DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
True Left
HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: True Left vs False Left
*****************************************************
#Post#: 9346--------------------------------------------------
Progressive Yahwism
By: 90sRetroFan Date: October 12, 2021, 5:43 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Progressivism at its most dangerous:
HTML https://roadtoomega.substack.com/p/savingtheworldwithscience
[quote]
HTML https://cdn.substack.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F015e1bd4-6171-4e94-b43b-4fc9589f21fe_640x459.jpeg
It took some time, but we are finally approaching a tipping
point called a phase transition, which is a spontaneous jump to
higher order and harmony, or the opposite, a collapse into
chaos. Obviously the former is better for life than the latter,
and what we should strive for collectively.[/quote]
I disagree. A collapse would be messy, but at least it offers an
opportunity for progress to be halted and hopefully even turned
backwards. It is the jump that is the true danger because it
will accelerate progress perhaps beyond our power to thereafter
stop it, as we have long been warning about:
HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-right/if-western-civilization-does-not-die-soon/
HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/leftists-against-progressivism/
Continuing:
[quote]Since phase transitions are known to occur at “the edge
of chaos,” the social and political chaos we are experiencing
currently indicates that such a transition is on the horizon.
Too much order means a system is rigid and therefore unable to
adapt or evolve, so an injection of chaos actually provides the
flexibility the system needs to change its organization. If
steered in the right direction by a unifying worldview, the
imminent phase transition will push the social system we call
civilization toward a state of higher order, control, and causal
power. This is the goal of the Road to Omega movement, and also
the goal of the cosmic evolution process, which is
simultaneously Darwinian (involves natural selection) and
teleological (goal-directed). The universe moves toward an
increasingly complex state not because it is being driven to do
so by some mystical force, but because life learns from its
mistakes; in other words, progressive evolution proceeds through
experiment and error-correction.[/quote]
What our enemies call the "cosmic evolution process" is simply
Yahweh (see below). This is why I call them progressive
Yahwists. Basically, they not only recognize (as do we also)
that natural selection is the dominant process in the universe,
but they (unlike us) are happy that this is the case and want to
help it along, whereas we consider natural selection to be the
ultimate tyrant that systematically multiplies those too ignoble
to see a problem with it (e.g. voluntary reproducers) while
systematically exterminating those noble enough to despise it
(e.g. voluntary non-reproducers). They also believe that
repeatedly eliminating the noble in every generation results in
improvement, which is only possible if they value ignobility.
[quote]This theoretical framework, being a merging of prior
frameworks, is most accurately described as the Evolutionary
Epistemology-Universal Darwinism-Universal Bayesianism
(EE-UD-UB) framework, or Poetic Meta-Naturalism for short (an
adaptation of Sean Carroll’s Poetic Naturalism), and the
spiritual worldview associated with this framework is known as
the Cosmic Perspective. This worldview views life as cosmically
significant. What is the purpose of life in the universe? To
perpetuate life and mind forever through constant learning and
adaptation.[/quote]
This is nothing but rebooted Yahweh-worship. As I have
previously rigorously proven, perpetuation is by definition not
a purpose. A purpose must have a completion point. Perpetuation
has no completion point; no quantity of successful perpetuation
brings the subject any nearer to a condition where further
perpetuation ceases to be required. That our enemies
nevertheless claim that this is the 'purpose' of life (by which
they mean is it is what we should aim for) is testimony to their
slavishness.
[quote]As David Deutsch often reminds us, the potential for
progress and knowledge growth is infinite.[/quote]
Here we see themselves explicitly admit that perpetuation has no
completion point! Yet they not only see no problem with this,
they consider this to be good news!
[quote]However, we should keep in mind that life cannot be
separated from the universe it inhabits—adaptive complexity
spreading through space is the cosmos waking up through a
recursive process of hierarchical (multi-level) emergence called
cosmic evolution. “You are the universe” may be the title of a
Deepak Chopra book, but that doesn’t make the statement any less
true. In his epic book The Singularity is Near, Ray Kurzweil
mapped out the major stages of the cosmic process in all its
glorious detail.
HTML https://cdn.substack.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F741a0d9f-aeda-4a78-80f9-9be7f892af2f_728x546.jpeg[/quote]
Glorious? What is glorious about this? Only accumulationists
would find this glorious. Anti-accumulationists (e.g. us) find
this terrifying!
[quote]While some might believe this view to be in conflict with
the almighty second law of thermodynamics—which says an isolated
system must (on average) grow increasingly disordered—this
website will show why this new cosmic narrative is in fact
emergent from the second law. In short, the second law is the
selection pressure for self-organizing systems, because it
filters out the unstable configurations and selects the most
resilient and functional designs. As a result, adaptive
complexity (aka life as a whole) grows more computationally
powerful as evolution proceeds, and better able to predict and
control the world around it.[/quote]
I do not disagree academically with this theory. I just disagree
with letting it happen unopposed.
