Proto-Indo-European & Political Opinion

I am not a huge fan of horror movies, but last night I watched Clive Barker’s Wishmaster. The movie was not entirely without substance, turns out Clive is a bit of a philologist himself.  Like me he has come to the conclusion that Islam existed before it was supposedly created by Mohammed and he traces their origins, as I have to Ahriman, Ahura Mazda’s brother.  Where we disagree is that he interprets Ahura Mazda as the “Cause of the Bad” as well as the cause of the good.

Ahura Mazda created everything good and his brother created everything bad.

I interpret that differently.  In the Ancient World they practiced slavery.  Appreciating intelligence as they did, they had a bar of citizenry that was based on intelligence, being able to understand the complex way in which the state operated and being able to create value for that state.  Slaves were allowed in the hopes that they could eventually be integrated into society.  While there were some instances in which this was the case what happened repeatedly throughout history is that the vast majority of those people didn’t become capable of embracing the philosophy of civilization and raising themselves to the bar of citizenry.

In the book MAIMONIDES by Abraham Joshua Heschel, it explains that neither Carthage nor Rome were capable of converting the Berbers of Northern Africa to their Political Philosophy because they didn’t recognize the Authority of Reason only Coercive Authority, that of Physical Violence which is why Islam succeeded in converting the Barbarians to their religion.  Shortly after that the Berbers started a revolution in Islam killing off the intelligentsia and the artists, Islam has remained the same to this day.

The Berber’s are actually the product of the failed attempt to fuse European Cultures with African Cultures which is why you had Upper and Lower Egypt in spite of the propaganda spouted by the black rappers, which is why the Berbers are light skinned.  It was recently leaked that King Tut had European DNA which is being concealed by Egypt, because white people would cry foul and riot if that fact was exposed (joke).

Muslims claim to be a Judeo-Christian religion and they claim descent from Adam, whom they claim was the first Muslim but they contradict themselves in believing that they are not tainted by original sin because they reject science (knowledge comes from the devil) and western education (are you seeing a pattern here?).  You can’t have it both ways, if you are descended from Adam you are tainted by original sin.

What this means is that we were there, White People that is.  Caucasians are named after the Caucasus mountains in Russia.  The Amazons spoken of by Plato were inspired by the Sarmatian race (Caucasoid) native to Iran.  The Hebrews refer to us as the Edomites, which is associated with the Garden of Eden, and the first stone on the breastplate of Aaron, Odem.

The entire philosophy of civilization (the Western World) comes from the philosophy of the Augur cult who interpreted bird omens.

From the separation of powers in the constitution to the philosophy of science, to the first King of Rome, to the two invasive months in the Western Calender, everything we are came from the Augurs.

The third eye or Ajna Chakra (knowledge) has two wings on it.  According to the philosophy of Yoga there are two serpents in the body, one male and one female, the ida and the pingala.  As they are refined they move up and through the body until the reach the 3rd eye chakra, where they drink the Ambrosia or Amrit, the food of the gods.  The third eye is the Garden of Eden, literally.

10The disciples came to him and asked, “Why do you speak to the people in parables?”

11He replied, “Because the knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them. 12Whoever has will be given more, and they will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what they have will be taken from them. 13This is why I speak to them in parables:

“Though seeing, they do not see;

though hearing, they do not hear or understand. Matt 13:

What the ancients understood was that society itself could be divided into those who think like men and those who think like women.  The Left Wing of “O-pinions” had a feminine bias, and the Right Wing had a masculine bias.  The Left side was also predisposed to being manipulated by evil which is why “sinister” means left handed and in Kabbalah the via negativa is known as the left hand path or the path of evil.  In witch craft there are two spins, Left and Right, or Widdershins & deosil (with the sun).  History has proven this, repeatedly, like a fractal.  Plato said that  democracies lead to the worst tyranny.  Obama appears to be attempting to prove this true right now as he tries to make evil equal to good, failure equal to success, and people’s issues equal to reason. He attempts to allow freedom of speech for one group while punishing it for another.  He rationalizes one group responding to words and Ideas with physical violence and he holds people to different standards concealing his narrative and operating on a concealed, unspoken, agenda.

