notice how they hardly attack anything he did while in office. the only thing they mention about his presidency is j6. Everything else is character assassinations and shit flinging.
it's almost as if they don't want to call attention to the fact that the country was stable, prosperous, and relatively peaceful on the world stage during his leadership.
It's also because they don't HAVE anything on him, they spent YEARS investigating him and best they had was his lawyer paid off a pornstar behind his back.
Compared to the insider trading, trafficking, endangering civilian lives and disregard for individual liberties most other politicians have on their record, he's a fucking saint that's just a bit crass.
they spent YEARS investigating him and best they had was his lawyer paid off a pornstar behind his back.
Yeah, but, as everyone knows, it's totally a crime to pay a pornstar off and not call it a campaign contribution? Ignore that if anyone else did it they'd get in trouble if they did call it a campaign contribution. Ignore that if Trump had called it a campaign contribution they would have impeached and sued him for that too.
Ignore it all, and always remember...Orange Man Bad.
If it wasn't so serious, it would be hilarious. Even Trump's most diehard haters can't say exactly what he did "wrong," if you actually ask them to explain, and then provide even a tiny bit of pushback. It's amazing. They don't even know. You can tell them it should have been a campaign contribution, and they'll nod along. You can tell them he shouldn't have said it was a campaign contribution...and they'll still nod along.
Donald Trump, for being a sex addicted 80's real estate coke head with a bastard littered family tree, is somehow the most moral person in America. The worst they've ever found on him is that he said women want to have sex with powerful people and that he loves to spend his mornings playing golf with people (Which by the way is how business deals are made). Trump lightly brushed research into the Biden family and found millions of dollars being laundered through the whore of Europe, Ukraine, funneled into Biden family pockets with Biden threatening the country to keep the cash flow moving through his offspring. Every one of Trump's loser children have been investigated a million times over and nothing came up so they had to start asking every one of his extended family to say something vaguely bad about him.
I wish the right was brave enough to spend a fraction of that investigative power on any family on the left, Obamas or Clintons or any number of senators that have thrown America into chaos to get a little bit more mammon in the pockets before everything collapses. But the Republican base is too judeo-christian subverted to believe "Turn the other cheek" means anything besides blind forgiveness to people who would have your bloodline purged.
I don't know that Donald Trump is as perfectly clean as their failed investigations suggest, but I'd bet the reason they don't dig up any of his shit from the 90's is because he was a Democrat and had a very close connection to people at the top of the party. He pal'd around with the Clintons until they basically seized control of the party and guaranteed he'd never run for president as a Democrat. That's where a lot of this animosity started.
Majority if not all the legitimate 'dirt' on him are business related in terms of using the tax system for write-offs, getting out of deals underhandedly etc can be seen as scummy but all legal as you talk to his employees and most praise him without being pushed.
He's at least not part of the pedo side of the establishment as he not only kicked Epstein out of his hotels to save an employee but testified against him in a court case. As he said he gave money to BOTH sides for influence, it's just in 2016 the Dems went full Clinton control while the Republicans were so weak he basically could walk in and seize power and the hubris of the left who had weakened the Republicans did see it coming.
That's why they hate him so much because he destroyed the plan to turn the Republicans into the forever second place protest party.
Because no one does catty bitch better than a split tail.
I wonder, sometimes: does she think this shit still works to change opinions? Can she be so disconnected from real, non-professional class people such that what she thinks matters?
There are just so many useless people out there...
It's not about the claims themselves, it's about the sensory bombardment. Each round doesn't have to be match grade when your firing at 50,000 rounds a minute.
People will get feelings from stories like this, and they'll hold onto the feeling, but NOT REMEMBER where it came from.
It needs to be said more often because your last paragraph is on the money.
Most people would fail a Turing test. They're basically ameboes. Stimulus response. Stimulus response. (Granted I don't believe in free will to begin with so I'm coming at this from a fairly dark place as far as "the human spirit" goes)
The end result is it doesnt actually matter what anybody does or doesn't do, all that matters is what's memorable and framing. That's the basic idea of "fortifying an election" the number of people who are UNABLE and I don't mean haven't learned, I mean lack the capacity, to parse connotation and denotation separately is way higher than those who can.