[quote]The founder of evolutionary genetics, Theodosius
Dobzhansky, famously said “Nothing in biology makes sense except
in the light of evolution.” Well, the Integrated Evolutionary
Synthesis says that nothing in biology or evolution makes any
sense except in the light of thermodynamics and information. It
is the need to stay out of thermodynamic equilibrium—a state of
death, decay, and disorder—that forces adaptive complexity to
search the “design space” for adaptive solutions to the problem
of survival. Solutions are adaptations that help the system
avoid threats and extract the energy the system needs to sustain
its ordered state.[/quote]
We often call these 'solutions' sustainable evils. It usually
involves anything stronger initiating violence on anything
weaker (but not to the point of the weaker's extinction, so that
the violence can continue without end).
[quote]This search for “fit” configurations is a form of
trial-and-error learning that occurs through the evolutionary
algorithm known as variation-and-selection. Through adaptation,
an evolving biosphere reduces its ignorance or uncertainty about
all the ways the world can surprise it.[/quote]
Or as we put it, through adulteration, Original Nobility is
lost. The more we become used to this world as it is, the more
we are being cut off from the ability to feel how the world
should be.
[quote]In other words, the information embedded in biological
memory (DNA, brains, societies) is knowledge. As life adapts to
its surroundings, natural selection generates predictive
knowledge, and recursive self-organization generates
increasingly complex, resilient, and intelligent cybernetic
systems.[/quote]
We call these prisoners increasingly incapable of resistance, or
eventually even of feeling compulsion to resist (hence slaves).
[quote][img width=1280
height=819]
HTML https://cdn.substack.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Fbce90837-f5d3-49a4-9625-85b5e5f7010b_1774x1136.png[/img][/quote]
This is evolution not towards the 'best' possible design, but
toward the most survival-oriented possible design. For example,
if at the "1st generation" "Design 1" for ethical reasons
refuses to initiate violence in order to extract energy, it will
be filtered out despite being ethically superior to "Design 4".
Or if at the "2nd generation" "Design 4a" for ethical reasons
refuses to initiate violence as part of competition, it will die
out in competition despite being ethically superior. And so on.
The notion that "most survival-oriented" = "best" is a
value-based declaration made by Yahwists and not shared by
anti-Yahwists.
(By the way, another word for "energy extractor" is vampire. Are
vampires the best?)
[quote]being unapologetic cosmic optimists[/quote]
Here they admit it. They think whatever comes out of the design
process will be great. We disagree. Whatever comes out will be
at the very least less capable of Gnosis. (Which is the whole
point behind Yahweh's process FFS!)
[quote]ROAD TO OMEGA is also a story about complexity,
emergence, and collective computation—features of nature that
suggest that such a revolution could be a natural part of an
evolutionary process that eventually brings about the emergence
of a global brain through the creation of an Internet and
peer-to-peer technology. In the words of Wired co-founder Kevin
Kelly, the technological trajectory we are on may have been
largely inevitable.[/quote]
No, all that would have been needed to evade it completely is if
Western civilization had been killed several centuries ago. No
other civilization at the time of the Renaissance was on track
to independently develop the internet and P2P. Western
civilization is Yahweh's vehicle.
We can still evade the present technological trajectory by
killing Western civilization ASAP. But time is running out.
[quote]In the context of the decentralization movement, Omega
refers to a state of hyperconnection among humans that is
achievable through peer-to-peer technologies that are emerging
today, like blockchains and decentralized applications (dApps).
...
By promoting the emergence of self-organizing social, political,
and economic networks, decentralization and hyperconnection may
bring about new levels of order and knowledge.[/quote]
I academically agree that decentralization will optimize natural
selection and hence Yahweh's plan. This is why I support
autocracy, which is a form of centralization. A sufficiently
powerful autocracy can temporarily hold off the selective
pressure of natural selection and even temporarily implement
alternative selective pressure, thereby temporarily enabling the
demographic proliferation of genuinely better designs. This is
National Socialism. These anti-Yahwist designs then have a brief
time interval available to consciously identify and deliberately
eliminate Yahweh's preferred progressive designs before natural
selection reasserts itself (and hence eliminate us). This -
ensuring evil dies before (or at the same time as) we do - is
the true purpose of life.
#Post#: 9358--------------------------------------------------
Re: Progressive Yahwism
By: 90sRetroFan Date: October 13, 2021, 2:40 am
---------------------------------------------------------
HTML https://www.edge.org/conversation/stuart_a_kauffman-beyond-reductionism-reinventing-the-sacred
[quote]A great divide splits contemporary society between those
who believe in a transcendent God, and those, including myself,
who do not.[/quote]
Indeed.
[quote]beyond the new science that glimmers a new world view, we
have a new view of God, not as transcendent, not as an agent,
but as the very creativity of the universe itself.[/quote]
This is what we have always understood Yahweh to be.
[quote]Darwin taught us about natural selection and evolution.
