Bitcoin Forum
October 16, 2018, 09:34:26 AM *
News: Make sure you are not using versions of Bitcoin Core other than 0.17.0 [Torrent], 0.16.3, 0.15.2, or 0.14.3. More info.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: Do you agree with the principles of the Dark Englightment?
yes to all - 13 (17.1%)
most of them - 30 (39.5%)
less than a majority of them - 11 (14.5%)
none of them - 22 (28.9%)
Total Voters: 76

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 [27]
  Print  
Author Topic: Dark Enlightenment  (Read 68837 times)
CRED.me
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42
Merit: 3


View Profile
January 19, 2018, 03:19:55 PM
 #521

Unlike James A. Donald’s unrealistic extremism, Jordan Peterson knows how to have dialogue with a much larger swath of society on this subject matter:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMcjxSThD54

I don’t however agree with him that women will necessary excel for example in medicine if ever it’s no longer a state subsidized and regulated non-free market (and I do agree with him that in any case such discrepancies aren’t because of IQ differences except perhaps on the extreme outliers of theoretical science). I think JAD is actually closer to correct on the natural roles of women in a free market. However, we must assess that collectivism is a feature of civilization so again JAD’s insight may be an unrealistic extremism, i.e. socialism and collectivism may be a permanent feature of civilization yet I’m not sure.

One possible perspective is that Jordan Peterson is more attuned to where we are now at the current juncture of civilization (which makes sense given he is data driven as a clinical psychologist) and JAD is more attuned to where we might be heading with a collapse of socialism and collectivism along with the collapse of the industrial age and fixed capital investment which require socialism and collectivism.

Also, this Anonymint theory that western women open the door to muslim invasion because women inherently want to be "raped and conquered" is way off.  Just like Einstein and Hitler both summarized:  "like anything else, nature is the best teacher".  Animals like female whales will send out a call to male whales.  When several males show up, the female runs away and tries to get the males to fight over her to the death and waits to see what survives in the aftermath.

That is exactly what human females do.  They try to force males to compete over them (preferably to the death to make the selection process easiest for the female).  Women are inherently genetic filters that try to get men killed on purpose to weed out bad genes.  The so called motherly traits really only extend to their offspring or some type of imaginary offspring in their head like a cat or small dog.  Men are disposable cannon fodder to them.

@r0ach should correctly attribute his criticism to the source, which is JAD’s theory.

@r0ach is attempting to make a distinction here between the implied desire that women want to be impregnated (forcefully via “rape”) by the most competitive and warrior genetics, and his theory that women want to incentivize men to compete for them. Sorry but I fail to see any generative essence distinction between the two concepts.

I guess he is thinking that although women instinctively want the most competitive genetics for their offspring, that they don’t want to be forcefully abducted or impregnated and would prefer more control over the situation that follows the competition of the males. And that they’d like the competition to take place within some orderly social structure that empowers them to retain control over such matters of engagement. Yeah females may have all sorts of fantasies, but the reality is that if they want males to compete to the death then in fact they abrogate such orderly control. So what they actually want is to be raped and conquered, because surely they can’t defend themselves against the victorious warriors. Duh. IOW, women want the social structure to give them every fantasy they can imagine, which of course is an outcome of total collapse and disorder (which btw is why we need females because the Second Law of Thermo requires that the trend to maximum disorder is inexorable). The instincts and feminine traits of women render them (collectively) entirely incapable of planning and logic that would sustain social order.

Even if you're dumb enough to play the woman's game and survive as the victor, they always believe their life is more important than the male, that the male is a disposable stepping stone, and are gone the second the male ceases to provide them with enormously asymmetric benefit (if they can find a better option or if divorce gives them some type of reward).

Correct w.r.t. to their hypergamy instincts. But perhaps this can be ameliorated somewhat by their upbringing and social pressure.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1539682466
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1539682466

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1539682466
Reply with quote  #2

1539682466
Report to moderator
1539682466
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1539682466

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1539682466
Reply with quote  #2

1539682466
Report to moderator
1539682466
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1539682466

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1539682466
Reply with quote  #2

1539682466
Report to moderator
CRED.me
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42
Merit: 3


View Profile
January 20, 2018, 12:36:31 AM
 #522

James A. Donald aka JAD or Jim (the first person to respond when Satoshi announced Bitcoin on the mailing list) has a thought provoking discussion going on about the future of religion in terms of promoting the maximum productivity of society:

https://blog.jim.com/culture/fixing-christianity/

https://blog.jim.com/uncategorized/request-for-research-assistance/#comment-1774211

I’d like to comment over there, but seems I’m banned there also.

