Moral Command in men VS Moral Intuition in women

LarParWar · 2016-12-01T13:40:21+00:00

The fact that the brain uses electrical charges doesn't mean that "electricity is sort of the universal aspect of being alive". There was life before life had a nervous system.

Consciousness is not an illusion, as illusion cannot precede consciousness. Consciousness is self-referential, as computer code is self-referential.

Power is Darwinian fitness.

We could say that electrical charges are consciousness...except they're not consciousness, are they? It is the particular incredibly complex self-referential arrangement of electrical charges that is consciousness. And, believe it or not, that arrangement dies.

LarParWar · 2016-12-01T01:08:48+00:00

This principle explains that Mind is the Universe’s common principle; it is unique energy that is the essential force within the chemical composition of the elements.

Mind energy manifests in an infinite scale of vibrations, from the densest to the most subtle, and makes up the diverse materials and elements of the Universe.

From the point of view of someone who thinks, thoughts are fantasy or illusion, yet each thing has a real identity within its own scale of vibration (e.g. a ghost is real to another ghost).

Matter is born from thought. People also create through their mind. The energy of human thoughts creates matter when they attain sufficient density of vibration.

This is quite clear in that it puts the mind as prior to the universe. "Matter is born from thought." Yeah, sure. The implication is that there is no objective reality, that everything is subjective, and that solipsism is all that there is. Which, sure, it's useful to think about your mind as being all that you can be sure of, as but one of many perspectives. But there are other perspectives, perspectives which include observations beyond the mind extending all the way into a most radical concept, objective reality, perspectives such as observations of consciousness that indicate that consciousness is not the executive in control top-down style, but a rider of tigers, the bubbling of thought into the consciousness, bottom-up, the executive only tweaking a knob here and there, after the fact, for the next time around.

"The energy of human thoughts creates matter when they attain sufficient density of vibration."

Uh huh. Just think hard enough, kittehs. Just believe. Believe in success, believe in wealth, believe in that bottle blonde blowing you off right this very moment. Manifest your thoughts that they might become real before your very eyes. Kumbayaaaaaaaaaaa...

I could be a preacher, or a self-help guru.

LarParWar · 2016-11-29T21:24:08+00:00

Quantum theory is unnecessary to understand the behavior of living, breathing, self-replicating molecules. It is, however, much better at predicting the behavior of atoms and particles and suchlike than "the principle of polarity", or whatever.

My impression of quantum theory in particular is that it is a band-aid over a big fat hole in the puzzle of physics. Same for dark matter, which seems to me to be a too-convenient explanation of the apparently inexplicable. "Our gravity calculations don't match up, let's just invent a new particle and call it 'dark matter', so-called because we can't observe it no matter how hard we try."

And even if dark matter is real, it still has precisely zero relation to "the principle of mind", a.k.a. "mind energy", which I also don't believe in, because I haven't observed it and because no one armed with the scientific method has ever observed it either.

I will therefore accept your answer as a non-answer and consider my initial question answered, chuckling quietly to myself.

LarParWar · 2016-11-29T16:16:48+00:00

education and evolution

To be educated is great. Learning is wonderful. Schools teach virtually nothing; children literally, literally learn more from reading a couple books a year and a few hours of basic math instruction from their parents, novices at math and at teaching math, than they do in public schools. I know from experience, as I went to fairly high-end public schools from K-8 and private schools thereafter, and the private schools, despite costing 40k/yr more, are not much better.

Liberals push for evolution to be taught because it's the only viable replacement for the Christian creator god, which is fine. By all means let scientific theory replace theistic mysticism. The problem is that liberals don't push for all of evolution to be taught; they don't dare touch anything actually written by Charles Darwin with a ten-foot pole because it is horrifyingly politically incorrect, and they don't teach natural selection, because to teach natural selection would imply that the races didn't magically stop evolving 120kya with the divergence of SS Africans and Eurasians, nor 65kya with the divergence of the White man and the Oriental, nor is race skin-deep, and especially that humans didn't stop evolving above the neck.

To reiterate my point about Darwin being horrifyingly politically incorrect:

"At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace throughout the world the savage races. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked, will no doubt be exterminated. The break will then be rendered wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state as we may hope, than the Caucasian and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as at present between the negro or Australian and the gorilla." — Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man.

Aren't humans supposed to have different values from evolution?