He did not know the basis for self reproduction or heritable
variation. But given these, evolution by natural selection
follows. Such evolving life forms would be subject to Darwin's
law, which arises only for entities capable of self reproduction
and heritable variation. This seems clearly to be ontological
emergence, not reducible to physics. Like Anderson's computer
able to run on transisitors or buckets of water, Darwin's
natural selection can run on multiple physical platforms, where
the entities under selection have their own causal powers, and
natural selection cannot be reduced to any specific physical
platform.
Indeed, it is possible that minor changes in the constants of
the physicists would still yield universes in which life,
heritable variation and natural selection would obtain. Note
that while the physicist might deduce that a specific set of
molecules was self reproducing, and had heritable variations and
instantiated natural selection, one cannot deduce natural
selection from the specific physics of any specific case(s), or
even this universe, alone. In short, Darwin's natural selection
is a new law operating on the level of self reproducing entities
with heritable variation, regardless of the physical
underpinning. In contrast to Weinberg's claim, here the
explanatory arrows point upward from molecules to the evolution
of living systems of molecules via natural selection.[/quote]
Yes, this is why Yahweh can accurately claim divinity. Which is
not to say he deserves to be worshipped.
[quote]I begin with Darwinian adaptations and preadaptations.
Were one to ask Darwin what the function of the heart is, he
would have replied, "To pump blood". That is, the causal
consequence of the heart for virtue of which it was selected by
natural selection is pumping blood. But the heart makes heart
sounds. These are not the function of the heart. Thus, the
function of the heart is a subset of its causal consequences and
must be analyzed in the context of the whole organism in its
selective environment. Again this says that biology cannot be
reduced to physics, for while the string theorist might
(actually could not) deduce all the properties of a given heart,
he/she would have no way to pick out as the relevant property
that of pumping blood. But it is that property that accounts for
the existence of hearts in the biosphere.[/quote]
What is the Darwinian function of muscle? Movement for escaping
predators? Wrong! Did you know that the overwhelming majority of
muscle fibres in the world are deliberately prevented from
meaningful movement as an explicit condition for their carriers
to reproduce?
HTML https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Battery_husbandry
The actual Darwinian function of muscle in the pictured animals
is to supply meat for consumption by mostly Westerners. It is
for this reason that these animals are forced to keep
reproducing, and hence their species guaranteed perpetuation
(the suffering of the indiviudals is not a concern to Yahweh).
HTML https://slideplayer.com/slide/17433322/101/images/4/The+fear+and+dread+of+you+will+fall+on+all+the+beasts+of+the+earth%2C+and+on+all+the+birds+in+the+sky%2C+on+every+creature+that+moves+along+the+ground%2C+and+on+all+the+fish+in+the+sea%3B+they+are+given+into+your+hands..jpg
[quote]It is critical that virtually any extant feature of an
organism can become the subject of natural selection in the
appropriate environment, and typically, if selected, a novel
functionality arises in the biosphere and universe. Now the
critical question: Do you think you could say ahead of time, or
finitely prestate, all possible Darwinian preadaptations of, say
species alive now, or even humans? I have not found anyone who
thought the answer was yes. I do not know how to prove my claim
that the answer is "No", but part of the problem is that we
cannot finitely prestate the relevant features of all possible
selective environments for all organisms with respect to all
their features.
But the failure to prestate the possible preadaptations is not
slowing down the evolution of the biosphere where preadaptations
are widely known. Thus, ever novel functionalities come to exist
and proliferate in the biosphere. The fact that we cannot
prestate them is essential, and an essential limitation to the
way Newton taught us to do science: Prestate the relevant
variables, forces acting among them, initial and boundary
conditions, and calculate the future evolution of the system…say
projectile. But we cannot prestate the relevant causal features
of organisms in the biosphere. We do not know now the relevant
variables! Thus we cannot write down a set of equations for the
temporal evolution of these variables. We are profoundly
precluded from the Newtonian move. In short, the evolution of
the biosphere is radically unknowable, not due to quantum throws
of the dice, or deterministic chaos, but because we cannot
prestate the macroscopic relevant features of organisms and
environments that will lead to the emergence of novel functions
in the biosphere with their own causal properties that in turn
alter the future evolution of the biosphere. Thus, the evolution
of the biosphere is radically creative, ceaselessly creative, in
way that cannot be foretold.[/quote]
Tell me about it:
HTML https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Photos_of_egg_industry_by_Roee_Shpernik
HTML https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Foie_gras_production
And the next thing you know:
HTML http://www.naturalheightgrowth.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Biodegradable-Porous-Scaffolds.jpg
Or even more recently:
HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-right/if-western-civilization-does-not-die-soon/msg8553/#msg8553
[quote]I find this wonderful.[/quote]
Because you are a Yahwist. I, an anti-Yahwist, find this
horrific.
However, while I agree that I cannot list all possible Darwinian
preadaptations, I can list the one trait that will never be a
preadaptation: anti-Yahwism. It doesn't matter which or how many
other Darwinian preadaptations someone carries; this one trait
is potentially enough to singlehandedly end them all. I find
this wonderful.