"Republicans pounce" indeed. The fact that pounce, point out, seize, hold accountable, raise questions, bring up, push, question, call out, and comment on are exactly the same thing is lost on 80% of people.
I think your way underselling most people, and free will. Most people are simply not as you say. Most people are not actually NPC's. They are trained to be NPC's by the media and education on specific topics. This is where the Ghelman-Amnesia effect comes into play, as well as familiarity bias.
Most people don't think much about politics, so their cognitive load is entirely based on other topics. They know what they know about, and what effects them in their daily lives. Relying on conditioning for things like politics is merely an efficient use of their time because the effects of government, particularly federal, have very little direct and immediate effect on their lives.
The conditioning which is built to offload cognitive load is not easily given up because not having to worry about cognitive load is a major benefit. No one wants to be the weirdo droning on about the mechanisms of political intrigue, especially if feedback is not explicitly apparent.
As such, the media indoctrinates people more based on those feelings because they have actually conditioned people for decades to subscribe to a narrative that has pre-built conclusions for everything, so the only thing left is emotional stimulation which is just responding to whether or not the issue is difficult or complex enough to not fit into the narrative, causing emotional distress from cognitive dissonance, and adding to cognitive load.
What you are seeing is not animal psychology. You are seeing a highly refined, highly trained, mass psychological conditioning that is designed solely to make people's cognitive load lessened; while actually betraying them in the long run. It's a deception.
If free will weren't a thing, deception and counter-deception wouldn't even be necessary.
Your argument would be valid to me if I was only talking about politics. I'm not.
I'm talking about every aspect of life. And the PAINFUL slog it is to get people to even play pretend at critical thinking.
The conclusions that people draw from information is in my experience, barely even tangitally related to what the information actually IS.
And again, if I only saw this in politics id say you have a point. But it isn't. There are programed blindspots, I'm not disagreeing with you there. And there are people who could otherwise make connections and leaps of logic that don't because of that programming. But in my experience the vast majority couldn't. Even without the programing.
Free will is a separate issue, I don't believe it exists and I've yet to hear an argument that was convincing. Most boil down to "but it'd be totally lame if it didn't exist" and I don't find that paticularlu compelling.
I still think you're not giving credit. This strategy isn't just for politics, it's a strategy that humans use for everything because cognitive loan is always a permanent issue.
I think Free Will is a larger debate, but fundamentally my argument would be that it is effectively required to exist as a mechanism of randomization, otherwise you would exist in a determinist universe, which is patently false.
If you think it's holistic than I can't fault you, I just can't bring myself to see it that way. It seems too...chaotic as a strategy.
It's why I don't buy most conspiracies as such, I don't think people acting in large groups are good enough at keeping secrets to pull most "inside jobs" off. But people who went to the same schools, believe the same things, have the same friends, and have the same ethics will as a force act in a way that furthers their agendas without coordination.
Which i suppose from your perspective is just evidence that the programming IS that effective. I can't really see anyway to prove it one way or the other personally. But you're consistent on that so I'll concede the point.
Whats your faith convictions/lack thereof? Id guess that colors your perspective on this more than anything. For my part, the universe IS deterministic in the sense that there are no truly random actions. And our belief in randomness is just an illusion created by our inability to perceive all things at once in full detail. It's the perfect simulation argument I realize, but I do believe in a God that's all powerful, and every argument with an all powerful God that tries to square that with him somehow blinding himself to the outcome of Free willed beings falls flat.
Otherwise it wouldn't be free will, it'd be predictable acceptable outcome that he elected not to alter. Which still make the only choice and will that matters His.
I'm not even sure in that context what free will IS. It can't be part of the natural world, so it's either mechanically Void and therefore random or mechanically random. Neither of which work because... if you have perfect information randomness doesn't exist.
On the flip side. A secular perspective on it demands consciousness be chemical. Or at the very least, physical. In which case I come to the same question. Hormones and neuron temperature and whayever else reacting in complicated ways that we aren't even aware of producing a process we can't even quantif yet.
So ignoring all the metaphysics of it all.