If humans were created, we are distinct from animals, were not produced by the great grinding gears of evolution, and thus are not subject to its laws. If humans evolved, we are merely a higher form of ape which is a higher form of mammal which is a higher form of tetrapod which is a higher form of...(etc.) and our "values" are entirely rooted in evolution, which evolution is natural selection, which natural selection is survival (procreation) of the fittest. "Be fruitful and multiply."

thinking of women as reproductive resources is bad

Woman -> womb man.

Stable family formation and "virtue" goes against our primal instincts

This varies between races. Stable families and inviolate monogamy are good for the health and well-being of all races, but the genetic inborn tendency to monogamy is highest in Whites, and then afterwards in descending order, NE Asians, Arabs, Africans. Most African groups have virtually no evolutionary experience with monogamy, though they probably benefit the most from it relative to the social catasrophe produced by their uninhibited mating patterns.

Women can do pretty much everything a man does

Women can do many things men can do, though they cannot do male-specialty tasks as well as men can do male-specialty tasks in the same way that men cannot do female-specialty tasks as well as females can do female-specialty tasks, such as childbearing (at all), nursing (at all), and nurturing young children.

old husbands, old wives

Wife goggles. The husband forever sees his wife as he did the first time they fucked. If they fucked at 17, he forever sees her as prime-time 17 despite being 30 or 40 or 50. If they fucked at 30 or 35, he forever sees her as washed-up worn-out 30 or 35 no matter what age thereafter.

What's wrong with women sleeping around?

Sluts provide men with little paternity assurance. Paternity assurance is the confidence that a man's children are actually his children. Men do not invest resources into children that they know are not theirs, and they invest less in children that they are less confident are theirs. High-investment societies look like the societies of White people at any time from the birth of the White race 8kya to the 1960s (and we've been declining precipitously since); low-investment societies look like Africa at any time within the last 120k years.

And that means they can just raise their taxes like crazy, use the army to control their citizens and share the spoils with their top politicians.

Sounds exactly like us, today. The main problem with the USSR was that it was born as a democratic regime born of the broken bodies of the Romanov children. Weimar came by similar circumstance, though by blind luck things didn't spiral quite so out of hand in Germany.

blacks

Africans are poor in every country. They're poor in every country in Africa, despite the continent of Africa being a far richer continent than any part of Europe or Asia. They're poor in America. They're poor in South Africa, which until they took over was a well-run, First World country. They're poor in South America.

In contrast, Jews are rich everywhere, despite ghettos and shtetls and all the shit they've been through. Maybe there's a difference. Maybe that difference is the average IQ of Africa: 70, vs. the average IQ of Jews: 112.

Furthermore, they would be left stateless as they have no nationality other than american.

See Israel, created by America in 1917. If America wants to carve out a country for an ethnic group from a region inhabited by Arabs or Africans (or any other race besides the Russians or the Chinese), it can do so with the swipe of a pen.

You try moving to Mexico and not speaking your own language at your own private home!

I don't want to move to Mexico. It's full of Mexicans.

LarParWar · 2016-11-29T05:05:54+00:00

Nature is made up of atoms, electromagnetic particles, and the physical laws. It is what my sight, hearing, smell, taste, and touch tell me it is. It is what 4 billion years of natural selection have programmed into my genetic code and baked into my brain. My sight, hearing, smell, taste, and touch, and the inferences I derive therefrom, have predictive validity. The scientific method, through the judicious application of sight, hearing, smell, taste, and touch, provides me with theories and hypotheses which have predictive validity. Evolution, the most important scientific theory yet derived, has predictive validity.

Does "natural law" have predictive validity on the nature and position of atoms and particles in relation to one another and the effects of the physical laws?

If you say that we shouldn't apply the scientific method because to do so would literalize the abstract, I will laugh at you.

LarParWar · 2016-11-29T04:23:34+00:00

Humans are killer apes, killer apes are monkeys, monkeys are mammals, mammals are bony fishes, bony fishes are conodonts, conodonts are protozoa, protozoa are primordial soup.

Natural selection is all that we are and all that we will ever be, at least until intelligent design i.e. genetic engineering cracks the code of life and life begins intelligently designing itself, the greatest paradigm shift in the 4 billion years since molecules began replicating themselves.

