27 July 2017

Skepticism and Thelema (YouTube Notes)


Video At: https://youtu.be/0uARWh1tlV0

DWTWSBTWOTL

A Brief Update

  • My Reading List
    • Completed Political Theology by Schmitt
    • Rec’d Judas by Marvin Meyer (mainly for the Gospel of Judas)
    • I’ve also picked up all of the translated works of Maria de Naglowska
      • Pioneer of Sex Magick who worked with the better known Paschal Beverly Randolph
      • She was, evidently, a significant influence on Evola.
    • Finally, I rec’d a while ago, the first volume from the Arktos Kickstarter for translating Alain de Benoist’s View from the Right
  • I get a lot of music, but I’d like to mention how I enjoy the new Laibach album, Thus Sprach Zarathrustra. 
    • It is a soundtrack (as were Macbeth & Baptism) and is a refreshing change from Spectre.
  • Internet Drama
    • Francesca vs. Laci
    • Not really surprised that Francesca learned that the “Skeptics” were going to VidCon and took steps to neuter the opposition
    • She played on the inherently decent nature of the Skeptics she was interacting with
    • In typically short sighted fashion, she outed herself once the immediate goal was met
      • SJWs et al have poor impulse control & must curtail their ability to foresee how actions now will play out in the future — otherwise they couldn’t push their agenda
      • She was probably scared of receiving blowback such as Laci Green rec’d
    • Now I don’t consider Laci Green to be in the same boat.
      • I am not saying she is “red pilled” (which is quickly becoming a meaningless term, used by each group to mean “agreeing with me”)
      • But I also don’t believe that the regressives are so monolithic and powerful enough to employ Mata Haris
  • Speaking of Internet, and YouTube in particular, these are some channels I enjoy
    • Roaming Millenial
    • Barbara4U2C
    • Blaire White
    • Sargon of Akkad // The Thinkery
    • Armoured Skeptic
    • Bearing
  • I’ll be trying to upload this a bit early, as I am visiting my parents this weekend. Dutiful son and all that (Oh the oppression of societal roles)
    • I will be forced to listen to Fox
      • Not really a fan, since I hate yelling
      • However it is interesting to see the contrast between what the Left claims they are saying and what they actually say
    • This reminds me of the studies by Haidt
      • He rose to prominence with some studies a while back that were reported as indicating that Confirmation Biases meant that Conservatives could not accept Contradictory facts
      • Much less hooplah was made about his findings that it wasn’t confined to Conservatives
      • Then the study that came out that showed that Conservatives understood Liberal’s positions far better than Liberals understood Conservative’s positions.
      • Hilarious.

So, On with the show

Thelema is a Spiritual Philosophy, more akin to Nikāya Buddhism than Christianity.

  • This means it can be applied to Theological positions ranging from Atheist to Superstitious.
    • It should be noted that Crowley warned against dogmatically adhering to either extreme.
    • Neither is truly a skeptical position as neither can be confirmed.
  • The A.’.A.’. Is the spiritual order of Thelema. One could think of it as a monastic hermetic order.
    • It’s motto is “We place no reliance on Virgin or pidgeon, Our method is Science, Our aim is Religion.” —Aleister Crowley; Motto for the Aஃ Aஃ (1907).
  • The occult and spiritual practices of Thelema are meant to be subjected to the Scientific Method.
    • Now this was the early 20th century, so there are some minor differences.
    • Logical Irrelevance may not have been migrated into the Method of Science as Falsifiability in time for it to be incorporated into Crowley’s conception.