Tldr. You seem to be saying that not understanding basic chemistry and linguistics is the same brainwashing that turns people into pavlovian attack dogs in politics. In which case, hey fair enough.
I don't disagree with your assessment of, what I would call, systemic indoctrination: same schools, friends, culture, etc. In fact, I'd say it's the primary mechanism of control and it took decades to build.
I'm anti-theist and libertarian; but I'm not like a christ-hater r/atheism bro. Frankly, the idea that Jesus Christ is effectively a physical personification of "The Truth" as a literary device makes perfect sense in a way that I hadn't been considering the past decade. If you manifested "The Truth" into a person, then even kind of the cultish things that Jesus sometimes said make perfect sense. I don't think a real person can claim such a thing, but the idea of promoting psychological healing and health from the rapid acceptance of reality, personal responsibility, and duty of care is such a good idea that I would unironically claim that Jesus's guidance forms the basis of a near perfect civilization; and I'd even be willing to entertain the argument that the real Jesus probably had something like that in mind.
However, from that, the institutionalization of Jesus' teachings are an inherent mechanism that can corrupt those very teachings; to the point that Catholics basically built themselves their own pharasies.
Protestantism was a rejection of that, but in so doing (as you can see from the 30 Years War), when you reject the institution you have to replace it with a new institution, and if you don't do it right you get people like Carolus Rex massacring people because he is an absolute tyrant.
Liberalism is the first idea in this chain which then says: "Hang on, the institutions of power are the real problem here. Maintain an individualist focus on the moral framework of Christianity (reality, responsibility, duty of care) [overly simplified to: Truth & Love]; and suddenly everything will work." Now, Liberal philosophy does make several faulty assumptions, but that core procedure that it's based on, to me, is fucking masterful. Any civilization that has managed to maintain individuated Truth & Love (or: decentralized institutions promoting: rapid acceptance of reality, personal responsibility, and sacral duty of care) has exploded with prosperity, wealth, and happiness. Even if it happens for only a short time, this becomes the golden era of that civilization. Or, effectively, the "kingdom of heaven on earth".
I don't think he's god or anything, and I don't want people to just worship others as a deity just because; but this Jesus fellow sure hit on something really good.
All that being said, this comes well after my recognition that a deterministic universe is a fundamental violation of Goodell's Incompleteness Theorem; and that every single field of every since has some major law which always says the same thing: perfect knowledge can't exist. In Computer Science, it's The Halting Problem. In Economics, it's The Knowledge Problem. In Mathematics it's Goodell's Incompleteness Theorem. In Physics it's The Uncertainty Principle. In Quantum Mechanics: it's the proof that QM doesn't follow the laws of Statistics & Probability (hence proving that QM uses probability, but isn't governed by the rules of probability, thus defeating the Einstein's "Hidden Variables" argument). As such, since every field has a similar law refuting perfect knowledge, it's not possible for a deterministic universe to exist, because a deterministic universe requires perfect knowledge.
For evolution, the fact that a conscious mind developed at all in any animal underscores the fact that simple stimuli-response is an inferior way of responding to the environment. Homo Sapiens would never have evolved to develop a conscious mind if stimuli-response was sufficient. A conscious mind allows for a large amount of free-wheeling associations that aren't directly tied to environmental stimuli, because the conscious mind creates abstract constructs to model on top of reality in order to make decisions. The species that dominates this planet, happens to be the only species capable of abstracting the environment, others, and most importantly: itself, with time dependency in it's analyses. Giving it the unheard of ability to make plans as well as create deceptions and then counter-deceptions to benefit itself. This ability caused this species to focus so heavily on biological investment into mental capacity that their off-springs' brains barely fit into their heads, and their heads barely fit in their mothers. Evolution so favored this animal that it landed on a nearby moon! No other species in that planet's entire existence has ever achieved such a feat in billions of years. It is likely that in the coming millennia, it will be a kind of zygote species that populates life outside of it's own planet. An unheard of accomplishment outside of massive cosmological events. They are quite remarkable, and it is explicitly because stimuli-response is as inferior of a form of behavior regulation to free will, as asexual reproduction is inferior to sexual reproduction.