[quote]this means that the technological evolution of the
econosphere is also not finitely prestatable, nor presumably
algorithmic. It too is ceaselessly creative, expanding from some
1000 goods and services say 50,000 years ago to perhaps 10
billion today.[/quote]
I find this horrific too.
[quote]And human culture, in general, is ceaselessly creative as
the biosphere and culture expand into what I call the Adjacent
Possible.[/quote]
I find this horrific too. (But no, it is not "human culture, in
general". It is primarily Western civilization which behaves
like this.)
[quote]In short, in wondrous ways, these our universe,
biosphere, econosphere, and culture are ceaselessly creative and
emergent.[/quote]
Only Yahwists could describe ceaseless creativity as "wondrous".
[quote]God is the most powerful symbol we have created. The
Spaniards in the New World built their churches on the holy
sites of those they vanquished. Notre Dame sits on a Druid holy
site. Shall we use the God word? It is our choice. Mine is a
tentative "yes". I want God to mean the vast ceaseless
creativity of the only universe we know of, ours. What do we
gain by using the God word? I suspect a great deal, for the word
carries with it awe and reverence.[/quote]
Please call him Yahweh. The true God is the one trying to save
us from Yahweh (ie. the Devil).
[quote] If we can transfer that awe and reverence, not to the
transcendental Abrahamic God of my Israelite tribe long ago, but
to the stunning reality that confronts us, we will grant
permission for a renewed spirituality, and awe, reverence and
responsibility for all that lives, for the planet.[/quote]
I guessed you were a Jew from the very first paragraph you
wrote. In actuality, you are merely putting a Western scientific
dressing over the exact same Yahweh-worship practiced by your
ancient ancestors, which is based on enjoying and being grateful
for material existence.
[quote]I believe, I hope correctly, that what I have sketched
above is true, points to a new vision of our co-creating
reality, that it invites precisely an enhancement of our sense
of spirituality, reverence, wonder, and responsibility, and can
form the basis of a trans-national mythic structure for an
emerging global civilization.[/quote]
I am here to stop you.
[quote]To ever succeed, this new view needs to be soft spoken.
You see, we can say, here is reality, is it not worthy of
stunned wonder? What more could we want of a God?[/quote]
No, it is not. God should be that which is outside of reality.
That which we (not you!), despite being stuck in reality, can
sometimes perceive in our idealistic imagination. And having
once glimpsed God, the entire material world thereafter becomes
worthy of nothing but contempt.
You of course disagree, because:
HTML https://wp-media.patheos.com/blogs/sites/348/2015/08/You-are-of-your-father.jpg
[quote]Yes, we give up a God who intervenes on our behalf. We
give up heaven and hell. But we gain ourselves, responsibility,
and maturity of spirit.[/quote]
I will not give up these. And the last thing I would ever want
is to gain is "maturity of spirit"!
HTML http://www.quotehd.com/imagequotes/authors7/jesus-christ-jesus-christ-little-children-you-are-from-god-and-have.jpg
#Post#: 9381--------------------------------------------------
Re: Progressive Yahwism
By: guest55 Date: October 14, 2021, 9:41 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I believe the film Alien: Covenant is all about progressive
Yahwism. In this film we learn that David the AI is responsible
for creating the Aliens in the first place. David claims that
his sole purpose is "creation". David represents Yahweh....
[img width=828
height=1280]
HTML https://i.pinimg.com/originals/c4/d7/1c/c4d71c20b7dd14ad1cb21e09dc4e61b3.jpg[/img]
#Post#: 9632--------------------------------------------------
Re: Progressive Yahwism
By: 90sRetroFan Date: October 31, 2021, 1:35 am
---------------------------------------------------------
HTML https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2017/mar/19/yuval-harari-sapiens-readers-questions-lucy-prebble-arianna-huffington-future-of-humanity
[quote]‘Homo sapiens as we know them will disappear in a century
or so’
Chris Evans read out the first page of Sapiens, the book by the
Israeli historian Yuval Noah Harari.
...
Last year, Harari’s follow-up, Homo Deus: A Brief History of
Tomorrow, was published in the UK, becoming another bestseller.
It develops many of the themes explored in Sapiens, and in
particular examines the possible impact of biotechnological and
artificial intelligence innovation on Homo sapiens, heralding
perhaps the beginning of a new bionic or semi-computerised form
of human.[/quote]
This is what our enemies want to become.
[quote]I’m not sure if it will be deliberate but I do think
we’ll probably have just one system, and in this sense we’ll
have just one civilisation. In a way this is already the case.
All over the world the political system of the state is roughly
identical. All over the world capitalism is the dominant
economic system, and all over the world the scientific method or
worldview is the basic worldview through which people understand
nature, disease, biology, physics and so forth. There are no
longer any fundamental civilisational differences.[/quote]
All we need to do is kill Western civilization, and the door to
other possibilities reopens.