Religion exists to create societies which are much more productive than without religion (i.e. the religious societies are more productive/erudite and thus resilient and anti-fragile…that’s until they’re co-opted by the unholiness of human manipulation of the institutions of the religion):

https://www.psychologicalscience.org/news/were-only-human/why-do-we-have-religion-anyway.html

It’s long-term ineffective for us humans to rally around admiration or dedication to another human (although this happens sometimes in the short-term for example for cults and political leaders), because humans are imperfect and this will eventually lead to a collapse of such an idealism.

So humans can be very motivated if they believe there might be some higher purpose to their existence that unifies around their core needs and maximizes their collective success.

Since we’re unable to prove scientifically that a God exists or doesn’t exist, this plausibility of a higher purpose to our existence is open to all possibilities (as it must be for us to exist as I have explained numerous times in prior discussions in these forums with for example @CoinCube). See quote below.

I’m intrigued by the comments over there at Jim’s blog pondering if an upgrade to Christianity might derive somehow from technological developments, such as the rise of social networking over the Internet.

One of my last recent public comments to @CoinCube was a challenge to tell me how I can be successful, i.e. to give me actionable information.

One thought occurred to me that up until now, social networking has been shaped by centralized corporations who are subsidizing and promoting leftism and unproductive activities (e.g. you should see my gf click Like on everything from someone she knows, without any thought to whether she really likes it).

As we move the Internet to a decentralized paradigm, one of my goals is this subsidization will cease and we’ll have a more meritorious form of social networking.

For me lately one of the higher purposes that has been driving me is the thought that perhaps decentralization would ameliorate to some extent the corruption of top-down control power vacuums and that would include the institutions built around religion. Perhaps this may help drive humans back towards religion in its decentralized form as exemplified in Matthew 6:5? Thus any State violating the meritocracy would be viewed rightly so as a parasite and a heresy.

So can decentralization improve (the institutions of) Christianity more towards Jesus’ ideal?

Atheist: “Nope.”

Christian: “I want to introduce you to my best friend . . . Jesus Christ.”

Jew: “If he does then he's got about 3,000 years of explaining to do!”

Muslim: “I don't drop what I'm doing five times a day to pray for nothing.”

Scientist: “Haven't figured that out yet, we're still doing the math.”

Hippie: “Our Mother Earth, Gaia.”

Buddhist: “Do you think God exists?”

Stoner: “Do . . . like . . . any of us really exist?”

Polytheist: “They all do.”

Hindu: “33 Gods exist . . . or is it 33 crores?”

Feminist: “Yes She does!”

Agnostic: “Maybe.”

Sci-Fi: “God is an alien!”

Greek Philosopher: “What if God did exist? Then what?”

Criminally Insane: “I am God!”

Joan Osborne: “What if God was one of us?”

Aquinas: “Yes, and a good thing, too.”

Paine: “Yes, but we’re still screwed.”

Sartre: “No, so we’re still screwed.”

Nietzsche: “No, and a good thing, too.”

“Then there was the dyslexic agnostic insomniac who stayed up all night wondering if there really is a dog.”

Neoclassical Economist: “Whether or not God exists is irrelevant. The cost of believing in God is minuscule compared to the benefit you’d get if God does exist.”

Nietzsche: “God is dead”

God: “Nietzsche is dead”

Edit: Insane response. Thank you everyone. Of course this isn't meant to represent any belief system as it is just a comical approach to this on going of “does God exist?” Best wishes.

CoinCube
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1554
Merit: 1019



View Profile
January 20, 2018, 05:06:38 AM
 #523

One of my last recent public comments to @CoinCube was a challenge to tell me how I can be successful, i.e. to give me actionable information.

One thought occurred to me that up until now, social networking has been shaped by centralized corporations who are subsidizing and promoting leftism and unproductive activities (e.g. you should see my gf click Like on everything from someone she knows, without any thought to whether she really likes it).

As we move the Internet to a decentralized paradigm, one of my goals is this subsidization will cease and we’ll have a more meritorious form of social networking.

For me lately one of the higher purposes that has been driving me is the thought that perhaps decentralization would ameliorate to some extent the corruption of top-down control power vacuums and that would include the institutions built around religion. Perhaps this may help drive humans back towards religion in its decentralized form as exemplified in Matthew 6:5? Thus any State violating the meritocracy would be viewed rightly so as a parasite and a heresy.