A secular perspective on it demands consciousness be chemical. Or at the very least, physical. In which case I come to the same question. Hormones and neuron temperature and whayever else reacting in complicated ways that we aren't even aware of producing a process we can't even quantif yet.
Negative. Again, this is a kind of simplistic materialist determinism, or as it was known at the turn of the 20th century "Philosophical Positivism". Positivism asserts there is absolutely nothing outside of the material, and all metaphysical concepts, including abstract concepts, are false. Let me counter this for a second: there is no IQ gene. However, genetics absolutely influences IQ. IQ is an abstract categorical measurement of a creature's ability to engage in abstract thinking. The mechanisms of which are primarily genetic (but other environmental factors like violence and nutrition have added weight). To say that IQ does not exist is highly reductive. There is clearly some mechanism which allows for abstract thought. This mechanism is clearly multi-variate, and is not based on one single mechanism. There is no IQ gene, there IQ chemical, but abstract thought is an emergent property of many biological and environmental causes.
Emergent properties exist from the combination of other things. But we can also see that when you have many emergent properties, the combination of these emergent properties can create another emergent property.
For example, there is no IQ gene, there is no IQ chemical. However if IQ is low, we could expect to see some increased level of interpersonal violence (this is an emergent property of one layer). If you have a community (a second layer of emergent properties) of humans with low IQ, you will tend to find violence common-place within that society (a third layer of emergent properties). If left for a long time, these communities may develop traditions over time that control such community wide violence as a culture (a fourth layer of emergent properties).
Emergent properties, especially when they are emergent from other emergent properties, tend to be abstract or even metaphysical in nature (happiness, contentment, skepticism, "a sense of meaning" are all effectively metaphysical concepts). But to claim they do not exist, is to reject the very basis of human interaction. There is no "sense of meaning" chemical, yet these feelings exist. Yes, down line of interactions you can find chemicals at the bottom, but they alone are not causal. A single gene in the society I mentioned flipping one way or another does not create the tradition of accepting spousal violence. These are knock-on effects pushed by abstract structures. What we see is that although we can not touch and feel abstract constructs, we do see that they exist, and that they do have an effect on society. To deny this would be positivism, which has long since been abandoned because it is fundamentally flawed as a philosophy.
TL;DR:
Determinism has a nasty habit of asserting a positivist philosophical interpretation of reality which is false, but it also requires a solution to the knowledge problem which simply can't be solved in any field of science. Wherefore, free will is required to exist as we know it, because it allows for the abstractions that governs our abstract concepts, and it also introduces non-deterministic outcomes into any system.
That's what "Project 2025" is. Just schizo talk collected into a big scary book of every fear they have pinned to him, they've taken the idea of a false flag and turned it into propaganda against American citizens.
Last time I checked, morons don’t usually end up with billion dollar franchises that they built from the ground up. What exactly was the zinger here? “Trump is bad at being a businessman” no he’s not, 100% factually he is not. “Trump is bad at acting” ok maybe? What does that have to do with anything? I’m sure if you pulled a Wall Street guy from the street and had him act out a scene it would probably suck.
Maybe I'm the crazy one, but everyone complaining he isn't good at acting... That he isn't good at lying professionally... They're acting like politicians lying to your face, scamming you, and being skilled, practiced, and adept at deceiving you, is a good thing.
And yet, ABC has removed EVERY SINGLE EPISODE of the 12 yr series from the internet. One cannot even find it on the pirate/stream sites. They've even removed clips from the show.
I've never seen it, but I'd like to, if only to see what they're so intent upon hiding.
notice how they hardly attack anything he did while in office. the only thing they mention about his presidency is j6. Everything else is character assassinations and shit flinging.
it's almost as if they don't want to call attention to the fact that the country was stable, prosperous, and relatively peaceful on the world stage during his leadership.
It's also because they don't HAVE anything on him, they spent YEARS investigating him and best they had was his lawyer paid off a pornstar behind his back.
Compared to the insider trading, trafficking, endangering civilian lives and disregard for individual liberties most other politicians have on their record, he's a fucking saint that's just a bit crass.