[quote]as the ecological crisis intensifies, the pressure for
technological development will increase, not decrease. I think
that the ecological crisis in the 21st century will be analogous
to the two world wars in the 20th century in serving to
accelerate technological progress.
As long as things are OK, people would be very careful in
developing or experimenting in genetic engineering on humans or
giving artificial intelligence control of weapon systems. But if
you have a serious crisis, caused for example by ecological
degradation, then people will be tempted to try all kinds of
high-risk, high-gain technologies in the hope of solving the
problem, and you’ll have something like the Manhattan Project in
the second world war.[/quote]
Harari is describing a solely Western mentality. To
non-Westerners, having realized that environmental damage has
occurred as a consequence of machine proliferation, the obvious
solution is to stop machine proliferation ASAP. But Westerners
think the 'solution' is to invent even newer machines to
counter the effects of existing machines:
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponzi_scheme
So if we continue to allow Westerners to keep deciding on behalf
of everyone else what the future is to be like, then it will
probably really go like Harari predicts. But this need not be
the case. All we need to do is insist that Western civilization
has already done far too much harm to continue deserving our
trust.
[quote]You can’t just stop technological progress. Even if one
country stops researching artificial intelligence, some other
countries will continue to do it.[/quote]
War should be declared by all anti-AI countries on all pro-AI
countries. And as long as AI is stopped before it can innovate
independently, the only other fix we need to halt further
innovation is to eliminate machinist genes from the human gene
pool.
[quote]The real question is what to do with the technology. You
can use exactly the same technology for very different social
and political purposes. If you look at the 20th century, we see
that with the same technology of electricity and trains, you
could create a communist dictatorship or a liberal democracy.
And it’s the same with artificial intelligence and
bioengineering. So I think people shouldn’t be focused on the
question of how to stop technological progress because this is
impossible. Instead the question should be what kind of usage to
make of the new technology.[/quote]
We should use whatever technology is already around to prevent
the introduction of anything even newer, preferably by
exterminating those who want the progress (starting with Harari
himself).
[quote]Now the main economic asset is knowledge, and it’s very
difficult to conquer knowledge through violence.[/quote]
State control over reproduction can be used to eventually breed
new generations uninterested in perpetuating superfluous
knowledge (especially stuff from the Renaissance onwards):
HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/truth-knowledge/
[quote]If you want a steak, you just grow a steak from cells –
you don’t need to raise a cow and then slaughter the cow for the
steak. This may sound like science fiction but it’s already a
reality. Three years ago they created the first hamburger they
made from cells. It’s true that it cost $300,000 but it’s always
like that with a new technology. By now, 2017, the price, as far
as I know, is down to $11 per hamburger. [/quote]
While of course this is preferable to slaughtering cows for
steaks, it is still a Western approach to the problem. It is not
a solution. After you get your steak and eat it, you will soon
want another one. Eventually you may even want more than one. Or
you may want different varieties of steak. And so on. Nothing
has been solved. The desire for steaks has not been decreased.
If anything, it has been increased.
Here is the alternative: if you want a steak, realize that the
problem is with you for wanting the steak in the first place,
not with how to get the steak you want. You want a steak because
of your non-Aryan blood. So don't reproduce, and after you
die there will be one fewer person wanting a steak. Repeat until
there are zero people in the world who want steaks. This is the
true solution to the problem of wanting steaks.
Western approach: increase supply.
Correct approach: reduce demand.
[quote]It will also have a lot of ecological benefits because it
will reduce the enormous amount of pollution which is caused by
high animal [s]farming[/s] today.[/quote]
Reducing the population of meat-eaters will have even more
ecological benefits. But you refuse to even consider this
because you are a progressive Yahwist.
[quote]AA: You live in a part of the world that has been shaped
by religious fictions. Which do you think will happen first –
that Homo sapiens leave behind religious fiction or the
Israel-Palestine conflict will be resolved?
As things look at present, it seems that Homo sapiens will
disappear before the Israeli political conflict will be
resolved. I think that Homo sapiens as we know them will
probably disappear within a century or so, not destroyed by
killer robots or things like that, but changed and upgraded with
biotechnology and artificial intelligence into something else,
into something different. The timescale for that kind of change
is maybe a century. And it’s quite likely that the
Palestinian-Israeli conflict will not be resolved by that time.
But it will definitely be influenced by it.[/quote]
I hope otherwise.
[quote]AA: Are you confident that radical Islam is nothing more
than the death rattle of the pre-modern era?
In the 21st century, humanity is facing some very difficult
problems, whether it’s global warming or global inequality or
the rise of disruptive technology, such as bioengineering and
artificial intelligence. And wWe need answers to these
challenges, and – at least as of March 2017 – I haven’t heard
anything relevant being offered by radical Islam. So this is why
I don’t think that radical Islam will shape the society of the
21st century. It could still be there, it could still cause a
lot of trouble and violence and so forth, but I don’t see it
creating or shaping the road ahead of humankind.[/quote]
I hope otherwise.