There are several philosophers in the A.’.A.’. Reading List.
  • Among them is David Hume
    • Hume was a Scottish Philosopher known for his philosophical empiricism, skepticism, and naturalism.
    • Contributed to Scientific Method

Thelema has several works which encourage skepticism, so I will finish with some works from the Thelemic Canon: primarily The Book of Lies and Liber O.
  • 333: 45 - Chinese Music; 51 - Terrier-Work
  • Liber O: Part I
The Method of Science is not set in stone. It is a constantly evolving process
  • Evidence of the Scientific Method, as we understand the term, can be found in the Ancient Egyptians (1600 BCE)
  • Then we move through the Greek Philosophers (Aristotle, Plato)
  • Through Theologians (Roger Bacon) to the Renaissance
  • Skepticism was emphasized: Francis Bacon, Descartes, Hume, Galileo
    • You can thank Francis Bacon for those lists you had to draw up in Science class of properties and observations
  • Finally, the alchemist Isaac Newton
  • Humes’s extreme skepticism lost out to neo-Kantianism.
The concept of falsifiability was introduced around 1934.
  • This seems to be an extension of the logical concept of irrelevance.
    • Logically, any statement that cannot be demonstrated as false is irrelevant (in the sense of Logic). Examples include
      • God exists
      • All is Buddha Nature
      • Logic is the best system
    • Note that this is not a value judgment, merely a comment on its provability.
  • It is unlikely that this was in Crowley’s conception of the Method of Science.
I’d like to draw attention to Newton’s contribution. This would have been in Crowley’s conception
  1. We are to admit no more causes of natural things than such as are both true and sufficient to explain their appearances.
  2. Therefore to the same natural effects we must, as far as possible, assign the same causes.
  3. The qualities of bodies, which admit neither intension nor remission of degrees, and which are found to belong to all bodies within the reach of our experiments, are to be esteemed the universal qualities of all bodies whatsoever.
  4. In experimental philosophy we are to look upon propositions collected by general induction from phænomena as accurately or very nearly true, notwithstanding any contrary hypotheses that may be imagined, until such time as other phænomena occur, by which they may either be made more accurate, or liable to exceptions.
  • To explain all nature is too difficult a task for any one man or even for any one age. 'Tis much better to do a little with certainty, and leave the rest for others that come after you, than to explain all things.
What is the (current) Method of Science:
  1. Define a question
  2. Gather information and resources (observe)
  3. Form an explanatory hypothesis (this includes the null hypothesis & falsifiability)
  4. Test the hypothesis by performing an experiment and collecting data in a reproducible manner
  5. Analyze the data
  6. Interpret the data and draw conclusions that serve as a starting point for new hypothesis
  7. Publish results
  8. Retest (frequently done by other scientists)
  • Six jumps back to three until the scientist is satisfied.
Not all of these steps are utilized every time, neither are they always used in this order.
  • Scientists, like other philosophers, tend to be a contentious lot
    • Anyone who prioritizes Science over Philosophy is an idiot, and ignorant of history.
    • Gratuitous jab at Tyson, is he still relevant?

Given that the Occult is often dealing with observable phenomenon derived from unobservable phenomenon
  • The Thelemite must beware Violating Newton’s 1st and 2nd principles. (Dangers of Mysticism)
  • However, in as much is possible, he must apply to his own workings the Method of Science
  • He must also avoid the problems rife  in the scientific community (especially in the Social Sciences) of falsifying data
David Hume was, among other things, a Scottish Philosopher from the 18th century.
  • Highly Skeptic, perhaps to an unworkable degree
  • Committed Atheist
  • Key take-away (imo)
    • While we are capable of reason, it is a mistake to categorize people as rational
    • We use our reason to justify our emotive responses.
    • That is, we use our reason to provide a justification for feeling what we feel
    • A “rational being” is one who, when faced with contradictory facts, can actually change their feelings.
    • The last item is my inference. Hume was far more pessimistic.
  • Hume’s Essays are, as I mentioned, on the A.’.A.’.’s reading list.
By taking this into account, we really can gain a greater understanding of people’s behavior
  • Haidt refers to Hume’s description as riding an elephant
    • The elephant is our feelings, the rider is the reason.
    • When we don’t realize we are riding an elephant, it is hard to control
    • The first step to understanding, & thus becoming a rational (or more rational) being, is to realize we are on an elephant.
    • Then we can direct the elephant.
    • Never forget that it is the bigger and stronger partner, and when it rampages, there is little the shrieking rider can do to stop it.
  • Haidt is important due to his studies in morality and the divide between (American) Liberals & Conservatives.
    • His work is also useful for understanding modern socio-political behaviors, both IRL and OL.
    • I plan on picking up his book, The Righteous Mind, soon. I’ve read many of his studies, but I would like to see where he takes it.
So, back to Thelema, or more accurately, Crowley.

In one of his works on practical instruction, Liber O vel Manus et Sagittae sub figurâ VI, part I, Crowley writes:
  1. This book is very easy to misunderstand; readers are asked to use the most minute critical care in the study of it, even as we have done in its preparation.
  2. In this book it is spoken of the Sephiroth and the Paths; of Spirits and Conjurations; of Gods, Spheres, Planes, and many other things which may or may not exist.
    It is immaterial whether these exist or not. By doing certain things certain results will follow; students are most earnestly warned against attributing objective reality or philosophic validity to any of them.
  3. The advantages to be gained from them are chiefly these: (a) A widening of the horizon of the mind. (b) An improvement of the control of the mind.
  4. The student, if he attains any success in the following practices, will find himself confronted by things (ideas or beings) too glorious or too dreadful to be described. It is essential that he remain the master of all that he beholds, hears or conceives; otherwise he will be the slave of illusion, and the prey of madness.
    Before entering upon any of these practices, the student should be in good health, and have attained a fair mastery of Asana, Pranayama and Dharana.
  5. There is little danger that any student, however idle or stupid, will fail to get some result; but there is great danger that he will be led astray, obsessed and overwhelmed by his results, even though it be by those which it is necessary that he should attain. Too often, moreover, he mistaketh the first resting-place for the goal, and taketh off his armour as if he were a victor ere the fight is well begun.
    It is desirable that the student should never attach to any result the importance which it at first seems to possess.
I Want to draw particular attention to The second point.
  • Despite the fact that Occultists regularly work with gods, angels, demons, spirits
  • Despite the fact that we use models and maps of the heavens and spiritual realms
  • We are enjoined to remain skeptical
    • The map is not the territory
    • The validity of things are found in their utility
The Book of Lies, also known as Liber 333, contains two items that I would like to draw attention to:
  • Chinese Music (45)
    • From Commentary: The attitude recommended is scepticism, but a scepticism under control. Doubt inhibits action, as much as faith blinds it. All the best Popes have been Atheists, but perhaps the greatest of them once remarked, “Quantum nobis prodest haec fabula Christi” [How much profit the story of Christ], attributed to Pope Leo X
    • The ruler asserts facts as they are; the slave has therefore no option but to deny them passionately, in order to express his discontent. Hence such absurdities as "Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité", "In God we trust", and the like. Similarly we find people asserting today that woman is superior to man, and that all men are born equal.
  • Terrier-Work (51)
    • This one’s commentary is primarily technical, since the text itself is pretty clear.
So, to recap:
  • The basic instructions for Thelema encourage both Skepticism and Critical Analysis
  • This can be seen by the doctrinal requirements of adherence to “The Method of Science” and recommendations of Skeptical Philosophers
  • I cannot recommend enough that any aspirant to Occult Knowledge, let alone Thelema, read “The Dangers of Mysticism”.
    • Modern Spirituality, Religion, and the New Age movement have fallen into the trap Crowley warns against.

Truth is found in the rubble of falsehood.
LITLLUW

SOURCES:
Method of Science

David Hume:

Haidt:

Crowley:

Personal Update:

Two Videos on Francesca

List of Recommended Channels
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , ,

26 July 2017

Pro-Pedophilia Sites, or Conversations With My Children #1


DWTWSBTWOTL

So my third son (age 17) came into my room to tell me about Heart Progress.