While comparing Donald Trump to Adolf Hitler they attempt to preempt a conversation about what they have been doing.  Turkey’s leader Erdogan models his government after Hitler’s.  Obama created ISIS and protected it, not attacking it’s oil as it used blitzkrieg warfare to snatch up land and resources to use for more war, at the same time Erdogan was buying oil from ISIS.  Syrian Immigrants in Germany are openly recruiting for ISIS on the streets as Angela Merkel’s dubious history comes into light.  Obama was supporting the rise of Neo-Nazi fascists in the Ukraine before Puttin stepped in to end it as his presence was requested there.  The Nazi movement came not out of the conservative right but out of the progressive left.  Nazi Germany was obsessed with cleanliness and health, they had the first list of carcinogens for the Nazi superman to avoid including cigarettes.

It was and is Moslems that worship to this day Adolf Hitler.  The global agenda of the Obama administration is to create an IslamoNazi hybrid ideology that will culminate in the conversion of every religion to Islam in which case religion will be irrelevant and then to create a New World Order under the Leadership of the United Nations, and to force the compliance of all of the now Fascist Dictatorship who in turn will be able to force the compliance of all of their citizens.  This is done under the guise of saving the earth from destruction of Global Warming, and therefore it is a moral act.  They are saving us from ourselves, so they aren’t motivated by self interest and the corporations aren’t attempting to solidify their authority permanently, it is an act of sacrifice on their part.  (eye roll).

The two wings of Opinion suggest that their is a choice to be made and a right to disagree.  This is harmful for the Global Fascist Agenda.  In Islam there is no right to disagree, there is no conversation, there is no vote.  There is no art because any depiction of an animal or a man is an act of Idolatry.  There is only one god, he doesn’t have a feminine counterpart (like the shekinah or holy spirit) and there is only one prophet and one message.  Do you really want to live in a world ruled by the United Nations where Saudi Arabia leads the Human Rights commission and Sharia Law (which claims to be above all other constitutions and man made laws) is granted recognition?  Think about it.

The Reason Justified True Belief is still Valid as Knowledge.

What I find so humorous is when Atheists argue against themselves.

---

Episteme, as distinguished from techne, is etymologically derived from the Ancient Greek word ἐπιστήμη for knowledge orscience, which comes from the verb ἐπίσταμαι, “to know”. In Plato‘s terminology episteme means knowledge, as in “justified true belief“, in contrast to doxa, common belief or opinion. The word epistemology, meaning the study of knowledge, is derived from episteme.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Episteme

---

Episteme became Epistemology, which became Science.

---

Epistemology (ⁱ/ɨˌpɪstɨˈmɒlədʒi/; from Greek ἐπιστήμη, epistēmē, meaning “knowledge, understanding”, and λόγος,logos, meaning “study of”) is the branch of philosophy concerned with the nature and scope of knowledge^[1][2] and is also referred to as “theory of knowledge”.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemology

---

There are other types of knowledge as far as the ancient greeks are concerned.

---

“Techne” is a term, etymologically derived from the Greek word τέχνη (Ancient Greek: [tékʰnɛː], Modern Greek: [ˈtexni] ( listen)), that is often translated as “craftsmanship”, “craft”, or “art”.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Techne

Phronesis (Ancient Greek: φρόνησις, phronēsis) is a Greek word for a type of wisdom or intelligence, which is a common topic of discussion in philosophy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phronesis

Gnosis is the common Greek noun for knowledge (in the nominative case γνῶσις f.). In Christian, Islamic, or Jewish mysticism, mystery religions and Gnosticism gnosis generally signifies a spiritual knowledge or “religion of knowledge”, in the sense of mystical enlightenment or “insight”. Gnosis taught a deliverance of man from the constraints of earthly existence through insight into an essential relationship, as soul or spirit, with a supramundane place of freedom.[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosis

---

The fact of the matter is people don’t walk into walls because they believe that they are solid.  You can debate all you want, belief informs action.  People act on what they believe.  Justified, True, Belief is a rhetorical tautology of peer review, that which can be agreed to exist or to be true.  To disagree with the most scientific definition of knowledge is silly.

---

“A piece of knowledge is never false or true – but only more or less biologically and evolutionary useful. All dogmatic creeds are approximations: these approximations form a humus from which better approximations grow.” (Ernst Mach) 

---

One last thing, the matter really comes down to how the Greeks, the people that created the philosophy defined belief.  This is a common logical fallacy that people have, thinking that you can falsify somebody from your own perspective without understanding what they are saying, this is where my skills as a linguistic philosopher come in.