[quote]AA: If we can indefinitely prevent death, would it still
be possible to create meaning without what Saul Bellow called
“the dark backing that a mirror needs if we are to see
anything”?
I think so, yes. You have other problems with what happens when
you overcome old age, but I don’t think lack of meaning will be
a serious problem. Over the past three centuries, almost all the
new ideologies of the modern world don’t care about death, or at
least they don’t see death as a source of meaning. Previous
cultures, especially traditional religions, usually needed death
in order to explain the meaning of life. Like in Christianity –
without death, life has no meaning. The whole meaning of life
comes from what happens to you after you die. There is no death,
no heaven, no hell… there is no meaning to Christianity. But
over the past three centuries we have seen the emergence of a
lot of modern ideologies such as socialism, liberalism,
feminism, communism that don’t need death at all in order to
provide life with meaning.[/quote]
If our enemies succeed in becoming literal vampires, we will
have to respond by becoming literal vampire slayers.
This is only type of stake we should give our enemies:
[img]
HTML https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/10/09/1412870394513_Image_galleryImage_No_Merchandising_Editoria.JPG[/img]
#Post#: 9703--------------------------------------------------
Re: Progressive Yahwism
By: Zea_mays Date: November 8, 2021, 3:04 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The UN just released this Yahwist propaganda:
HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DOcQRl9ASc
It goes without saying that if humans were extinct, we wouldn't
be in this mess in the first place (a basic fact which
environmentalist-minded groups like the human extinction
movement recognize.)
It goes without saying that if all species went extinct, it
would be impossible for any individual to ever be harmed by
global warming or other environmental effects in the first place
(a basic fact which human-centric environmentalist organizations
almost always ignore).
#Post#: 9709--------------------------------------------------
Re: Progressive Yahwism
By: Zea_mays Date: November 8, 2021, 3:36 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Also, I recently stumbled across this crap:
[quote]The Fourth International Posadist is a Trotskyist
international. It was founded in 1962 by J. Posadas,
[...]
Posadism attempts to introduce elements of Ufology into Marxist
thought.[1][2] Arguing that only communism can allow the
development of interplanetary travel, they concluded that
visiting aliens from other planets must live in highly advanced
communist societies and are bound to help Earth-based communists
with bringing about the world revolution.[3][4]
[...]
In recent years, interests in the Posadists, particularly in
regard to their views in ufology, has increased. Several
satirical and non-satirical "neo-Posadist" groups emerged on
social media, making Posadas "one of the most recognizable names
in the history of Trotskyism".[11][14]
[...]
His most prominent thesis from this perspective was the 1968
pamphlet Flying saucers, the process of matter and energy,
science, the revolutionary and working-class struggle and the
socialist future of mankind which exposed many of the ideas
associated today with Posadism. Here, Posadas claims that while
there is no proof of intelligent life in the universe, the
science of the time makes their existence likely. Furthermore,
he claims that any extraterrestrials visiting earth in flying
saucers must come from a socially and scientifically advanced
civilisation to master inter-planetary travel, and that such a
civilisation could have only come about in a post-capitalist
world.[3]
Believing visiting aliens to be naturally non-violent, who are
only here to observe, Posadas argues that humans must call on
them to intervene in solving the Earth's problems[/quote]
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_International_Posadist
[quote]At their founding conference the movement proclaimed that
“Atomic war is inevitable. It will destroy half of humanity: it
is going to destroy immense human riches. It is very possible.
The atomic war is going to provoke a true inferno on Earth. But
it will not impede Communism.”
[...]
Posadas wrote that “Nuclear war [equals] revolutionary war. It
will damage humanity but it will not – it cannot – destroy the
level of consciousness reached by it… Humanity will pass quickly
through a nuclear war into a new human society – Socialism.”
[/quote]
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Posadas#Nuclear_war
If you look up "Posadism" in an image search, there's a bunch of
memes portraying it in a positive light. People thought
over-the-top semi-satirical Alt-Right memes were just harmless
nonsense, but rightists ended up genuinely believing all of the
most extreme aspects of the memes, and got Trump elected, so we
shouldn't overlook the danger Posadism poses just because it is
now limited to memes.
HTML https://i.imgur.com/2LlriEP.jpeg
HTML https://www.thenation.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Posadist-Meme1.jpg
#Post#: 9778--------------------------------------------------
Re: Progressive Yahwism
By: 90sRetroFan Date: November 14, 2021, 8:26 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
More broadly, there certainly seems to be motivation to replace
capitalism, which is basically machine innovation driven by
desire for profit, with an economic system of machine innovation
for its own sake. False Left anticapitalists seem to be
supporting this, as their anticapitalism was always about
disliking capitalism for producing rich people rather than
disliking capitalism for producing machines.
HTML https://www.yahoo.com/news/us-approaching-china-apos-advances-114938084.html
[quote]Currently, he said, the U.S. employs finance-based
planning, which he said boils down to, "We are going to spend
more money than they are."
...
