Thursday, November 18, 2021

Jolly Heretic Significantly Non-Heretical

This guy isn't a moron and I shouldn't call him that. E.g. he knows how the antipathy to group selection is politics, not science. He's openly social darwinist, which is exactly as refreshing as you might imagine.

But my god does the Sophism infection make it tempting.

He talks a lot about avoidance of discipline by the irresponsible left, and about narcissistic self-absorption. Naturally, he calls the first [harm avoidance], as if being undisciplined isn't harmful, and the latter [individualism], in an apparent attempt to out-lie Satan. 

ProTip: don't try to tell better lies than Satan. You also can't out-hunt Artemis or out-run Hermes. It just doesn't happen. Gonna play a prank on Coyote and Loki next? Yeah, uh, good luck with that.

If society isn't a good deal for you, society is betraying you. If you go around saying everyone has to sacrifice for the group and other collectivist nonsense, you are normalizing and lionizing betrayal. How do you think Sophist arguments work, moron? If you lose, you're weak. Don't tee up exactly what the Sophists already beat up.

The electoral birth defect is a hell of a drug, to mix metaphors. 


A nice negative example of how not to stay in your lane. Conquest #1 is important. He hits every Fascist talking point, like a true Marxist, and appears completely oblivious to honour and responsibility. 

It's ironic since he's usually hyper-aware of dysgenesis, and yet he spends the entire video slagging off a situation where IQ was rapidly rising according to his own data. Centralized governments are wildly dysgenic because they're too weak to handle a smart and responsible population.

He's probably just wrong, too. Doesn't know what he's talking about and is analyzing a fairy tale as a result. In his purported mafia dystopia apparently random monasteries were strong enough to have and retain security - which is bad apparently. Allegedly a gang was demanding protection money from everyone but skips the church? For two hundred years? Oh yeah gangs totally do that in real life...

Come to think Dawkins, another biology-focused thinker, has this same issue. Believes knowing about genetics qualifies him to talk about sociology and the ideal society. 

If you insist on having domain-crossing expertise, you have to train the domain-crossing expertise: epistemology. Do your reps. As far as I know, there is exactly one way to even partly escape your genetic destiny: worship logic. Do the accounting. 

(Can normies even do this or is it restricted to autistics?)


Yudkowsky's sequences weren't wrong exactly: the opposite of idiocy is not wisdom. JH frequently indulges in opposite-day clown world...which is still just clown world. Yes, egalitarianism is blatantly false: not everything is socially constructed. However, while genes are very close to destiny in the individual, it is far from the case that social constructions have no effect on society. It is precisely that genes give you a fate regarding your reaction to social constructions...

Christians are not wrong all the time: know them by their fruits, if you can't know them by anything else. What are the fruits of the invert-liberal Christian conservative society Dutton favours? Liberalism. The Regressive Inquisition. We, uh, already tried that. Genius.


There's also the blatant bureaucratism, [fast life history strategy]. At least one of those words is redundant. And yes you can always skip the cringe intros.

 

This is particularly annoying for me since I too was raised to avoid discipline. If you can lie to get out of it, you should, right? I was raised to see the harm of discipline first, especially because all the "discipline" I saw was not discipline at all, but was certainly harmful. Don't you feel sorry for anyone who can't lie their way out? I certainly do. And I certainly shouldn't. 

For me, filial piety means being undisciplined. Sorry, gonna go with impiety on this one. 

Hey idiot, this doesn't mean harm is good. Like, check the dictionary. What do words mean?

Partially the issue is that I want to reward those who feel some iota of shame, as opposed to what I'm used to: none at all. (Shame nihilists?) Of course, especially against a Sophist background, taking pity on the self-destructive only encourages them to rip the cord on their blast vest so they can spread the misery as far as possible.  


P.S. Oh hey, a duck search of 'electoral birth defect' brings up me as the first result. It's originally from Moldbug's first post, the formalist manifesto.

P.P.S. There's finally a better result than me for 'political formula' too, but I'm still the second.

No comments: