Proving Morality: Peace With Destiny’s Gauntlet

This is part 4, “Peace With Destiny’s Gauntlet,” of the five-part essay “Proving Morality.” You may wish to read part 1, part 2, and part 3 first.

I have not read McDowell’s masterful works—and I sure as hell don’t want too—and I sure as hell don’t feel obligated or indebted to do so—but I can easily guess the bullcrap interpretation McDowell has used or fostered. It’s the same arsenal available to prove that extraterrestrials visited the ancients, which has more chance of being true in my estimation. McDowell will have confirmation of some story elements in the Bible from the evidence of history and will have correlation of some Christian theology and Biblical story elements with ancient pagan theology and mysticism. We are never to conclude, for example, that Zoroastrianism is instead the falsely imitated truth.

I accept Jesus really existed, historical fact, but that does not make him the Son of God. I do NOT accept that Moses existed, even though I can’t prove he never existed. I am unable to positively disproof the existence of the Bogeyman as well. Logic is constructive with evidence not destructive against evidence, at least not directly. Therefore, the absence of evidence disproving something, again, ain’t proof and don’t make it so.

There may have been a great flood, into the Mediterranean Sea, or even a great flood of the whole earth. So what? Given that snowball earth melted, it would be hard to avoid. If I write my holy book and incorporate known history, does that make my holy book as good as yours? I know, mine lacks the mystique of age yours has, not to mention the political support of some establishment to reach critical cultural mass and get the patina started in the first place. Feminists likewise rely on a mystique of superior fairness and moral purity. Can’t you feel it?

Other ancient religions and mythologies have story elements in common with the Bible, but that is not proof of historical or supernatural fact, my friend. It is disguised circular reasoning that assumes the origins of the story elements all point back to the Christian God and factual events. It could be that religious ideas as cultural elements cross pollinated from civilization to civilization—like proprietary genetically engineered Monsanto corn replacing noncommercial nature and our natural rights of free existence, but I digress. It could be that religious ideas as cultural elements cross pollinated from civilization to civilization, that the ancient Jews were a superior but not chosen people of great cultural sophistication for those times, and ancient Jewish priests created a religion suitable for rule by a Jewish king that worked so well at killing their independent federal spirit that it inspired the evolutionary development of other Abrahamic religions that have been incredibly successful at accruing adherents by generalizing admissibility while maintaining appeal.

The God in the Christian Bible leads believers out of pagan child sacrifice to a sip of wine and piece of bread. Some pagan gods were happy with a little drink spilled onto the ground. So what is pagan and what is not? A matter of politically defined convenience, like federal government.

This is the blurb I have on this blog:

Faith beyond the axiomatic is corruption; morality is social reciprocity and has limited scope.

All logic starts from assumptions. The less blind faith in the assumptions, the less observational error introduced into the system of statements we call knowledge or theory or understanding. Danger and Play reported that Anthony Robbins says the greatest motivator of humans is fear. Fear is there to inform us of an urgent danger or potential danger, but if we use fear self-destructively, it’s just worry or worse yet irrational action that can only be constructive by lucky coincidence.

Most of us will not be lucky. A great canonical example of this is M3, a.k.a. MuffManMike, who related in raw terms his 12 miserable years of involuntary celibacy as a nice guy beta in his epic post “Confessions of a Reformed InCel.” He expresses his suicidal rage at being lied to thusly:

Misogyny. It doesn’t appear out of thin air.

Here’s the kicker.

Everytime… EVERY.MOTHER.FUCKING.TIME i could have taken corrective action, i was lied to. Each time my buddies told me that i had to become an asshole, (their way of saying don’t listen to what a woman wants, do what they go for) i was once again led astray by a woman.

By my mother
By my teachers
By magazine articles
By other girls i asked advice for
By Oprah
By my friendzone crush and object of my desire.
(and yes.. by my marriage counselor)

Unequivocally.

I can still remember getting mad enough after a while that i started acting like a dick. After all what i was previously doing wasn’t working.. try something new right? And what did the girl i crushed on tell me when she didn’t like my new attitude?

“YOU DON’T WANT TO BECOME AN ASSHOLE LIKE THAT, I KNOW YOU TOO WELL, DON’T CHANGE, YOU’RE SUCH A NICE PERSON INSIDE, DON’T RUIN YOURSELF“.

That line reverberated in my head everytime i knew my asshole friend was at her place fucking her like an animal.

Hence all the THINGS I FEEL at the start of this post. It’s visceral. I can’t control it. It’s a part of me now. I can only manage it. But to each and every one of those women who i used in the above THINGS I FEEL section, it is my firm belief that you simply have NO CLUE what loneliness is unless you’ve contemplated what gun metal tastes like as it rubs against your tongue pressing into the roof of your mouth.

If you truly believe that after 2 weeks, 3 months, a year of not having physical relations with the opposite sex is true suffering.. i ask you if you felt your life was in danger. If not.. you’re not suffering enough. If so.. TRY IT FOR 12 YEARS and get back to me.