Instead, Sekora has been pushing for technology-based planning
...
Sekora explained that technological advances occur when two
existing technologies combine, and Socrates was to be used to
create what he called "automated innovation."[/quote]
It goes without saying that the new stuff once introduced can be
further combined with the old stuff and with each other, so
innovation will just keep branching out and never end.
[quote]According to Sekora, the U.S. has been at a self-imposed
disadvantage due to a finance-based planning economic strategy
that focuses on maximizing profits in the short-term rather than
producing the best products to establish long-term market
dominance. Instead of focusing on developing and acquiring the
best technologies, the government focuses on dollars and cents.
...
"Technology-driven decision-making is an essential part of our
defense modernization. Current incentives in the Pentagon lead
to less innovation and more bureaucracy," Rogers said in a
statement to Fox News. "Even a single failed test of a new
technology can have serious consequences on officers’ careers.
This attitude smothers innovation and reinforces using the same
old ‘proven’ technologies that don’t meet modern
threats."[/quote]
Note also that the above line of argument against capitalism is
not even that it makes some people too rich, but that it leads
to sub-maximal innovation. In other words, if they continued to
believe that capitalism was the best system for maximizing
innovation, they would happily continue to be capitalists. It is
only because they now suspect that a system other than
capitalism is a better system for maximizing innovation that
they want to dump capitalism. Basically, they want everything
else to be secondary to maximizing innovation. In short,
innovation is their new god. (See also the title of this topic.)
#Post#: 9787--------------------------------------------------
Re: Progressive Yahwism
By: guest55 Date: November 15, 2021, 11:40 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Every time I visit this thread in particular I'm reminded of one
of the old Superman movies I watched in my childhood, the
Superman film where one of the villains gets turned into a
cyborg at the end. That scene absolutely traumatized me in my
youth:
HTML https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5a7b0d3680bd5e90fee815f5/1525095213110-U1CSXY52T27ZKSJ3OIB8/superman3.jpg
HTML https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-BWdr-IYWaeA/WFxNxIwPs-I/AAAAAAAAMjo/B-r77alLDn8Ce55DI6XPEfWYTIVrRhKogCLcB/s1600/4092593512_bf92412f53_o.jpg
Few scenes in any film have ever scared me as much as the one
above did.
[quote]False Left anticapitalists seem to be supporting this, as
their anticapitalism was always about disliking capitalism for
producing rich people rather than disliking capitalism for
producing machines.[/quote]
Such a great point! Lest we also forget the primary motivation
behind capitalist thinking has always been to have a fully
automated work force so capitalists don't have to work, nor will
they have to pay labor costs! The WALL-E film in a nutshell is
literally where these capitalists want to go! They actually
believe that this is a good idea!
[quote]It goes without saying that the new stuff once introduced
can be further combined with the old stuff and with each other,
so innovation will just keep branching out and never
end.[/quote]
Reminded of the Martin Heidegger quote again in regards to
technology in it's essence being something man does not control.
[quote]Basically, they want everything else to be secondary to
maximizing innovation. In short, innovation is their new god.
(See also the title of this topic.)[/quote]
Indeed! Take a good look at the above images because your new
god probably looks something like that!
#Post#: 9792--------------------------------------------------
Re: Progressive Yahwism
By: Solar Guy Date: November 16, 2021, 11:07 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Progressive Yahwism as you call it is called Extropianism:
HTML https://www.mrob.com/pub/religion/extro_prin.html
Meanwhile you probably want to choose Universal Freedom
Gnosticism:
HTML https://www.orionsarm.com/eg-article/471fe95ed7b16
#Post#: 9798--------------------------------------------------
Re: Progressive Yahwism
By: 90sRetroFan Date: November 16, 2021, 11:19 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Responding to your first link:
[quote]EXTROPY — the extent of a system’s intelligence,
information, order, vitality, and capacity for improvement.
EXTROPIANS — those who seek to increase extropy.[/quote]
So extropians want to "increase capacity for improvement". Yet
for improvement to be meaningful, the more you improve, it
should follow that the less capacity remains for you to further
improve. If you start off with 10 flaws, you have the capacity
to eliminate 10 flaws. If have already eliminated 9 flaws, you
now only have the capacity to eliminate 1 more flaw. This is
genuine improvement, and hence reduction in the capacity for
improvement. On the other hand, so-called "improvement" that
increases the capacity for "improvement" logically cannot be
improvement at all. It is progress. The difference is that
improvement is measured relative to an endpoint, whereas
progress is measured relative to a starting point.
[quote]Extropianism is a transhumanist philosophy. The Extropian
Principles define a specific version or "brand" of transhumanist
thinking. Like humanists, transhumanists favor reason, progress,
and values centered on our well being rather than on an external
religious authority. Transhumanists take humanism further by
challenging human limits by means of science and technology
combined with critical and creative thinking. We challenge the
inevitability of aging and death, and we seek continuing
enhancements to our intellectual abilities, our physical
capacities, and our emotional development.[/quote]
You want to challenge aging and death because you are following
your natural survivalist impulse. How then can you claim to want
emotional development, which should really be about questioning
whether a mere natural impulse ought to be followed in the first
place? How can you claim to use critical thinking without first
critiquing survivalism itself?