  • I have an open topic policy with my children
    • This has been in place since they were very young
    • I just pay attention to when they get bored (i.e. their question has been answered insofar as their interest & ability to follow allows)
    • This has led to some very interesting dinner conversations.
  • Heart Progress is a pro-pedophilia advocacy group
    • Pardon, a Pedosexual advocacy group
    • It is part of the pro-pedophilia movement that has been discussed by others

So he came to my room and asked if I had heard of Heart Progress
  • It sounded vaguely familiar and I told him so
  • He explained about it.
  • It had come up in his Dischord

Now I am fairly libertine in my attitudes toward sex and sexuality
  • I draw the line at sex with children, animals, and public copulation with inanimate objects.

We talked a bit
  • Pedophilia normalization is not new
    • It is just that we are able to hear from them unfiltered due to fewer layers of mediation on their viewpoint
      • I.e., They can spew their bullshit narratives on YouTube, Twitter, Facebook, etc without moderation
      • Not that I am saying they should be censored. I want to know who these perverts are
    • NAMBLA, the North American Man/Boy Love Association has been doing it for decades (1978)
      • Hakim Bey, aka Peter Lamborn Wilson, is said to be a member.
      • He did quite a bit to normalize Pedophilia in 80s Counter Cultural circles
  • While there is no difference made by the Law, there is a difference between Pedophilia and Hebephilia/Ephebophilia
  • Hebephilia/Ephebophilia is the sexual attraction to post-pubescent children, i.e. teens
  • This can be understood as a vestige of biological imperatives 
  • The target is able to breed.
  • I don’t want to get into the legalities and pros and cons, but it is identifiable as a valid biological impetus
  • This does not mean that it is OK, that is a social and intellectual stance
  • We are all born to find, barring other factors, that those who are sexually mature enough to breed are sexually desirable.
  • Pedophilia is the sexual attraction to pre-pubescent children
  • They cannot breed. There is no biological impetus for this desire.
  • This is a mental sickness.
  • If you are born this way, then it is like Schizophrenia (of which some forms are believed to have biological causes) or Autism
  • It needs to be treated and mitigated
  • You are a danger to society and yourself
He also mentioned how the pedos claim that prepubescent children are “sexual beings”
  • This is another case of taking a kernel of truth and misrepresenting it.
  • Children have genitalia
  • Children will often play with their genitalia because, even when underdeveloped, it feels good
  • Children are also interested in what adults do, and thus have an (academic) interest in sex and sexuality
  • This does not make them sexual beings
    • Frankly, I cringe at the phrase “sexual beings”
    • We are more than our genitals
    • We are more than where we like to put our genitals
    • Modern society focuses way to much on these things
    • This is coming from a member of a Solar-Phallic cult and Tantrist/Sex-Magician.
  • None of this means that it is alright to Fuck children
So, yeah, thank you Internet for making my role as a parent so much more entertaining.

Links, as always, are in the description

This video was a spur of the moment affair, and isn’t meant to count toward my Weekly Video update

That video will be on Skepticism and Thelema, covering the Method of Science and the Role of Doubt within the Thelemic system

Truth is found in the Rubble of Lies

LITLLUW

Sources

YouTube For This Script: https://youtu.be/H_MfU_WLEs8
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , ,

23 July 2017

Goose & Gander (Equality, Merit, Standards + Brief Personal Update)


DWTWSBTWOTL

A quick update:

  • I’ve been sick, this has combined with my allergies to make me truly miserable.
  • I am normally critical of “Big Pharma”, but thank god for modern medical science.
  • I’ve also been distracted by getting my orders and travel ready for my trip to Japan this August.
  • I may do a video montage as a bonus video
  • Being sick may impair my ability to write, but it did give me time to play around with Audacity, hence the intro and outro Music.
  • Also Libre Office Impress for Ending and Beginning titles.
  • I’ve also been trying to figure out my image archive. I have some 20,000 images and I am trying to tag them so I can find them when I want to use them in my videos.
  • And I found some cool stuff on the Free Music Archive, not that I have used it yet.
  • Current Reads: re-reading “Political Theology” by Carl Schmitt. Reading “Aristokratia, Volume 1”
  • So, on with the show


I really like the phrase “What is Good for the Goose is Good for the Gander.”