What do women and the politicians that pied pipey lead and empower them do to keep men in line for their convenient exploitation? Shaming language. Shaming language sells to the stooge a credit of moral authority, a moral terrain, and the inclusive social positioning of the stooge who is either to stay on his prison hill or to climb out of his prison dale toward moral emancipation. This is the exploitation hierarchy: Government Elite → Woman and Other Victims (top stooges) → White Men (bottom stooges). A tacit fear is used to maintain the class ranking and the flow of wealth from producers to consumers from right to left, and fear can NOT be defeated until it is observed. F. D. Roosevelt was a lying president like them all, but he knew how to
work the truth like the devil: “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.” It’s profound truth that sells suckers on dangerous ideas because it is distractive reassurance away from fear of personal accountability and power.

Hey, did you watch those three videos in the order linked? Maybe take a break from the computer and come back later? I’m trying to make an important point on who gets what in life and why, or why politics is what it is.

M3 was kept in line with all manner of lying, direct and implicit, until a bold truth of predictive incongruence—the sexual resource he treated with respect, humanity, and friendship threw herself into the loins of a friend—broke the validity of who he was to himself. He was forced to search for a new paradigm of self-identity. I repeat what words M3 puts in this woman’s mouth:

YOU DON’T WANT TO BECOME AN ASSHOLE LIKE THAT, I KNOW YOU TOO WELL, DON’T CHANGE, YOU’RE SUCH A NICE PERSON INSIDE, DON’T RUIN YOURSELF.

She was selling fear.

It is no accident M3 turned to cathartic blogging therapy. Nor is it an accident he had to face the neurotic fear conditioned into him, if I had to guess. I’m not a psychologist, but I am a student of philosophy and THE steward of MY psyche, and I no longer accept the neurotic implantation of phobia (unhealthy fear) of another’s authority. I strive to use fear only to warn me about dangers but not to choose how to deal with the dangers I perceive. It is no accident M3 boils down the purpose and meaning of his blog to the key to his catharsis and mental recovery to this blurb on the banner image he uses:

I will not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. I will face my fear and let it pass through me.

M3 blogs about the origin and meaning of the phrase for him. I have had a similar self-actualizing experience. I found pushing against neurotic authority only feeds the troll. One must ignore and starve the neurosis like a troll or entitlement princess. Only then can there be peace—on the inside. If you can only be happy with total peace on the outside, you will never find peace, but you will find fear. However, the capitulation of the ascetic is not to be admired either. You can have productivity and peace with people selectively by person and degree. You can’t afford the competitive disadvantage of forgoing such opportunities. Are you worth making a difference in your life to the best of your ability? The best lived life is somewhere between trying to control everything and trying to control nothing. To be self-actualized is to be valid by one’s mere existence and mentally free to chase one’s potential as one’s self-identity, to intimately and peacefully know and cultivate one’s passions. Passion is freed by constructive harmony with reality that only a dispassionate mind can purposefully navigate. Besides trying to be immediately helpful, I am preparing for dispassionately functional definitions of virtue and vice in part 5. It always is what it is.

Civilization is a complex functional organization of human lives, and it does not take to a lack of coincidence. It takes to practical discipline lumped in denotatively with the most impractical of value systems all confusingly termed culture. Not every sociality is functional culture! The design of vocabulary is a choice in faith and often politics, and civilization requires reliable causality of its functionality to maintain itself as a power structure. Only the men are men, and some men do NOT have what it takes to honor causality on the societal scale with cultural regularity in their values, beliefs, and choices, like women typically don’t. Evolutionary experimentation with the human genome is like that. Twice as many of our ancestors were women than were men. Men are more emotionally developed than women, not less!

If our first assumptions about reality were not observations of fear for our mortal existences transmogrified into blind faith of impenetrable dogma to keep our inept self-identities and understandings safe, what would our unleashed potential be? That will vary individually from horrific to excellence. The question is, as necessitated by the law of conservation: What sort of team society are we culling and facilitating from the candidate pool? Stronger and happier, or frumpy and weaker? The law of conservation over all resources makes the chosen application of resources critical to results, and we each collectively form an essential aspect of the environment for each other from which critical resources for survival and fulfillment are exclusively available. While human ability to labor at thought and at deed and to provide intimacy and companionship is unsurpassed or otherwise competitive this will be so.