Transhumanists are just Yahweh-worshippers who use machines to
do their worship. "Values centered on our well being" is the
giveaway:
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Am_that_I_Am
[quote]I am that I am is a common English translation of the
Hebrew phrase אֶהְיֶה
אֲשֶׁר
אֶהְיֶה‎, ’ehye
’ăšer ’ehye ([ʔehˈje ʔaˈʃer
ʔehˈje])– also "I am who I am," "I will become what I
choose to become", "I am what I am," "I will be what I will be,"
"I create what(ever) I create," or "I am the Existing One."[1]
The traditional English translation within Judaism favors "I
will be what I will be" because there is no present tense of the
verb "to be" in the Hebrew language.[/quote]
Their disdain for "external religious authority" is in reality
disdain for the possibility for authentic emotional development
(beyond what is natural).
[quote]We see humanity as a transitory stage in the evolutionary
development of intelligence. We advocate using science to
accelerate our move from human to a transhuman or posthuman
condition.[/quote]
And what will you do once you get there? Will you then see
transhumanity as another transitory stage, and then advocate
using whatever machine is available then to accelerate the move
from transhuman to transtranshuman? And after that, then what?
Transtranstranshuman? And then transtranstranstranshuman?
Without a fixed endpoint, progress is all you will ever have,
never true improvement.
(One thing is for sure, though: transhumanists, just like
humanists, are anthropocentrists by assigning special status to
humans in their worldview:
HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/ancient-world/antropocentricism-the-most-dangerous-ideology-in-the-world/<br
/>)
[quote]The Extropian philosophy embodies an inspiring and
uplifting view of life while remaining open to revision
according to science, reason, and the boundless search for
improvement.[/quote]
What is inspiring or uplifting about boundlessness? Whatever is
boundless is necessarily meaningless. Extropianism is no less
shallow than investing money to make more money, and then
investing that larger sum of money to make even more money, and
so on. But at least investors do not act like there is something
deep about what they do. This makes them less annoying than
Extropians.
[quote]1. Perpetual Progress — Seeking more intelligence,
wisdom, and effectiveness, an indefinite lifespan, and the
removal of political, cultural, biological, and psychological
limits to self-actualization and self-realization. Perpetually
overcoming constraints on our progress and possibilities.
Expanding into the universe and advancing without end.[/quote]
Wisdom? There is no wisdom in doing anything that has no ending.
[quote]2. Self-Transformation — Affirming continual moral,
intellectual, and physical self-improvement, through critical
and creative thinking, personal responsibility, and
experimentation. Seeking biological and neurological
augmentation along with emotional and psychological
refinement.[/quote]
"Moral" and "experimentation" in the same sentence..... Only a
Westerner can write this ****.
[quote]3. Practical Optimism — Fueling action with positive
expectations. Adopting a rational, action-based optimism, in
place of both blind faith and stagnant pessimism.[/quote]
Translation: victims of our initiated violence now do not
matter, so long as there may be a payoff for ourselves later
(and if there isn't, we will just initiate violence against more
victims while we wait - there has to be a payoff eventually,
right?).
[quote]4. Intelligent Technology — Applying science and
technology creatively to transcend "natural" limits imposed by
our biological heritage, culture, and environment. Seeing
technology not as an end in itself but as an effective means
towards the improvement of life.[/quote]
If you have actually transcended nature, you would not want the
stuff you just said (in 1.) that you want. Your so-called
"transcendence" is therefore not transcendence, but mere
overcoming of inability to get what you want (which is still
what nature tells you to want).
[quote]5. Open Society — Supporting social orders that foster
freedom of speech, freedom of action, and experimentation.
Opposing authoritarian social control and favoring the rule of
law and decentralization of power. Preferring bargaining over
battling, and exchange over compulsion. Openness to improvement
rather than a static utopia.[/quote]
In such a society, the winners will be the ones supplying the
(constantly updating) newest machines that others want to use.
This is why we support statism: it takes state intervention to
realistically stop the machine ratrace.
[quote]6. Self-Direction — Seeking independent thinking,
individual freedom, personal responsibility, self-direction,
self-esteem, and respect for others.[/quote]
Those with machines obviously do not mind coexisting with those
without machines, because the latter will be less powerful. In
contrast, those without machines are totally justified in
opposing (including via retaliatory violence) coexistence with
those who are constantly making themselves more powerful via
machines.
[quote]7. Rational Thinking — Favoring reason over blind faith
and questioning over dogma. Remaining open to challenges to our
beliefs and practices in pursuit of perpetual improvement.
Welcoming criticism of our existing beliefs while being open to
new ideas.[/quote]
Then answer my challenge as outlined above.
*****************************************************
DIR Next Page