Yeah, but, as everyone knows, it's totally a crime to pay a pornstar off and not call it a campaign contribution? Ignore that if anyone else did it they'd get in trouble if they did call it a campaign contribution. Ignore that if Trump had called it a campaign contribution they would have impeached and sued him for that too.
Ignore it all, and always remember...Orange Man Bad.
If it wasn't so serious, it would be hilarious. Even Trump's most diehard haters can't say exactly what he did "wrong," if you actually ask them to explain, and then provide even a tiny bit of pushback. It's amazing. They don't even know. You can tell them it should have been a campaign contribution, and they'll nod along. You can tell them he shouldn't have said it was a campaign contribution...and they'll still nod along.
Donald Trump, for being a sex addicted 80's real estate coke head with a bastard littered family tree, is somehow the most moral person in America. The worst they've ever found on him is that he said women want to have sex with powerful people and that he loves to spend his mornings playing golf with people (Which by the way is how business deals are made). Trump lightly brushed research into the Biden family and found millions of dollars being laundered through the whore of Europe, Ukraine, funneled into Biden family pockets with Biden threatening the country to keep the cash flow moving through his offspring. Every one of Trump's loser children have been investigated a million times over and nothing came up so they had to start asking every one of his extended family to say something vaguely bad about him.
I wish the right was brave enough to spend a fraction of that investigative power on any family on the left, Obamas or Clintons or any number of senators that have thrown America into chaos to get a little bit more mammon in the pockets before everything collapses. But the Republican base is too judeo-christian subverted to believe "Turn the other cheek" means anything besides blind forgiveness to people who would have your bloodline purged.
I don't know that Donald Trump is as perfectly clean as their failed investigations suggest, but I'd bet the reason they don't dig up any of his shit from the 90's is because he was a Democrat and had a very close connection to people at the top of the party. He pal'd around with the Clintons until they basically seized control of the party and guaranteed he'd never run for president as a Democrat. That's where a lot of this animosity started.
Majority if not all the legitimate 'dirt' on him are business related in terms of using the tax system for write-offs, getting out of deals underhandedly etc can be seen as scummy but all legal as you talk to his employees and most praise him without being pushed.
He's at least not part of the pedo side of the establishment as he not only kicked Epstein out of his hotels to save an employee but testified against him in a court case. As he said he gave money to BOTH sides for influence, it's just in 2016 the Dems went full Clinton control while the Republicans were so weak he basically could walk in and seize power and the hubris of the left who had weakened the Republicans did see it coming.
That's why they hate him so much because he destroyed the plan to turn the Republicans into the forever second place protest party.
I'd agree with most of that, but the difference is that the Clintons seized control of the Dem party in something like 1991 or 1992
Not to the extent as just before 2016 as remember, Clinton got second place to Obama in 2008.
With the ego she has, I doubt that was the plan.
It completely wasn't. Obama is an insurgent that countered the Clinton regime. They still kinda hate each other.
Kamala Harris was more of a Clinton surrogate, but not she seems to be a Willy Brown surrogate.
Find dirt
Omit references to Democrats
Publish.
People find left out ties to Democrats
"They're just disinfo agents of Putin!"
NPCs just know step 3.
"Trump was so bad as president we had to try to kill him repeatedly...I meaaaaan...Orange Maaan Baaaaaad? ...Literally Hitler." - Enemy of the People.
"He was also so bad in Home Alone 2 we had to remove him...after nearly three decades of not having to remove him. Orange. Man. Bad."
apprentice was so popular that they spun off a celebrity apprentice.
Because no one does catty bitch better than a split tail.
I wonder, sometimes: does she think this shit still works to change opinions? Can she be so disconnected from real, non-professional class people such that what she thinks matters?
There are just so many useless people out there...
It's not about the claims themselves, it's about the sensory bombardment. Each round doesn't have to be match grade when your firing at 50,000 rounds a minute.
People will get feelings from stories like this, and they'll hold onto the feeling, but NOT REMEMBER where it came from.
It needs to be said more often because your last paragraph is on the money.