  • Evidently it can be traced back about five centuries.
  • It reflects my standards based, meritocratic leanings.
  • It also confuses people who don’t know what a gander is.
  • As the French Syndicalist, Georges Sorel, once said, “There is only one pleasure greater than that of being appreciated by intelligent people, and that is the pleasure of not being understood by blunder-heads, who are only capable of expressing in a kind of jargon what serves them in the place of thought.”


For those of you who do not know, this is a gander….
 And this is a goose.

  • Yes, a Gander is a male goose. There is a verb “gander” which is slang for “look”, but we can ignore that.
  • Just FYI, a baby Goose is called a gosling. 


  • They are so cute before they become tasty.


I did find it interesting that the dictionary reverses the sex order of the saying.

  • A strict reading says “What is good for the (Female) Goose is Good for the (Male) Gander.”
  • However, Dictionary.Com gives: “What is good for a man is equally good for a woman; or, what a man can have or do, so can a woman have or do.”
  • To be fair, Wiktionary.Com does give it in the correct order, and provides a sex-neutral version which points to the essence of the proverb’s meaning.


While the proverb is great, Let us not forget what it is referring to…

  • What’s good for the goose is good for the gander, but in our modern world, your goose is still cooked.

Now, I believe in displayed merit. This means I do not believe in equality.

  • Any two people, even identical twins, are not equal. 
  • I do, however, believe in standards and judging people accordingly.
  • After all, this is how we determine an individual’s merit.
  • Some standards vary according to the situation
    • I value the Mechanic more highly than the Physician when I need my car fixed.
    • Likewise, I value the Physician more when I am sick.
  • Others remain fairly consistent.
    • E.g., I always value the truthful.
  • Different standards apply to different classes of people.
    • Politicians, the Military, and Policemen should be held to a higher standard in our society due to their duties and responsibilities.
  • This posits an inherent societally based inequality.
    • Any two groups held to different standards are not and cannot be equal
    • Those who meet a higher standard are intrinsically superior to those who do not, or cannot, meet that standard.
    • Note that an individual may transcend their group if they aspire to, and maintain, a higher standard than is expected of them by society.
Our society does not grant equal rights to children.
  • Neither are they held to the same standards.
    • If a child hits another child, it would be considered cruel to throw them in jail for assault.
    • Likewise, we look on with amusement at some of their more creative interpretations of the world around them
      • I have heard it said that we begin to really possess the capabilities for logical reasoning around age 15 and complete them around 25
      • However studies have shown that neither high schools nor colleges teach critical thinking.
      • I cannot find a link for the statistical age at which logical reasoning skills develop and when the brain structures are fully formed, so feel free to take that statement with a grain of salt.
    • Children are not the equal of adults