So can decentralization improve (the institutions of) Christianity more towards Jesus’ ideal?

Certainly this is the case with social media currently.

Case in point: Facebook To Start Ranking News Sources, Promote Only The "Most Trustworthy"
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-01-19/facebook-start-ranking-news-sources-promote-only-most-trustworthy

However, you cannot talk about decentralization without talking about the underlying coherence the decentralized agents agree upon. What the actors work independently but cooperatively towards achieving. The source code or unifying principles. Without this coherence you are not dealing with decentralization but chaos.

Decentralization helps to mitigate human corruption via limiting the ability of a single institution or individual to employ power and coercion to force unearned rents from others. However, decentralization is also very costly and inefficient it is competitive only because human appetite is limitless and thus so is the potential cost of forced centralization. Voluntary centralization is not a problem it is forced centralization that is potentially catastrophic.

Bitcoin for example exists and will thrive because governments reflect these unlimited appetites and will continue to debase fiat until confidence in fiat collapse and global monetary reform is forced.

The following thread which discusses the nature of what will develop from such a forced reform is quite interesting especially the posts by AgentofCoin.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1809999.msg27327487#msg27327487

I believe the answer to your question of whether decentralization can improve (the institutions of) Christianity more towards Jesus’ ideal is yes. It's probably not a coincidence that the enlightenment did not happen until after the shattering of a single European monolithic and centralized church into multiple smaller organizations that independently reached towards similar aspirations.

CRED.me
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42
Merit: 3


View Profile
January 23, 2018, 10:50:18 AM
 #524

Well argued and articulated.

The USA is not an island and there’s a lot of bad guys with guns and that won’t change even if the good guys give up their guns, because the problem is too vast. Europe may become more familiar with this predicament if they continue importing millions of rapefugees. When a bad guy is pointing or shooting a gun in a life threatening manner, it’s not manslaughter to defend oneself.

QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong; Here in Germany, one obvious consequence of the refugee migration has been that wages are declining for low-end jobs. I believe you had said that would be a consequence of the refugee crisis. Do you see this spreading throughout Europe?

ANSWER: It is only common sense that if you increase the labor force in the low-end unskilled area, wages must decline. Every study that has ever been conducted on this issue has shown that is the logical consequence. This is indeed what caused the riots in Philadelphia against the Irish. Wages declines in the midst of a depression. Yes this trend will spread throughout the EU.

Also survivalism and rugged independence is still a core value amongst some Americans. Remember we needed our guns and militias to protect ourselves from illegal taxation and oppression by your King. We’re descended from the concept of independence and individualism. And we have a history of war against natives, British, Mexicans, North vs. South, and probably another civil war coming soon of extremist leftist cities versus extremist conservative rural areas.

Western Europeans are tired of fighting after 2000 years of it. The Americans aren’t quite done yet.


Simple. Because Brits are descended from a monarchy system as contrasted against Americans who are descended from a republic and the struggle for independence from the monarchy. Many Americans view guns as a patriotic duty. Brits view themselves as placated servants to the queen (in the abstract culturally they do). In short, some Americans are still prepared to kick ass when the time comes.
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2044
Merit: 1049


Crypto is the separation of Power and State.


View Profile WWW
January 24, 2018, 06:38:19 PM
 #525



It’s the antithesis of superrationality to presume that hypergamy will ever cease to exist, because a mix of R and K reproductive strategies is nature’s necessarily bottom-up mechanism for annealing resilency of the species.

Top-down organization and teachings can never be resilient and dynamically adaptive to the unpredictable multi-dimensional solution space of our universe, unless the universe becomes computable which would thus require everything to be knowable a priori, which is the same as saying that nothing could exist. For all information to travel instantly to top-down controllers would require the speed-of-light to be not quantized, thus the past and future light cones of relativity would collapse into undifferentiated. Our very existence requires friction so that information is relativistic.

Top-down systems can never be resilent (i.e. survive long-term), because they can’t adapt decentralized with low capital decentralized inputs. This is the fundamental reason that Kurzweil and his Singularity is entirely impossible. How can an AI which depends on a few dozen chip fabs be any where near as resilient as nature’s decentralized procreation via zillions of daily mutations and chemical reactions. Feeding entropy into AI is a top-down centralized process, even if the AI is feeding itself entropy, the limiting factor is the lack of non-deterministic (i.e. randomly bottom-up) chaos (i.e. Butterfly Effect) in the initial procreation conditions.