Most people would fail a Turing test. They're basically ameboes. Stimulus response. Stimulus response. (Granted I don't believe in free will to begin with so I'm coming at this from a fairly dark place as far as "the human spirit" goes)
The end result is it doesnt actually matter what anybody does or doesn't do, all that matters is what's memorable and framing. That's the basic idea of "fortifying an election" the number of people who are UNABLE and I don't mean haven't learned, I mean lack the capacity, to parse connotation and denotation separately is way higher than those who can.
"Republicans pounce" indeed. The fact that pounce, point out, seize, hold accountable, raise questions, bring up, push, question, call out, and comment on are exactly the same thing is lost on 80% of people.
I think your way underselling most people, and free will. Most people are simply not as you say. Most people are not actually NPC's. They are trained to be NPC's by the media and education on specific topics. This is where the Ghelman-Amnesia effect comes into play, as well as familiarity bias.
Most people don't think much about politics, so their cognitive load is entirely based on other topics. They know what they know about, and what effects them in their daily lives. Relying on conditioning for things like politics is merely an efficient use of their time because the effects of government, particularly federal, have very little direct and immediate effect on their lives.
The conditioning which is built to offload cognitive load is not easily given up because not having to worry about cognitive load is a major benefit. No one wants to be the weirdo droning on about the mechanisms of political intrigue, especially if feedback is not explicitly apparent.
As such, the media indoctrinates people more based on those feelings because they have actually conditioned people for decades to subscribe to a narrative that has pre-built conclusions for everything, so the only thing left is emotional stimulation which is just responding to whether or not the issue is difficult or complex enough to not fit into the narrative, causing emotional distress from cognitive dissonance, and adding to cognitive load.
What you are seeing is not animal psychology. You are seeing a highly refined, highly trained, mass psychological conditioning that is designed solely to make people's cognitive load lessened; while actually betraying them in the long run. It's a deception.
If free will weren't a thing, deception and counter-deception wouldn't even be necessary.
Your argument would be valid to me if I was only talking about politics. I'm not.
I'm talking about every aspect of life. And the PAINFUL slog it is to get people to even play pretend at critical thinking.
The conclusions that people draw from information is in my experience, barely even tangitally related to what the information actually IS.
And again, if I only saw this in politics id say you have a point. But it isn't. There are programed blindspots, I'm not disagreeing with you there. And there are people who could otherwise make connections and leaps of logic that don't because of that programming. But in my experience the vast majority couldn't. Even without the programing.
Free will is a separate issue, I don't believe it exists and I've yet to hear an argument that was convincing. Most boil down to "but it'd be totally lame if it didn't exist" and I don't find that paticularlu compelling.
I still think you're not giving credit. This strategy isn't just for politics, it's a strategy that humans use for everything because cognitive loan is always a permanent issue.
I think Free Will is a larger debate, but fundamentally my argument would be that it is effectively required to exist as a mechanism of randomization, otherwise you would exist in a determinist universe, which is patently false.
If you think it's holistic than I can't fault you, I just can't bring myself to see it that way. It seems too...chaotic as a strategy.
It's why I don't buy most conspiracies as such, I don't think people acting in large groups are good enough at keeping secrets to pull most "inside jobs" off. But people who went to the same schools, believe the same things, have the same friends, and have the same ethics will as a force act in a way that furthers their agendas without coordination.
Which i suppose from your perspective is just evidence that the programming IS that effective. I can't really see anyway to prove it one way or the other personally. But you're consistent on that so I'll concede the point.
Whats your faith convictions/lack thereof? Id guess that colors your perspective on this more than anything. For my part, the universe IS deterministic in the sense that there are no truly random actions. And our belief in randomness is just an illusion created by our inability to perceive all things at once in full detail. It's the perfect simulation argument I realize, but I do believe in a God that's all powerful, and every argument with an all powerful God that tries to square that with him somehow blinding himself to the outcome of Free willed beings falls flat.
Otherwise it wouldn't be free will, it'd be predictable acceptable outcome that he elected not to alter. Which still make the only choice and will that matters His.
I'm not even sure in that context what free will IS. It can't be part of the natural world, so it's either mechanically Void and therefore random or mechanically random. Neither of which work because... if you have perfect information randomness doesn't exist.
On the flip side. A secular perspective on it demands consciousness be chemical. Or at the very least, physical. In which case I come to the same question. Hormones and neuron temperature and whayever else reacting in complicated ways that we aren't even aware of producing a process we can't even quantif yet.