Any group to which we give a “pass” for failing to adhere to the nominal standards of civilized behavior is automatically less
  • Further, one could argue that they are being infantilized. 
  • When we fail to hold groups such as BAMN, Antifa, or BLM accountable for acts of violence, theft, or any other violation of the norms of civilized behavior, we are positing that the are inferior beings who just can’t help themselves.
    • Just like when a toddler smacks their sibling in the head for taking their toy.
    • Actually, they are less than the child, since we admonish the child.
    • Full disclosure, I’ve disliked Antifa since the early 90s when SCAR (Skins Committed Against Racism) and SHARP (Skin Heads Against Racial Prejudice) were running around in gangs and beating up the Goths, Ravers, and Street Kids for not being members of their clique. They’ve also ruined several shows.
  • When Feminists allow, even encourage, other women to act out in illogical rants, how are they any different than the caricatures of patronizing men who are believed to diminish women by smiling at their tantrums and saying “There, there” or “Don’t worry your pretty little head about it”.
  • What’s really amusing is how complicit the SJW crowd is at diminishing and infantilizing themselves.
    • A more conspiratorially minded person must wonder if the “movers & shakers” are merely encouraging the SJWs in order to make them more malleable, or whether it is a self-defeating monstrosity, a beast with no head.
The lazy, the loser, the ugly, the stupid, etc etc resent standards.
  • They find their feelings hurt when they realize that they do not meet the standards.
    • Nietzsche and Kierkegaard referred to this as “Ressentiment”
    • According to Wikipedia, “Ressentiment is a sense of hostility directed at that which one identifies as the cause of one's frustration, that is, an assignment of blame for one's frustration.” I recommend the article, it is concise.
    • I do like the Kierkegaard excerpt “The ressentiment which results from want of character can never understand that eminent distinction really is distinction. Neither does it understand itself by recognizing distinction negatively (as in the case of ostracism) but wants to drag it down, wants to belittle it so that it really ceases to be distinguished.”
    • Nietzsche points out: “But it is not the same concept [of] ‘good’; on the contrary, one should ask who is actually evil in the sense of the morality of ressentiment. The stern reply is: precisely the ‘good’ person of the other morality, the noble, powerful, dominating one, but re-touched, re-interpreted and reviewed through the poisonous eye of ressentiment.”
  • But I digress, suffice to say that if Nietzsche were a prophet, his accuracy in describing the Modern World would have put other prophets to shame.
Sadly, for these SJWs, the elimination of explicit standards merely results in the impositions of implicit standards.
  • You see this in the way that dissent within the SJW community is vilified. 
    • Thought Criminals, to salute Orwell, or Apostates, to recognize the post-Christian roots of their ideology, are savaged.
    • Much like how the early Church needed Satan in order to bind the sects and factions together, SJWs need the “fascists” (whomever they may be on that day).
      • LaVey explicitly mentions this in his Nine Satanic Statements
    • I plan on discussing the lineal descent of Christianity to Post-Christian society (I.e. Modernity & Post-Modernity) in a later video
  • We expect a certain level of “Otherizing” of their opponents by the SJW community (it is part and parcel of the human psyche).
  • However, the internal infighting of the SJWs really shows their devotion to  Matthew 12:30, “Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters.” (NIV)
Ursula K. Le Guin authored an interesting work called The Dispossessed.
  • The work portrays an Anarcho-Communist society that managed to be successful enough that they were ceded the moon of their world.
  • The original society and the new society were isolated from each other.
  • While professing to be free, social convention created a set of unwritten laws.
    • E.g., Names were assigned by a computer to ensure they were unique, people had to “volunteer” for the hard labor of terraforming the moon
    • Most importantly, dialog with the original society was restricted, as were certain ideas which risked undermining their ideology
    • The story revolves around contact being made and involves an interesting critique of both societies.
  • Bringing this back to standards, Le Guin is a fantastic Author.
    • She doesn’t need the artificially restricted pool of “Women Authors” in order to stand out.
    • She can be held to, and evaluated by, the same standards that makes any author great
    • She is an adult.
I should also point out that the inherent subjectivity of any given set of standards is a non-issue
  • Even if we bypass the philosophical argument that all things are subjective by virtue of our perception and contextualizing process, and merely go for cultural comparisons
    • We can point out that some standards are actually cross-cultural: don’t murder, don’t steal
    • Also, we are pointing out cultural norms. The sphere of discussion is the culture from which we culturally construct the standards
  • The arena in which we fight is actually pitting those of the current standards against those who seek to lower those standards
  • Standards can be arranged in a hierarchy based upon their difficulty and social cohesion.
    • It is harder to tell the truth and suffer a penalty than it is to lie and gain benefits. 
    • Further, social cohesion is increased by virtue of being able to trust what the other person is saying.
    • Thus the person who generally tells the truth is superior to the person who does not. 
    • Also, those who hold truth-telling as a virtue are superior to those who do not.
  • Another example
    • It is generally accepted that controlling your emotions is more difficult than letting them sway you to acts of violence
    • Randomly assaulting people, even if they are despicable people, lessons social cohesion by interjecting doubts about whether one will be a target of violence.
      • Remember, Barabbas was chosen over Jesus
      • Devadatta worked against Siddhartha
      • MLK was shot
    •  Thus, those who refrain from randomly assaulting people are superior to those who do not.
    • And, those who criticize randomly assaulting people are superior to those who encourage randomly assaulting people.
  • Decrying the subjectivity of any given set of standards is merely an attempt to divert the discussion. It is the instinctual reaction of people’s ressentiment.
So, to summarize:
  • “What is good for one type is equally good for another type, despite any irrelevant differences between the types.”
  • Standards exist, whether you want them to or not. Eliminating overt standards leads to the creation of covert standards
  • Failure to hold a group to the same set of standards categorically relegates them to an inferior status
  • People can aspire to a higher set of standards than set by societal expectations and this makes them superior.
  • The subjectivity of standards is a non-argument

