Monthly Archives: December 2015
There’s a Congressional Ban on studying Gun Violence
Researchers from federal agencies including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the National Institute of Health (NIH) have largely been mum on the public health issue of gun violence—not by choice, but because of a 20-year-old congressional ban on federally funded gun violence research.
This Epic Chart Shows The Wages Of Nearly Every Job In America
Curt: THE FAILED BOOK OF ATHENIAN TRUTH, THE SUCCESSFUL BOOK OF JERUSALEM’S LIES
THE FAILED BOOK OF ATHENIAN TRUTH, THE SUCCESSFUL BOOK OF JERUSALEM’S LIES
(The Stoics Were Right: Jehova Is The Devil) (trigger warning) (ouch)
The Greeks tried and only partly succeeded in creating a discipline of truth telling.
The Hebrews succeeded in creating an training manual in deception, written using the very technique of deception that they wished to promote.
The first great deception was monotheism: Moses restatement of Ramses’ monotheism, and Abraham’s use of Babylonian absolutism.
The second great deception was pseudoscience: Boaz, Marx, Freud, Cantor, Mises, The Frankfurt School and Critique, Rothbard and Rand, Strauss’s neoconservatism, Chomsky.
These techniques of deception work by the same mechanism: half truth, desirable falsehood, suggestion appealing to altruism, and loading, framing, overloading, and propagandizing by heaping undue praise on the falsehood while heaping straw man criticisms on the truth.
It took others a few decades to identify the vulnerability. It took me a few years to understand the technique and find a means of exposing it to analytic criticism.
But now it’s pretty clear that the ancient battle between western science and middle eastern mysticism is merely the battle between the art of truth telling and the art of lying.
It is far more profitable to lie than speak the truth. Especially in a land where everyone speaks the truth.
If for no other reason than it is cheaper and faster to diligently construct desirable falsehoods than unpleasant truths.
Just as the common law evolves only in response to innovations in parasitism; just as science evolves only by the falsification of theories; so does truth telling evolve only by the incremental suppression of lying.
This should be clear enough for an individual with a Bachelors degree in a STEM discipline to follow.
Curt Doolittle.
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukraine.
Jewish Joke to study Talmund: Two men came down the same Chimmeny
Deception, overloading, obliterating truth, pseudo science.
Rabbi Joseph Telushkin, whose writings have been a blessing to many of us, recounts this story of Talmudic logic in his book Jewish Humor: What The Best Jewish Jokes Say About the Jews:
A young man in his mid-twenties knocks on the door of the noted scholar Rabbi Shwartz. “My name is Sean Goldstein,” he says. “I’ve come to you because I wish to study Talmud.”
“Do you know Aramaic?” the rabbi asks.
“No,” replies the young man.
“Hebrew?” asks the Rabbi.
“No,” replies the young man again.
“Have you studied Torah?” asks the Rabbi, growing a bit irritated.
“No, Rabbi. But don’t worry. I graduated Berkeley summa cum laude in philosophy, and just finished my doctoral dissertation at Harvard on Socratic logic. So now, I would just like to round out my education with a little study of the Talmud.”
“I seriously doubt,” the rabbi says, “that you are ready to study Talmud. It is the deepest book of our people. If you wish, however, I am willing to examine you in logic, and if you pass that test I will teach you Talmud.”
The young man agrees.
Rabbi Shwartz holds up two fingers. “Two men come down a chimney. One comes out with a clean face, the other comes out with a dirty face. Which one washes his face?”
The young man stares at the rabbi. “Is that the test in logic?”
The rabbi nods.
”The one with the dirty face washes his face,“ he answers wearily.
“Wrong. The one with the clean face washes his face. Examine the simple logic.The one with the dirty face looks at the one with the clean face and thinks his face is clean. The one with the clean face looks at the one with the dirty face and thinks his face is dirty. So the one with the clean face washes his face.”
“Very clever,” Goldstein says. “Give me another test.”
The rabbi again holds up two fingers. “Two men come down a chimney. One comes out with a clean face, the other comes out with a dirty face. Which one washes his face?”
“We have already established that. The one with the clean face washes his face.”
“Wrong. Each one washes his face. Examine the simple logic. The one with the dirty face looks at the one with the clean face and thinks his face is clean. The one with the clean face looks at the one with the dirty face and thinks his face is dirty. So the one with the clean face washes his face. When the one with the dirty face sees the one with the clean face wash his face, he also washes his face. So each one washes his face.”
“I didn’t think of that,” says Goldstein. It’s shocking to me that I could make an error in logic. Test me again.”
The rabbi holds up two fingers. “Two men come down a chimney. One comes out with a clean face, the other comes out with a dirty face. Which one washes his face?”
“Each one washes his face.”
“Wrong. Neither one washes his face. Examine the simple logic. The one with the dirty face looks at the one with the clean face and thinks his face is clean. The one with the clean face looks at the one with the dirty face and thinks his face is dirty. But when the one with the clean face sees the one with the dirty face doesn’t wash his face, he also doesn’t wash his face. So neither one washes his face.”
Goldstein is desperate. “I am qualified to study Talmud. Please give me one more test.”
He groans, though, when the rabbi lifts two fingers. “Two men come down a chimney. One comes out with a clean face, the other comes out with a dirty face. Which one washes his face?”
“Neither one washes his face.”
“Wrong. Do you now see, Sean, why Socratic logic is an insufficient basis for studying Talmud? Tell me, how is it possible for two men to come down the same chimney, and for one to come out with a clean face and the other with a dirty face? Don’t you see? The whole question is “narishkeit”, foolishness, and if you spend your whole life trying to answer foolish questions, all your answers will be foolish, too.”