So ignoring all the metaphysics of it all.
Tldr. You seem to be saying that not understanding basic chemistry and linguistics is the same brainwashing that turns people into pavlovian attack dogs in politics. In which case, hey fair enough.
I don't disagree with your assessment of, what I would call, systemic indoctrination: same schools, friends, culture, etc. In fact, I'd say it's the primary mechanism of control and it took decades to build.
I'm anti-theist and libertarian; but I'm not like a christ-hater r/atheism bro. Frankly, the idea that Jesus Christ is effectively a physical personification of "The Truth" as a literary device makes perfect sense in a way that I hadn't been considering the past decade. If you manifested "The Truth" into a person, then even kind of the cultish things that Jesus sometimes said make perfect sense. I don't think a real person can claim such a thing, but the idea of promoting psychological healing and health from the rapid acceptance of reality, personal responsibility, and duty of care is such a good idea that I would unironically claim that Jesus's guidance forms the basis of a near perfect civilization; and I'd even be willing to entertain the argument that the real Jesus probably had something like that in mind.
However, from that, the institutionalization of Jesus' teachings are an inherent mechanism that can corrupt those very teachings; to the point that Catholics basically built themselves their own pharasies.
Protestantism was a rejection of that, but in so doing (as you can see from the 30 Years War), when you reject the institution you have to replace it with a new institution, and if you don't do it right you get people like Carolus Rex massacring people because he is an absolute tyrant.
Liberalism is the first idea in this chain which then says: "Hang on, the institutions of power are the real problem here. Maintain an individualist focus on the moral framework of Christianity (reality, responsibility, duty of care) [overly simplified to: Truth & Love]; and suddenly everything will work." Now, Liberal philosophy does make several faulty assumptions, but that core procedure that it's based on, to me, is fucking masterful. Any civilization that has managed to maintain individuated Truth & Love (or: decentralized institutions promoting: rapid acceptance of reality, personal responsibility, and sacral duty of care) has exploded with prosperity, wealth, and happiness. Even if it happens for only a short time, this becomes the golden era of that civilization. Or, effectively, the "kingdom of heaven on earth".
I don't think he's god or anything, and I don't want people to just worship others as a deity just because; but this Jesus fellow sure hit on something really good.
All that being said, this comes well after my recognition that a deterministic universe is a fundamental violation of Goodell's Incompleteness Theorem; and that every single field of every since has some major law which always says the same thing: perfect knowledge can't exist. In Computer Science, it's The Halting Problem. In Economics, it's The Knowledge Problem. In Mathematics it's Goodell's Incompleteness Theorem. In Physics it's The Uncertainty Principle. In Quantum Mechanics: it's the proof that QM doesn't follow the laws of Statistics & Probability (hence proving that QM uses probability, but isn't governed by the rules of probability, thus defeating the Einstein's "Hidden Variables" argument). As such, since every field has a similar law refuting perfect knowledge, it's not possible for a deterministic universe to exist, because a deterministic universe requires perfect knowledge.
For evolution, the fact that a conscious mind developed at all in any animal underscores the fact that simple stimuli-response is an inferior way of responding to the environment. Homo Sapiens would never have evolved to develop a conscious mind if stimuli-response was sufficient. A conscious mind allows for a large amount of free-wheeling associations that aren't directly tied to environmental stimuli, because the conscious mind creates abstract constructs to model on top of reality in order to make decisions. The species that dominates this planet, happens to be the only species capable of abstracting the environment, others, and most importantly: itself, with time dependency in it's analyses. Giving it the unheard of ability to make plans as well as create deceptions and then counter-deceptions to benefit itself. This ability caused this species to focus so heavily on biological investment into mental capacity that their off-springs' brains barely fit into their heads, and their heads barely fit in their mothers. Evolution so favored this animal that it landed on a nearby moon! No other species in that planet's entire existence has ever achieved such a feat in billions of years. It is likely that in the coming millennia, it will be a kind of zygote species that populates life outside of it's own planet. An unheard of accomplishment outside of massive cosmological events. They are quite remarkable, and it is explicitly because stimuli-response is as inferior of a form of behavior regulation to free will, as asexual reproduction is inferior to sexual reproduction.