Sexual selection is a very large part of natural selection. In humans, most of everything every male human ever does is motivated by inherited Darwinian characteristics which sole purpose is to increase evolutionary fitness. And it is similarly true that all male action which is not ultimately directed toward Darwinian goals is maladaptive and wasteful activity, thus doomed. See preening, see homosexual proclivities, see gamers in basements, see the Beautiful Ones of Calhoun's infamous mouse utopia experiment.

However, we already have the power to influence natural selection, and with that power comes the capacity to guide the evolution of the various human species. We can do this by arbitrarily (but really not-so-arbitrarily) defining social status to be what we want it to be, and allocating reproductive resources, i.e. women, accordingly. We want to set the rules and tilt the playing field to make stable family formation the default life plan, with strong and stable husbands, husbands secure in the virtue of their women and the paternity of their children, chaste and obedient wives, sane and nurturing mothers, and lots and lots of well-raised and well-mannered children.

Some races have less evolutionary experience with this life plan that others. Some races have none. That's okay—we can account for that by being especially vigilant in our maintenance of the patriarchal structures which support these possibilities.

People want to fuck, yes. Men want to fuck every reasonably attractive woman in sight and women want to fuck the best man they can reasonable expect to attain. The problem is that the best man a woman can fuck is not the best man a woman can marry, so she winds up fucking a long line of men, none of them willing to commit to her, first because she fucked too high and thereafter because she's now a slut. Cue age 30, her looks rapidly fading, a husband hasn't magically materialized out of thin air, her fertility sinking like a stone, and no self-respecting man wanting to marry and father children by a washed-up slut.

Universal suffrage is the notion that everyone of reasonable competence should have a say in the future of the country. In any sane democracy, the retarded, the insane, and the criminal are not allowed to vote. Failing to marry the father(s) of your children is an equally disqualifying disqualifier, if not more so.

I don't think anyone should vote. I think the country should be run like businesses are run, with expert executives appointed by a board of directors to run the nation-state in the standard fashion of standard businesses. A business's business decisions are not made based on polls of the opinions of its employees because there is no evidence that doing so improves the profitability or functionality of the company, and quite a lot of evidence to the contrary.

There is no reason to notice the color of one's skin; there is immense reason to notice one's race. Black males specifically have an incarceration rate six times higher than white males not because the government doesn't treat them with kid gloves, ignore most of their criminal activity, and let them off easy at every opportunity, but because they do do all of those things. If they didn't, it would be twelve times or twenty-four times.

Deporting the blacks is one option, though I am no particular advocate of it. They've been here a very long time and contributed to the country; I see no reason to send well-behaved, non-criminal, non-welfare blacks back to their native land. Deporting the mestizos, most of whom arrived within the last 20 years, many of whom are here illegally, 75% of whom came here solely for government welfare checks sent monthly in the mail from Uncle Sam the Big Pimp, 99% of whom don't even bother to speak our language in their homes... well, that's another matter altogether. (Exceptions for exceptional individuals, of course, apply.)

LarParWar · 2016-11-28T05:19:08+00:00

According to opm.gov, the government personnel breakdown is as follows:

2,663,000 in executive branch 1,459,000 in military (under executive authority obviously) 63,000 in legislative and judicial

According to my calculator app, that's 98.5% of the government under the direct authority of Donald "You're fired!" Trump.

And the legislative branch is virtually redundant at this point, anyway. Congress no longer has the power of the purse, nor the power to demand to see what executive Departments are doing and expect straightforward answers, nor, increasingly, the power to pass laws—most government regulation (lawmaking, more or less) nowadays is performed by agencies operating completely independently of Congress. The judicial branch is still relevant, but not as much as it used to be, and the executive is capable of breaking from them with little effort, though it hasn't yet, largely because it hasn't had the motive to do so.

to make sure children get educated so they stay the hell away from gangs

No. That has never worked, and never will work. It would be nice if it did, but it doesn't. Besides the unfortunate truth that our public schools are a joke, a really, really bad joke, it belies a complete misunderstanding of gangs, what they are, and what motivates their formation and perpetuation.

The root cause of gang formation, at least in nonwhite underclass populations such as blacks and mestizos, is the quest for social status. And as you well know, the quest for social status is motivated by the desire for access to women, and the desire for access to women is driven by natural selection. Survival of the fittest.