The men of the Manosphere know all too well that the bonds of so-called citizenship are now oppressive not supportive. For every one genuine red-pill man (or woman?) there are numerous antithetic others, lilliputians unable to feel the walls of their honeycomb cells in our collective order, and they like it. Government bonds…now there’s a hint why economics and money must be understood by free men. lollolzlolzloollolz Got Ben? lollolzlollsorry lolforlzlolyou

My understanding of reality is admittedly based on assumption, but my computational capacity is useless without working assumptions, and by consciously minimizing my use of faith I have minimized the introduction of errors. A hallmark of thoughtfully choosing one’s assumptions is the elimination of blind faith. Here is how I model reality:

3realities

I have two graphical versions because each one makes an inference that is not necessarily correct. The issue is what information can be communicated between immediately dependent realities in both directions. Using the lingo I coined in part 1, can the softerware reality be seen from the harderware reality? It could be anything. Do NOT accept the graphical spin of the two possible 2-D renderings:

       Containment Model Inference:
              Psychological Reality ⊂ Physical Reality ⊂ Supernatural Reality
       Stack Model Inference:
              Psychological Reality ⊄ Physical Reality ⊄ Supernatural Reality

Furthermore, supernaturalism is supposed to explain things to our satisfaction, like alchemy’s earth, wind, fire, and water. It is possible there is no supernatural reality but only a metaphysical reality we perceive in limited form as physical reality that concurrently provides unseen context of dark matter and dark energy. All of these guesses suffer from the time dimension problem. If we assume time is linear, or at least monotonic, then we need a beginning of creation without a creator. That is to say, “Fine, but why does God exist?”

If we seek a very beginning within the context of time, we are stuck with something from nothing. Any nothing from which something like a god spontaneously springs into existence is not nothing but a peculiar something that must have originated somehow to have such a wonderful seminal property. We cannot answer the question of the ultimate origin of our existence without timelessness. It is easy to say God was begotten not made, but it is nonsensical. To beget is an event of creation. Events happen in time. Timelessness means no events, no nothing, as far as we can fathom. It is important to recognize our childlike perception of reality because fear is the mind-killer. We are so clueless about the origin of our reality that we can’t even intelligently pose the question. When we ask about the omnipotent meaning of our existences, we are as children asking nonsensical questions. When we search for omnipotent meaning, we are as children seeking unicorns. When we have found omnipotent meaning, we are as children explaining how unicorns fly.

Things get mentally and socially complicated and dangerous with virtual reality, and this avenue of slavery and domestication is being researched as we speak. An attempt is being made to network us together into a collective tool the way cells form a domesticated organism, except our physical relativity will not be strictly fixed. Giving conditioned and indoctrinated children the vote will grease the skids on that plan. I mean biological children, under 16 years of age. At least women will lose the privilege of primacy in the rank and file should that happen. Perhaps we will have natural selection working for the advancement of women for a change.

The bugaboo of extinction by AI superiority is impossible for a philosophically intelligent person to miss, Star Wars notwithstanding, which is why I write and publish this essay: to demonstrate the essentialness of philosophy to the creation and stewardship of civilized freedom for humans, the ones who can.

4realities

The stack model naturally associates up with greater weakness in reality dependency. The stack could grow down, but that direction is counterintuitive, so I did not do it that way. The level of virtual technology at our disposal I have modeled as growing upward, so higher is more empowering, but empowering for whom? Without a direct interface into our minds, virtual reality is communicated to us through our biological sensory organs. We can discern a primitively indirect method of virtual immersion, like watching a movie on DVD.

In the next graphic, I show how our realities might fit together. I symbolize subjugation via virtual technology by inverting the direction of technological growth to the downward direction.

realityrelations

A world in a universe of non-ubiquitous virtual technology is a shown on the left. A world in a distinct sister universe with an interwebz is shown in the middle. A networked system of mind control is show in the third universe on the right.

If our first assumptions about reality were not observations of fear of our mortal existence transmogrified into blind faith of impenetrable dogma, what would our first assumptions be? It would depend on the intellectual awareness of the individual, no doubt. An intellectual awareness that was comprehensive and consistent would be the best to consider. I believe those with such an awareness can only come to one conclusion: Morality comes from our evolution. This is the direction of the Manosphere. It always was.

Pussy on acultural life support is one of two essential resources of humanity, though technology could put that primitive essential in jeopardy of extinction by natural selection. Being that pussy life support is antithetical to civilized value and is a costly administrative overhead, mass produced fembots could satisfy the other essential resource of humanity without the bitchy unpleasantnesses and irrational perils, whilst we and the Big Bang go on.

The other essential resource is problem-solving dick. Civilized men harness and build on pussy because the universe organizes itself toward greater power of sophistication unto ends we could speculate return us to the supernatural reality that gave us existential birth, maybe. I venture to guess men will be able to live entirely without natural pussy on the heel, but would such men still be problem solvers who know what freedom is? If AI gives us our answers, we have lost frame control of the questions, and the continued existence of mankind will depend purely on homo sapiens’ domesticative value. An archive of human genome sequences could be maintained with far less resources.

Courage and brains, courage and brains, my fellow mental patriarchs, courage and brains.

—‘Reality’ Doug, 02 May 2013

Advertisements

About ‘Reality’ Doug

I'm feed up with herd people, so civil and uncivilized, these feckless barbarians with manicures. Where is Galt's Gulch? and where are the people to go there? Who am I? Who is John Galt?
Gallery | This entry was posted in Philosophy and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Proving Morality: Peace With Destiny’s Gauntlet

  1. Pingback: Update and You Must Watch This | M3

What do you think?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s