---

Doxa, a philosopheme[edit]

In Plato’s Gorgias (dialogue), Plato presents the Sophists, rhetors who taught people how to speak for the promise of commercial success, as wordsmiths that ensnare and use the malleable doxa of the “multitude” to their advantage without shame.^[5] In this and other writings, Plato relegated doxa as being a belief, unrelated to reason, that resided in the unreasoning, lower-parts of the soul.^[6] This viewpoint extended into the concept of doxasta in Plato’s Theory of Forms, which states that physical objects are manifestations of doxa and are thus not in their true form.^[7] Plato’s framing of doxa as the opponent of knowledge led to the classical opposition of error to truth, which has since become a major concern in Western philosophy. (However, in the Theaetetus and in the Meno, Plato has Socrates suggest that knowledge is orthos doxa for which one can provide a logos, thus initiating the traditional definition of knowledge as “justified true belief“.) Thus, error is considered in Occident as pure negativity, which can take various forms, among them the form of illusion. As such, doxa may ironically be defined as the “philosopher‘s sin“. In classical rhetoric, it is contrasted with episteme.

Plato’s student Aristotle objected to Plato’s assumption of doxa. Aristotle perceived that doxa’s value was in practicality and common usage, in contrast with Plato’s philosophical purity relegating doxa to deception. Further, Aristotle held doxa as the first step in finding knowledge, as doxa had found applications in the physical world and those who held it had great amount of tests done to prove it and thus reason to believe it.^[8] Aristotle clarifies this by categorizing the accepted truths of the physical world that are passed down from generation to generation as endoxa.^[9] Endoxa is a more stable belief than doxa, because it has been “tested” in argumentative struggles in the Polis by prior interlocutors. The use of endoxa in the Stagirite’s Organon can be found in Aristotle’s Topics and Rhetoric.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doxa#Doxa.2C_a_philosopheme

---

Pistis in rhetoric[edit]

Thus, pistis in rhetoric are the elements to induce true judgment through enthymemes, hence to give proof of a statement.^[3] There are three modes by which this is employed. The first mode is the “subject matter capable of inducing a state of mind within the audience.”^[4] The second pistis is the “subject itself considered under an appeal to the intellect or in its logical aspects.”^[4] The third pistis is the “logical, rational, and intellectual aspect of the issue under discussion.”^[5] All three modes of pistis occur in logos as it appeals to logical persuasion.^{[3]  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pistis#Pistis_in_rhetoric}

---

Male and Female Minds Revisited

I am going to revisit my theory on male and female brains to practice my explanation of it.  Science after all is the explanatory art.  

-Wikipedia

Super-ego[edit]

The superego (German: Über-Ich)^[26] reflects the internalization of cultural rules, mainly taught by parents applying their guidance and influence.^[8] Freud developed his concept of the super-ego from an earlier combination of the ego ideal and the “special psychical agency which performs the task of seeing that narcissistic satisfaction from the ego ideal is ensured … what we call our ‘conscience’.”^[27] For him “the installation of the super-ego can be described as a successful instance of identification with the parental agency,” while as development proceeds “the super-ego also takes on the influence of those who have stepped into the place of parents — educators, teachers, people chosen as ideal models.”^[28]

…also known as growing the fuck up. 

The existence of id consolidates the authority of Ego, in the absence of Id the ego will be sympathetic with it’s own desires and try to get super-ego to participate with it, which is the sole purpose of ego, and exactly the opposite of what Super ego wants, it directly antagonizes the will of super ego.  When I was studying male and female communication rituals my obscene abilities of pattern recognition were able to pick up on the patterns of the female brain and the way it is in relationship with the male brain.  This creates emergent properties in society and the world.  The 1 on 1 relationships create the norm, and people being aquisitively mimetic copy what they have seen.  This unconscious process, these unconscious relationships and patterns create a normative bias that creates disparate impact in favor of feminine judgments or ego.  Not only are the outcropping patterns bad they are dangerous and unsustainable.  