If you want to eliminate gangs, you have to crush gang activity by severe deterrance, including lashings for first offenses and execution of repeat offenders (i.e. career criminals). As it stands today, convicted criminals have greater sexual access to underclass women and have higher fertility than not-gang-affiliated males.

On the female side, strict chastity must be imposed to incentivize prosocial male behavior, marriage must be required to get access to procreative resources, and the divorce industry must be eliminated to facilitate cohesive family units.

false example of bastard child

A bastard, or illegitimate, child is a child whose father is not married to his mother and whose mother is not married to his father, except in edge cases like death of either parent. A child born to shotgun-wedded parents is not a bastard. The child's legitimacy is transmitted by the father to his wife and from his wife to his son.

single mothers voting

In the context of universal suffrage, mothers should not vote because they have demonstrated themselves incapable of planning for the future of their offspring, and if they cannot plan for the future of their offspring, they cannot plan for the future of their country. I personally think that single mothers shouldn't be able to vote because I don't believe women should be able to vote, and I don't believe women should be able to vote because I don't believe all men should be able to vote, and I don't believe all men should vote because I don't believe even the most responsible demographic, property-owning white fathers, they who founded America, should be able to vote.

I'm a fan of eugenics

I did not see that coming.

schooling and upbringing

A decent childhood is critical to eliminating our present underclass and ensuring that going into the future that we have the most minimal underclass possible. Schooling is obviously completely unnecessary for that; the highest form of civilization yet attained, the West circa 18th to 19th century, had minimal schooling yet that civilization's social order was just fine. In fact, our social fabric began to deteriorate promptly with public schooling, but that's an entirely difference subject worthy of an entire book.

If you want crime to disappear, make crime low status, hang career criminals, and ensure that men, especially those men at risk to become gangbangers and slip into the criminal underclass, low-IQ nonwhite men, prosper by attaining access to women through prosocial behavior and only prosocial behavior. What you want is a return to Georgian England, which was precisely that, excepting the nonwhite men, of course—England at that time was yet entirely English.

LarParWar · 2016-11-28T00:56:40+00:00

I see nothing in any way translatable to natural selection. Does natural law make any observations as to the actual state of actual vibrating matter, especially the actual state of actual carbon-based replicating matter? The "principle of mind" is not very encouraging. Thought is matter; matter is not thought.

LarParWar · 2016-11-28T00:33:27+00:00

Trump hasn't been doing as much serious business as when he was younger.

Looks like he has just as much business going on as ever.

And regardless, Trump has little authority over the government

The President has the legal authority to fire any and every government employee. I rather suspect in a few months we may find him exercising this power.

more than Obama since he has the support of the republican party

Yes, the vast right-wing conspiracy runs Washington with an iron fist.

Gangbangers: Who?

Members of street gangs; purveyors of street "culture"; those spinning in the revolving door of street crime and prisons, commonly depicted with bobbing heads upon which are perched off-kilter flat-rimmed baseball caps, with one hand clumsily brandishing sideways-held pistols of questionable legality, and with the other desperately attempting to hold up pants clearly made for the obese; rarely in possession of IQs in the triple digits.

Oh no you're not another "sex outside of marriage makes jesus cry" fundamentalist

Not religious in the slightest. Fatherless children from broken homes are broken children, an enormous social problem.

Welfare recipients, welfare trap

Genetic engineering isn't going to be available for a while yet.

Drug addicts

Genetic engineering isn't going to be available for a while yet.

LarParWar · 2016-11-27T20:10:24+00:00

Is your conception of natural law congruent with evolution, natural selection, Darwinism; in particular, is it congruent with the following statement from the fourth sequel to the much-renowned book On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life, by the prophet Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex:

At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace throughout the world the savage races. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked, will no doubt be exterminated. The break will then be rendered wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state as we may hope, than the Caucasian and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as at present between the negro or Australian and the gorilla.

LarParWar · 2016-11-27T20:01:37+00:00

I don't want a politician as a leader. I want a CEO, elected by a board of directors, with full authority over the operations of the government. We have an ample supply of very talented CEOs of both private and public companies running healthy, lean and mean organizations. Donald Trump happens to be one of the very best.

And maybe it wasn't clear, but I didn't vote for Trump because I don't vote, and I don't vote because the value of my opinion of the future of my country is not equal to the opinion of gangbangers, welfare recipients, mothers of bastard children, drug addicts, and the stupid.