Negative. Again, this is a kind of simplistic materialist determinism, or as it was known at the turn of the 20th century "Philosophical Positivism". Positivism asserts there is absolutely nothing outside of the material, and all metaphysical concepts, including abstract concepts, are false. Let me counter this for a second: there is no IQ gene. However, genetics absolutely influences IQ. IQ is an abstract categorical measurement of a creature's ability to engage in abstract thinking. The mechanisms of which are primarily genetic (but other environmental factors like violence and nutrition have added weight). To say that IQ does not exist is highly reductive. There is clearly some mechanism which allows for abstract thought. This mechanism is clearly multi-variate, and is not based on one single mechanism. There is no IQ gene, there IQ chemical, but abstract thought is an emergent property of many biological and environmental causes.
Emergent properties exist from the combination of other things. But we can also see that when you have many emergent properties, the combination of these emergent properties can create another emergent property.
For example, there is no IQ gene, there is no IQ chemical. However if IQ is low, we could expect to see some increased level of interpersonal violence (this is an emergent property of one layer). If you have a community (a second layer of emergent properties) of humans with low IQ, you will tend to find violence common-place within that society (a third layer of emergent properties). If left for a long time, these communities may develop traditions over time that control such community wide violence as a culture (a fourth layer of emergent properties).
Emergent properties, especially when they are emergent from other emergent properties, tend to be abstract or even metaphysical in nature (happiness, contentment, skepticism, "a sense of meaning" are all effectively metaphysical concepts). But to claim they do not exist, is to reject the very basis of human interaction. There is no "sense of meaning" chemical, yet these feelings exist. Yes, down line of interactions you can find chemicals at the bottom, but they alone are not causal. A single gene in the society I mentioned flipping one way or another does not create the tradition of accepting spousal violence. These are knock-on effects pushed by abstract structures. What we see is that although we can not touch and feel abstract constructs, we do see that they exist, and that they do have an effect on society. To deny this would be positivism, which has long since been abandoned because it is fundamentally flawed as a philosophy.
TL;DR:
Determinism has a nasty habit of asserting a positivist philosophical interpretation of reality which is false, but it also requires a solution to the knowledge problem which simply can't be solved in any field of science. Wherefore, free will is required to exist as we know it, because it allows for the abstractions that governs our abstract concepts, and it also introduces non-deterministic outcomes into any system.
That's what "Project 2025" is. Just schizo talk collected into a big scary book of every fear they have pinned to him, they've taken the idea of a false flag and turned it into propaganda against American citizens.
Correct. It's effectively a
RedBlue Herring that centers people's emotional response as a trigger.They're not kidding about 'triggering' people. They are building triggers into people as weapons.
Just another erroneous claim 🤷
I believe you mean "baseless"
This is the film that got a standing ovation at a film. Festival right?
This is about Trump's old reality show of the same name. Someone apparently just wrote a book including this very newsworthy nugget of knowledge.
Plus we live in a time where anyone who has something negative to say about him gets wall to wall coverage
Last time I checked, morons don’t usually end up with billion dollar franchises that they built from the ground up. What exactly was the zinger here? “Trump is bad at being a businessman” no he’s not, 100% factually he is not. “Trump is bad at acting” ok maybe? What does that have to do with anything? I’m sure if you pulled a Wall Street guy from the street and had him act out a scene it would probably suck.
Maybe I'm the crazy one, but everyone complaining he isn't good at acting... That he isn't good at lying professionally... They're acting like politicians lying to your face, scamming you, and being skilled, practiced, and adept at deceiving you, is a good thing.
And we know this is true now because nobody brought this up for the 2016 election… or during Trumps entire term of office…
I’m still mad there isn’t a gorilla channel
Too bad they didn't succeed with Arnold when he took over the Apprentice
And yet, ABC has removed EVERY SINGLE EPISODE of the 12 yr series from the internet. One cannot even find it on the pirate/stream sites. They've even removed clips from the show.
I've never seen it, but I'd like to, if only to see what they're so intent upon hiding.