Female authority comes from usurping, blaming, guilting, shaming, and humiliating masculine authority.  Women do not see reason as their own will, they see it as a foreign invasive will, because they edit their consideration set to think sentimentally and emotionally not analytically or logically.  They don’t think about the ugly things that are going on in the world they think about the pretty things that would be pleasant if they were true.  The female mind ignores threats, and is naturally hostile to the masculine narrative which is to say they don’t listen to men with the same eagerness that they listen to other women and to their own emotions.  The female mind uses mercy and charity to expand her authority and to appear a moral superior to reason.  The male narrative is democratic, bold, offensive, truthful, easy to understand because it isn’t vague.  The female narrative tries to shut the male narrative up by presupposing a meritocracy of pleasantness where being pleasant is a virtue and you can’t speak your truth plainly and boldly.  The meritocracy of pleasantness thwarts the meritocracy of reason and prevents participation of the best with the best.  The female mind thinks it wins by getting offended even if it throws itself in the way to get offended for someone else, once offended the female mind presupposes it’s own moral authority to judge and punish.  

Parrhesia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In rhetoric, parrhesia is a figure of speech described as: to speak candidly or to ask forgiveness for so speaking.^[1] The term is borrowed from the Greek παρρησία (πᾶν “all” + ῥῆσις / ῥῆμα “utterance, speech”) meaning literally “to speak everything” and by extension “to speak freely,” “to speak boldly,” or “boldness.” It implies not only freedom of speech, but the obligation to speak the truth for the common good, even at personal risk.

An example of this is the quote “I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears, and sweat” by Winston Churchill.^[2]

My term “Superficial Aesthetic Snap Decisions”  are the tacit judgments made by the uneducated female mind without understanding.  (http://terminclature.wordpress.com/2013/11/19/superficial-aesthetic-snap-decisions/) The uneducated mind is easily offended thinking  that everything in the brief, pleasant span of its short life has prepared it to judge everything that goes on from it’s own narrow-minded opinion.  It is essentially operating tacitly on a dynamic tautology of argument from ignorance. 

Argument from ignorance (Latin: argumentum ad ignorantiam), also known as appeal to ignorance (in which ignorance stands for “lack of evidence to the contrary”), is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false (or vice versa). This represents a type of false dichotomy in that it excludes a third option, which is that there is insufficient investigation and therefore insufficient information to prove the proposition satisfactorily to be either true or false. Nor does it allow the admission that the choices may in fact not be two (true or false), but may be as many as four, (1) true, (2) false, (3) unknown between true or false, and (4) being unknowable (among the first three).^[2] In debates, appeals to ignorance are sometimes used to shift the burden of proof. -wikipedia

Let me see if I can explain this another way.  We have all of this technology in America, google +, facebook, wordpress, etc. many people think that they are experts on how the internet works.  This is called epistemic arrogance.  Over valuing what you know and undervaluing what you don’t know.  It is very good for making you feel good about yourself but it is very bad for knowing the threats that are coming at you.  That feeling goodness, prevents you from understanding the nature of the enemy that hates you and wants to eradicate you off the face of the planet.  That positive emotional female crap, is a liability, it makes you weak, slow, and unprepared.  

The Deep Web (also called the Deepnet,^[1] Invisible Web,^[2] or Hidden Web^[3]) is World Wide Web content that is not part of the Surface Web, which is indexed by standardsearch engines. It should not be confused with the dark Internet, the computers that can no longer be reached via the Internet, or with a Darknet distributed filesharing network, which could be classified as a smaller part of the Deep Web. There is concern that the deep web can be used for serious criminal activity.^[4]

Mike Bergman, founder of BrightPlanet and credited with coining the phrase,^[5] said that searching on the Internet today can be compared to dragging a net across the surface of the ocean: a great deal may be caught in the net, but there is a wealth of information that is deep and therefore missed.^[6] Most of the Web’s information is buried far down on dynamically generated sites, and standard search engines do not find it. Traditional search engines cannot “see” or retrieve content in the deep Web—those pages do not exist until they are created dynamically as the result of a specific search. As of 2001, the deep Web was several orders of magnitude larger than the surface Web.^[7]

thank you iconographic art of joxua mourningstar 

 

This is a photoshop I did of Nishkala shiva, and Sikala Shiva, an ancient Indian metaphor for the nature of the mind. Sikala Shiva is in corpse pose but still alive, although in a dormant state, he represents the subconscious mind, many orders of magnitude greater than the conscious mind represented by Shakti.  Below him is Niskala Shiva in his dead form representing the unconscious mind, many orders of magnitude greater than the subconscious mind.