Links are provided below. My notes will be posted to my blog.

Truth is found in the rubble of falsehood.

LITLLUW

----

Music Used in This Video:
Swans - Better Than You (Intro)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylo6w-Umy0c
Ordo Equitum Solis - Father of Incantation (Outro)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BW18XT-x39o

Current Reading:
Political Theology: Four Chapters on the Concept of Sovereignty by Carl Schmitt
https://books.google.com/books/about/Political_Theology.html?id=MXPs7149s9sC
Aristokratia edited by K. Deva
https://books.google.com/books?id=ENsFmgEACAAJ&dq=Aristokratia&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi524r6-p_VAhUEzGMKHe3lDHUQ6AEIKDAA

Links:
Proverb Definition:
Dictionary: http://www.dictionary.com/browse/what-s-good-for-the-goose-is-good-for-the-gander
Wiktionary: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/what%27s_good_for_the_goose_is_good_for_the_gander

More on Geese than most would want to know:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goose

Critical Thinking:
https://www.criticalthinking.org/https://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/the-state-of-critical-thinking-today/523

Ressentiment:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ressentiment
(Essay on) http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/genealogyofmorals/section3.rhtml
Hell, just read Genealogy of Morals
(PDF) http://www.inp.uw.edu.pl/mdsie/Political_Thought/GeneologyofMorals.pdf

Nine Satanic Statements 
http://www.churchofsatan.com/nine-satanic-statements.php

Matthew 12:30 (I used the NIV)
http://biblehub.com/matthew/12-30.htm

The Dispossessed (Wikipedia)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dispossessed

Credits:
Goose, Gander, Gosling:
Pixabay
https://pixabay.com/en/goose-bird-animal-canadian-nature-35856/
https://pixabay.com/en/goose-top-hat-politics-politician-41344/
https://pixabay.com/en/gosling-chick-goose-fluffy-spring-810541/

Roast goose in yat lok restaurant
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Roast_goose_in_yat_lok_restaurant.JPG
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , ,

02 July 2017

Sex and Gender and Roles (Oh My!) [YouTube Script]


This is the text from which I created my YouTube video of the same name.

Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law.
Welcome to my inaugural video.
The first topic is one that keeps floating onto my radar. We will cover the topics of Sex, Gender, and the like. While I was preparing for this, Laci Green began a discussion on this topic. I will link her video in the description.
So, without further ado, there are many people screaming about gender and sex online. In these discussions, we should remember that one should not attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity — even when they are so stupid it hurts. However, I realize that identifying the problem is not the same as explaining the problem, so here are my thoughts. It should be noted that these thoughts are based upon fact, or inferences derived from those same facts.

1. Colloquial

The first thing we need to understand is the concept of “Colloquial Speech”. Colloquial is defined in the dictionary as “used in ordinary or familiar conversation; not formal or literary”. To put it simply, it is what non-experts think a technical term means. Often, it refers to an incomplete or improper use of the term. The modern or popular usage of a term is often colloquial. Sadly, these lines can be blurred even by experts, especially when they import a term across disciplines or fall victim to the impulse to let ideology dictate science. With this in mind, let us move to the first term.