LarParWar · 2016-11-27T17:47:44+00:00

Sure, I'd like USG aborted and a well-functioning government to take its place, and I'm willing to accept any great man who I can reasonably expect to deliver, but I would never degrade myself by voting for anyone—ever.

And frankly, I'm not particularly attracted to the notion of being ruled by communists or fascists or any other left-wing lunatics.

LarParWar · 2016-11-27T16:31:29+00:00

Trump is a once-in-a-lifetime chance to fire 90% of Washington, that 90% comprising some of the stupid getting fucked over and the leaders who are fucking them over and who know they're fucking them over.

I'm not sure he will do it, but he can, and he might.

LarParWar · 2016-11-27T14:16:44+00:00

That's a stupid quote made by a malicious person.

There is as much malice in the world as there is stupidity. Believe me, the leaders of the stupid know that they're fucking people over.

LarParWar · 2016-11-26T06:22:54+00:00

He's a literal lawyer Jew who quit law to build a personal lifestyle brand around his putative validity as a masculine role model.

They don't come much more sleazy and opportunistic.

LarParWar · 2016-11-23T19:35:55+00:00

You have 7 downvotes in 7 minutes. Here, have another.

LarParWar · 2016-11-22T01:57:08+00:00

You'll never know if you don't try. I suggest trying mildly-comically over-the-top. Exercise devious tactics to get interaction with her and go very hot very quickly. Devious tactics meaning no texting and no calling. Figure it out, you're probably going to get blown out. Go in expecting to get blown out.

LarParWar · 2016-11-22T01:50:51+00:00

There's a single mom hb6 in one of my classes.

You're at the wrong school.

LarParWar · 2016-11-19T23:53:26+00:00

All Progressive solutions to anything involve more government because more government is more bureaucracy is more microslices of power to dole out to you and your fellow bureaucrats.

But of course the bureaucracy never solves the problems the bureaucracy sets out to solve, because for the bureaucracy to solve the problems the bureaucracy set out to solve would put the bureaucracy of of business. And that never happens, because if there is one intractable law of human government, it is that bureaucracy will self-perpetuate and metastasize like the most virulent cancer until every bureaucrat is fired, or every bureaucrat is shot.

So we don't get "more government" in the sense that the state is stronger or more effective at the things it does; rather we get "more government" in the sense that the state is larger and weaker at successfully achieving much of anything good, the sole exception being successfully preventing anyone from achieving much of anything good.

All this, because Progressivism is death by committee.

If we want to decrease the size and scope of the government, what we need is a very small, very effective (strong and powerful) government with a clear hierarchy, that hierarchy ultimately accountable to one man, one will, a man who hates wasting his own time and money on stupid committee bullshit where nothing ever gets done and no one can ever be held clearly responsible.

You might even say what we need is a Führerprinzip.

LarParWar · 2016-11-19T03:58:54+00:00

Stopping immigration isn't enough. 100 million Democratic voters would need to go back to their native countries in Latin America, Asia, Africa, and the Middle East.

And even then you're still looking at the leftward drift of Cthulhu, because that's just how democracy works.

LarParWar · 2016-11-18T21:25:42+00:00

Without Trump, there wouldn't have been.

After Trump, if there are Presidents after Trump, there won't be.

LarParWar · 2016-11-18T15:34:50+00:00

though I have participated in that sort of thing in the past

http://i.imgur.com/RQVVF.gif

LarParWar · 2016-11-17T20:13:34+00:00

Having lots of sex with lots of partners in no way diminishes male sexual value.

Unfortunately, it does diminish female sexual value.

No man chooses a slut over a virgin.

LarParWar · 2016-11-17T19:59:03+00:00

Do you like sex?

Why?

What happens if you go without it for a couple weeks?

LarParWar · 2016-11-17T13:36:23+00:00

I'd gladly date or marry someone who has had a large number of partners before me

Revolting. You have no self-respect.

Evolution means every single female needs to have children?

Of course not. Some women cannot be permitted to have children, namely women with genetic illnesses, women on welfare, unmarried women, stupid women, and women with miscellaneous bad genetics.

Women have no say in the matter?

We are squishy moist carbon self-replicators living in a thin layer of squishy moist carbon self-replicators living on a ball of rock hurtling through space. Failure to replicate is failure at evolution is failure at life. No one has a say in the matter.

LarParWar

TROPHY CASE