In short, AI can only become truly alive if it becomes imperfect and randomized in it’s instantiation of itself, in which case it’s computational superiority will just be tool and implausible to attain universal dominance. Nature abhors a (n entropic) vacuum and thus can never be universally dominated by any given phenomenon. I had tried to explain this before:

http://unheresy.com/Information%20Is%20Alive.html




Great stuff; very well done!

The linked blog post makes clear that subjective self-aware consciousness is necessarily intrinsically embodied in-the-world and thus cannot be implemented in any AI separated by abstraction layers from grounded sensory experience.

The Singulartarians will respond that any AI passing the Turing Test by sufficiently emulating primary consciousness may still enslave us, reducing our quibbling to mere distinction without functional difference.

That implies the winner of the NL/ML arms race is an empirical question which will be decided by facts on the ground, not a priori theoretical speculation.


██████████
█████████████████
██████████████████████
█████████████████████████
████████████████████████████
████
████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
███████████████████████████
██████
██████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
█████████████
██████████████
████████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
██████████████████████
█████████████████
██████████

Monero
"The difference between bad and well-developed digital cash will determine
whether we have a dictatorship or a real democracy." 
David Chaum 1996
"Fungibility provides privacy as a side effect."  Adam Back 2014
Buy and sell XMR near you
P2P Exchange Network
Buy XMR with fiat
myhometalk
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 138
Merit: 102



View Profile WWW
January 24, 2018, 06:45:35 PM
 #526

What's this about? You quoted one of your own links.

a.ramanta
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 8
Merit: 0


View Profile
February 26, 2018, 04:34:17 PM
 #527

It is a structural inevitability that the libertarian voice is drowned out in democracy, and according to Lind it should be. Ever more libertarians are likely to agree. ‘Voice’ is democracy itself, in its historically dominant, Rousseauistic strain.
Traxo
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 337
Merit: 125



View Profile
May 19, 2018, 09:10:50 AM
 #528


It is a structural inevitability that the libertarian voice is drowned out in democracy, and according to Lind it should be.
Ever more libertarians are likely to agree.
‘Voice’ is democracy itself, in its historically dominant, Rousseauistic strain.


The progenitor of this thread asked me to inform you that your post is very astute and refers you to where he blogs now because he is permabanned from bitcointalk.org:

https://steemit.com/@anonymint
Traxo
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 337
Merit: 125



View Profile
August 23, 2018, 03:25:20 PM
 #529

The progenitor of the OP of this thread has a new comment which may be worthy of repeating over here:

My epiphany today. A plausible reason that high IQ people tend to favor feminism (and the socialism which supports it) is because they’re most competitive when their intellect is not able to be countered by testosterone. IOW, they want society to be structured in a way that puts at a disadvantage the trait they typically do not have.

The ties in with my argument as to which strict patriarchy is a defect-defect situation at any scale larger than the Dunbar number size limited tribe. The males in the society will try to find any way to leverage the collective to put the other males at a competitive disadvantage. The intellectuals politically coalesce around defeating testosterone which causes the society to go decadent in R strategy reproduction with fatherless children destroying the nuclear family structure that otherwise creates a strong society.

Yet the lack of strict patriarchy is also a defect-defect situation. So the conclusion is that nation-states are also a defect-defect situation. This is why nation-states are being disintermediated now by Bitcoin and decentralized ledgers. We’re moving to a NWO back towards highly decentralized  knowledge age tribes. Eventually there will be a world government for that the defect-defect arrangement to replace the weakening power of the nation-states. Nation-states will be disintegrate back into knowledge age tribal regions in the NWO.

Again I discussed these concepts recently as as username X:

https://blog.jim.com/culture/the-optics-of-noticing/#comments
Flodner
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 462
Merit: 265



View Profile WWW
August 23, 2018, 05:18:13 PM
 #530

Interesting thoughts, but "A plausible reason that high IQ people tend to favor feminism (and the socialism which supports it) " - where does this data comes from?
I doubt this)
Moreover Dark Englightment as intellectual movement (if it might be called so) is definitely anti-socialist

▄▄▄▄▄  ▄▄▄▄▄  ▄▄  ▄  ▄▄  ▄  ▄  ▄ 
LOYALTY ON THE BLOCKCHAIN
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀  ▀  ▀  ▀  ▀▀  ▀  ▀▀▀  ▀▀  ▀▀▀▀  ▀▀▀▀

  
  
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
  
  
qiibee
                                                                      
  Telegram     Medium     Twitter
  Facebook     Instagram     LinkedIn
██████
██▀▀▀▀
██  █▀
██




██
██  █▄
██▄▄▄▄
██████
.
TOKEN SALE
██████
▀▀▀▀██
  ▀█  ██
        ██




        ██
  ▄█  ██
▄▄▄▄██
██████

█████████████▄
██         ████▄
██ ▄▄▄ █   ██ ▀██▄
██ █▄█ █▀█ ██   ▀██
██   █ ▀▀▀ ████████
██  ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄  ██
██  ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄  ██
██  ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄  ██
██  ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄  ██
██               ██
███████████████████
Anon136
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1624
Merit: 1178



View Profile
August 24, 2018, 03:47:21 AM
 #531

Interesting thoughts, but "A plausible reason that high IQ people tend to favor feminism (and the socialism which supports it) " - where does this data comes from?
I doubt this)
Moreover Dark Englightment as intellectual movement (if it might be called so) is definitely anti-socialist


I believe it is what is referred to as "neo-reactionary".

Rep Thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=381041
If one can not confer upon another a right which he does not himself first possess, by what means does the state derive the right to engage in behaviors from which the public is prohibited?
Flodner
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 462
Merit: 265



View Profile WWW
August 24, 2018, 06:07:31 AM
 #532

Interesting thoughts, but "A plausible reason that high IQ people tend to favor feminism (and the socialism which supports it) " - where does this data comes from?
I doubt this)
Moreover Dark Englightment as intellectual movement (if it might be called so) is definitely anti-socialist


I believe it is what is referred to as "neo-reactionary".

Yes you are right, it is synonym

▄▄▄▄▄  ▄▄▄▄▄  ▄▄  ▄  ▄▄  ▄  ▄  ▄ 
LOYALTY ON THE BLOCKCHAIN
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀  ▀  ▀  ▀  ▀▀  ▀  ▀▀▀  ▀▀  ▀▀▀▀  ▀▀▀▀

  
  
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
  
  
qiibee
                                                                      
  Telegram     Medium     Twitter
  Facebook     Instagram     LinkedIn
██████
██▀▀▀▀
██  █▀
██




██
██  █▄
██▄▄▄▄
██████
.
TOKEN SALE
██████
▀▀▀▀██
  ▀█  ██
        ██




        ██
  ▄█  ██
▄▄▄▄██
██████

█████████████▄
██         ████▄
██ ▄▄▄ █   ██ ▀██▄
██ █▄█ █▀█ ██   ▀██
██   █ ▀▀▀ ████████
██  ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄  ██
██  ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄  ██
██  ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄  ██
██  ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄  ██
██               ██
███████████████████
Traxo
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 337
Merit: 125



View Profile
August 27, 2018, 04:08:08 PM
 #533

Shelby forwarded this to me:


---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: Debate between Satoshi’s first public contact and myself continues
From:    "Shelby Moore"
Date:    Mon, August 27, 2018 7:46 am
To:      armstrongeconomics@gmail.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

James A. Donald (aka Jim) was the first person who responded on the
mailing list when Satoshi first announced the existence of Bitcoin to the
public.

I am debating him:

https://blog.jim.com/politics/and-another-one-bites-the-dust/#comment-1876730

https://blog.jim.com/culture/the-optics-of-noticing/#comment-1876738

https://blog.jim.com/politics/and-another-one-bites-the-dust/#comment-1877258

(last link is about the unique social contract of the Jews)
Traxo
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 337
Merit: 125



View Profile
August 28, 2018, 07:48:13 PM
 #534

Interesting thoughts, but "A plausible reason that high IQ people tend to favor feminism (and the socialism which supports it) " - where does this data comes from?
I doubt this)

He added this to his Steemit post:

Note as for data supporting my thesis that intellectuals who study at universities are heavily into progressivism, just look at the political pressure in most universities, notice how intellectuals prefer domesticated docile cats over vicious Pitbulls as pets, and notice how they write “she” instead of he to refer to a programmer in their research papers. Also see the IQ distribution of atheists in the U.S.A. chart which can be found on the following blog by searching for “it’s negentropic”:

https://steemit.com/philosophy/@anonymint/geographical-cultural-ethos-science-is-dead-part-2

Atheism is the religion of no patriarchy because God is the penultimate patriarch.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 [27]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!