is compounded, it seems to me, of a perversion of seven different qualities; a perversion effected and fostered by certain misunderstandings in the peculiar circumstances that resulted from the prosperity, power, and world dominion we of the West achieved for ourselves and enjoyed in recent centuries. All of the seven elements of our mentality that I shall enumerate are good qualities, at least in the sense that they are born in us, that we could not eliminate them from our genetic heritage if we wanted to, and that we have perforce to accept them. We could comment at length on each of them, and it would be particularly interesting to contrast ourselves with other races at each point. But I must list them as briefly as possible, with only a word or two of explanation to make my meaning clear.

The first is imagination, which is highly developed in us, and vivid; an imagination which means, among other things, that we have a spiritual need of a great literature: both a literature of vicarious experience and a literature of the fantastic and marvellous that transcends the world of reality. But this gift bears with it, of course, the danger that we may not distinguish clearly between a vivid imagination and something that we can actually see in the world.

Second, the sense of personal honor which is so strong in us, and seems so fatuous and silly to other races. It is this, among other things, that gives us the conception of an honorable contest when men of our race meet as opponents in war. It gives us the knightly ethos that you see when Diomedes and Glaucus meet on the plains of Troy and in all subsequent history and story of our race. It also exposes us to the danger of behaving in knightly fashion to those to whom those standards are lunacy.

The third is the capacity for objective and philosophical thought, which is virtually limited to our race, and which enables us to put ourselves mentally in the position of others, but simultaneously exposes us to the risk of fancying that their thoughts and feelings are what ours would be.

The fourth is our capacity for compassion. We have a racial reluctance to inflict unnecessary pain, and we are ourselves distressed by the sight of suffering. That is, of course, a peculiarity that brings upon us the ridicule and contempt of the numerical majority of the world's population, who are beings differently constituted. The savages of Africa, who are now your masters in the sense that you have to work for them every day, find the spectacle of a human being under torture simply hilarious. And when they see a blinded captive with broken limbs squirm as they prod him with red-hot irons, they laugh with glee -- with a merriment, a real merriment, that is greater than the funniest farce on the stage has ever excited in you. You may search the vast and respectable literature of China in vain for any trace of compassion for suffering per se.

Fifth, our generosity, both as individuals and as a nation, which naturally brings on us the contempt of those to whom we give abroad.

The capacity for self-sacrifice is sixth; and that is, of course, highly developed in us, but it is a necessary basis for the existence of any civilized society. No people above the stage of unthinking savagery can survive in this world without some instinct or some belief which makes its young men give their lives for the preservation of the society in which they were born.

And the seventh and last is the sentiment of religion, which of course is common to all mankind, although here again it takes a distinctive form in us. For fifteen centuries the religion of the Western world has been Christianity, Western Christianity, and there is no other religion now known or even imaginable that could take its place. But it is simply an historical fact, which we must deplore but cannot change, that only a small part of our population today, 12 or 15 per cent., really believes that Christ was the son of God, that the soul is immortal, and that our sins will be punished in a future life. That means that the religious instinct, which is a part of our nature, finds in the majority of our people no satisfaction in an unquestioning faith; so that those frustrated instincts are available for exploitation by any halfway clever scoundrel, as the shysters and punks who now occupy the majority of our pulpits well know. When faith is lost, what Pareto calls the religious residue in a people becomes its most vulnerable point, its Achilles heel. It is the unsatisfied need for an unquestioning faith in a superior power.


Now, a perversion of all of these qualities in us operated during the centuries of our dominance to give us an utterly false conception of other peoples. We have imagined that by some magic we could convey to them not only our material possessions, but the qualities of our mind and soul.

And we have always succumbed to the flattery of imitation. The capacity for imitating behavior is common not only to all human beings, but to all anthropoids, as we all know from the proverbial expression, "monkey see, monkey do." An ape's ability to imitate is, of course, limited. But, with the exception of the Australoids, other races have the capacity to imitate us convincingly in externals. If they dress in our clothes, observe our social conventions, and speak our language, using the phrases which as they can learn by observation please us, and using those phrases even if they don't understand them or if they regard them as preposterous drivel and nonsense, the members of other races could imitate us so plausibly that we believe them converted to our mentality and to our conception of life. And any shortcomings that we may notice in the performance of the imitator, we generously overlook or regard as endearing naivete.


http://www.revilo-oliver.com/rpo/wwoop.htm
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:25 AM.
Page generated in 0.20413 seconds.