May we all have the wisdom to ask, and answer, the wise questions!
kolaleph.org/2013/01/16/the-rabbi-is-in-two-men-come-down-the-same-chimney/
Black S. African Businessman calls for end to Race-based policies (which favor blacks)
Review of “Seizing Power: The Strategic Logic of Military Coups”
The argument Singh makes in his book is simple and compelling: Coup attempts are best understood as coordination games, or “situations in which each individual has an incentive to do what others are doing, and therefore each individual’s choices are based on his or her beliefs about the likely actions of others.” Instead of thinking about coups as battles (e.g., the side with the greatest military power will win) or coups as elections (e.g., the side with the most public support will win), Singh pushes us to think of coup success as being driven by coup-makers’ ability to get others to believe that their coup attempt will be successful.
How do coup-makers convince others their coup attempt will be successful? They convince military actors that the success of the coup has the support of almost everybody in the military and that any possible resistance is minor. One way coup makers have done this is by seizing the main radio broadcast facility.
French President Nicolas Sarkozy Calls For WHITE GENOCIDE
“Peaceful” protest
Extreme Anti-White Tweets from #BlackLivesMatter Movement
“White Debt” ???
To a fellow University of Iowa graduate (from the non-fiction program . . . predictably):
LET MY PEOPLE GO!!!
White people, whom you describe as a “moral problem”, have built modern civilization, dragged the rest of the world out of ignorance poverty and disease (against their will in many cases), suffered germ warfare from Asian invaders, suffered slavery (the Black Sea slave trade numbered 5 million almost half the individuals of the North Atlantic slave trade at a time when the world was much more sparsely populated), ended slavery, invented universal ethics and universal laws, and continue to run the only society in the world that tolerates your parasitism, moral relativism, and anti-social propaganda.
Note: Though I’d love give credit to my Slavic ancestors, the world-improving changes are mostly attributable to Western and Northern Europeans. If Slavs did anything right, it was acting as an enormous meat shield against the invading hordes from the East, and slave traders from Turkey and their agents.
So to hell with your whiny, hypocritical, self-loathing, overly deceptive, cultural Marxist status seeking.
San Bernadino (great essay)
—“The New Atheists may have the cleanest conscience today in a sense, but it comes at the price of an amazing lack of historical awareness, empathy or sophistication.”—
—“There is, of course, another way of interpreting our troubles with Islam. Islamic fundamentalism can be seen as a very recent development rooted in colonialism and revolt, a kind of Marxism-Leninism-With-Prayers. If you put it that way, many will respond with greater sympathy; the underdog always gets cut some slack, and progressives’ anti-authoritarianism may find itself weirdly aligned with what is, in my opinion, the most authoritarian belief system ever created. Still, we may assume some responsibility for all of this: had the French never colonized Algeria, it’s unlikely that Franco-Algerians would be gunning down cartoonists in Paris.”—
The last sentence (at least part of it) is awful.
—“There is no place for blood and honor and absolutism in the world that is emerging, and Islam will have to adapt, or die.”—
I’m afraid social norms and property rights have to be enforced the old fashioned way — with blood and honor.
poseidonian.wordpress.com/2015/12/04/san-bernardino/
***
It is related to my post about Run Away Underclasses: www.lostrepublic.com/archives/15907
Yet another study showing the obvious: men are better than women at combat
Marine Corps Study Shows That Men Are FAR Better In Ground Combat Than Women
An experimental Marine Corps study looking at female integration into ground combat units has determined that women perform far worse than men.
The study, called the Ground Combat Element Integrated Task Force (GCEITF), was conducted with 200 male and 75 female volunteers to provide officials with more information on how females perform in ground combat situations.
Defense Secretary Ash Carter intends to open all combat specialties to women at the start of 2016, unlessthe services specifically request exemptions. Those exemptions have to be backed by detailed evidence and must be submitted by October, Christian Science Monitor reports.
What the study found is that women are about 15 percent less powerful than men, and that in terms of performance on the distribution, “the female top 25th percentile of women overlapped with the bottom 25thpercentile for males.” A lack of power means, for example, that men were able to throw their heavy packs on top of the wall, but females required assistance.
Men had better firearm accuracy, hitting targets 44 percent of the time, in comparison to females, who only scored at 28 percent. Male-only squads were also faster.
According to the study, “All-male squads, teams and crews demonstrated higher performance levels on 69 percent of tasks evaluated … as compared to gender-integrated squads, teams and crews.”
Women also were more likely to suffer injuries, a conclusion backed by research from the British Ministry of Defence, which found that because of physiological differences, women are burdened with musculoskeletal injuries at a rate 10 times higher than men. If a woman has to carry a pack more than 25 percent of her bodyweight, her risk of injury skyrockets by five. (RELATED: Military Services Have Until October 1 To Justify Keeping Women Out Of Combat Roles)
In the GCEITF, the actual injury rate for women, focusing on muscles, tendons and ligaments, was 40.5 percent. Men came in with an injury rate of only 18.8 percent. Despite the results of the GCEITF and the fact that no female volunteers passed the infantry officer course opened earlier this year, it’s unknown whether the findings will be convincing enough to persuade Navy Secretary Ray Mabus, who has previously gone on record stating that he does not see a reason for requesting an exemption and that ultimately, it’s his call.
Women’s college theater group cancels ‘Vagina Monologues’ amid concerns that it could offend transgender people
Donald J. Trump to Republican Jewish Coalition: “You’re not going to support me because I don’t want your money.”
!!!