2. Sex

Sex, the state, not the act, refers to the male or female division of a species, especially as differentiated with reference to the reproductive function. What should be clear is that this is a biological term. In humans, it refers to having either an XX or XY chromosome pair. This cannot be changed. Perhaps in the future, genetic re-sequencing of the human genome may be possible, but for now, that is the realm of science fiction.

2.1. Intersex

Discussions of the biological reality of sex invariably brings up the topic of intersexed individuals. Intersex refers to a rare condition where a non-viable, from a reproductive point of view, chromosome expression such as XYX or YY occurs. Experts seem to be in some disagreement over what exactly counts as intersex, but even the most permissive reckoning puts it at only 1.7%.
Now some may object to the term non-viable. Since this is biology, the term only refers to their ability to pass on their genetic heritage — i.e., to have children. It in no way refers to their worth or relevance as a human being or member of society. There are plenty of significant intersex people who are known for more than being intersexed. You have access to google.
Intersex is another biological and unchangeable condition.

3. Gender

Now that we have clarified these biological terms and explained their immutable character, one might wonder what all the confusion is about. According to the dictionary, gender is “either the male or female division of a species, especially as differentiated by social and cultural roles and behaviors”.
Since they use the term “species”, I have to assume that they have observed gender in non-human species. However, we will focus only on human beings. This definition is obviously different from the proceeding two. This is not a biological term. Its reference to social and cultural roles make it obvious that this term is sociological or anthropological in nature. It is the cultural expectations and assumptions made toward one’s role in society based on one’s biological sex.
There are two genders, corresponding to the biological divisions. These divisions are rather broad and include many roles, some of which may even seem to be in opposition to the qualities of other roles.

3.1. Gender Roles

This brings us to a term that seems to have fallen out of modern discourse. Gender Roles are the specific duties of Men and Women within a society. The roles for males include everything from effete femme-boy to the epitome of iron-disciplined warriors. Those for females can include delicate princesses to shield-maidens. This isn’t to say that all roles are held in equal esteem. Societies naturally favor those which increase the viability of the society. They also vary in how they react to less common gender expressions (Christian, Muslim, and Jewish views of homosexuality come to mind).
Again, Gender Role is not a biological term.

3.2. Gender Dysphoria

Pendent to this is Gender Dysphoria, a psychological term used to describe the dissonance created by one’s natural inclinations being at odds with the gender expectations of a society. This is caused by both biological and social factors. The degree can vary, but many cases resolve themselves after puberty, possibly because they either find or manufacture a gender role for themselves within society. Such was my case.
Transexualism is a final effort to ease the dysphoria for those who do not find a resolution on their own. By transitioning, they mimic the other sex so as to open that portfolio of gender roles. I would presume that success in easing the dysphoria relates to how closely their transitioned selves mimic the desired sex (thus causing others to relate to them as that sex) and their own acceptance of their transition. Then again, while conversant with psychology, gender dysphoria is not my field of study.

4. Conclusion

In conclusion, there is a significant distinction between sex and gender which is lost in most conversations on this topic. Gender roles can change within generations. However, since some gender roles are tied to biological sex functions (e.g., Motherhood), some roles may only be capable of slight modifications, rather than wholesale revision. Sex, being biological, is immutable — at least until we can directly modify the DNA of living beings in such a way that its results are both controllable and immediate.
I would also like to point out that I feel that modern “trans” culture trivializes a serious condition by pretending that gender is something that can be easily changed like a set of clothes.
Further, modern gender discussions seem to posit that any gender role is a unique gender. This seems to only complicate the matter rather than offering a resolution.
So, to wrap up, I should point out that I am open to meaningful criticism, rather thick skinned, and enjoy discussing ideas. Truth is found in the rubble of falsehood.

Love is the law, Love under will.
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)