Tag Archives: narrative

The Holy Trinity as a Psychological Metaphor

SI_the_resistance

I have been trying to figure out how to put this information together in the least offensive way.  The western brain, male and female has a feminine bias, and reacts emotionally and violently to certain Ideas.  The information expressed in this blog is descriptive of a philosophy from a long time ago and explanatory of the situation we currently find ourselves in.  Please do not presuppose that I agree with everything in this blog.  You don’t know how I am in relationship with the information in this blog, if you ask me I will tell you.  Above all I would like to appreciate Fidem Turbare for having the open mindedness to entertain my explanations, and the intelligence to understand what I am talking about.  It is a huge frustration when there is nobody on your level capable of evaluating you or understanding what you are talking about.  I have decided to rewrite this blog as a personal conversation between me and Fidem.  

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Fun:Fidem_Turb%C4%81re

http://www.fidemturbare.com/

As some of you know I am a philologist and a linguistic philosopher, I have traced the origins of Christianity to India through Judaism.  Many of you might not know this but the people that created the religions were not theists, they were deists.  I set out a long time ago to understand the perspective of the people that created the religions.  Jesus was a member of the cult of Pythagorus, I know this because I have learned how to recognize rhetorical tautologies, and languages of experience in a person’s narrative.  Jesus references the corner stone that was rejected, even today this symbolism is very important to freemasonry which also traces it’s origins back to Pythagorus.

golden-mean

In my very popular piece here (http://thoughtuncommon.wordpress.com/2014/04/14/the-metaphysics-of-joxua-luxor/) I lay out my metaphysics and explain the rolls assigned men and women in an attempt to make a scientific marriage unit, scientific from ancient standards, but still not without merit as we will discuss later in this blog.

From the perspective of the ancients, male and female roles were internalized and externalized, there was a division of labor and a division of attention.  In Persia women were property, in Greece marriage was a business contract.  It had less to do with love and more to do with survival.  Women naturally and instinctively like to think about things that women like, puppies, kittens, babies, etc.  It was known back in the day that women are interested in extending and expanding their authority, anybody that is not a threat and that expands their authority they want to protect, the sick, the poor, etc.  Women expand their authority to usurp masculine authority.  They don’t think about the political environment, or the economic environment, and when they make decisions they take fewer considerations into account.  They think only of their own needs and the needs of those under their authority.  For this reason the man represented Sapiential Authority, the Mother Moral authority and the child survival and action in the future, also acting on the fathers wisdom.

division

It is important to note that the average western male no longer studies Torah everyday, or attends a Wisdom school like Freemasonry, and even if he did Freemasonry is no longer the moral science that it once was, it has devolved into a business fraternity and drinking club for the most part.  The average American male is no longer conversant in high philosophy, he doesn’t hang out with the boys at the gymnasium discussing politics and policy.  So the rules have changed.

If you observe women’s behavior under life threatening circumstances you realize that in that state of temporary autism a person operates on their hard wiring.  Never have I heard of a woman throwing herself between her boyfriend and a gunman.  I have heard of women sheltering their babies.  In the recent batman movie shootings 3 young men died protecting their girlfriends.

Aristotle wrote on this subject immensely, of interest is that any society that stops reading Aristotle shortly ends up back in the Dark Ages.  Aristotle wrote extensively on the proper relationship between men and women noting too that men sexually peak at the age of 18 and women at the age of 40.

aristotle

In the Hindu Epic the Ramayana, which I believe is the source of inspiration for the biblical account of Adam and Eve, Sita is kidnapped because she sees a beautiful deer and she wants Rama and his brother to go and catch it for her so she can have it as a pet.  At the end of the book it is because of her Fickle sentimental thinking that the whole escapade happened in the first place.  Women are sentimental thinkers.  They weigh emotions as more important than reason.

Most people don’t know this but God’s Holy Spirit is actually a woman:

ShekinahShechinahShechina, or Schechinah (Hebrewשכינה‎), is the English spelling of agrammatically feminineHebrewname of God in Judaism.[citation needed] The original word means the dwelling or settling, and denotes the dwelling or settling of the Divine Presence of God, especially in the Temple in Jerusalem.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shekhinah

The reason that the Catholic Church had to turn her into a ghost is to silence her.  There is a psychological reason for shaming girls for their sexual behavior, women need to be more careful and take more responsibility for their actions because of their nature.  Women do not take responsibility for their actions in general.  A woman will have sex with a man and just assume the relationship is about her needs, desires, and wants, without communication ahead of time.  When men are blamed and shamed for the desire for sex this creates negative, unsustainable, patterns in society.  It counter incentivizes masculine sexuality.  This is something that should be meditated on.

Because women don’t solve problems in such a way as they create value for men (IN GENERAL) they automatically presuppose their own authority and think that men should be like women.  It is a cognitive bias to think that everyone thinks like you do.  Men and women were separated back in the day not to protect women from men but to protect masculinity from femininity.

ark_covenant

pythag

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complementarianism

Genesis 2:18  Then the LORD God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper as his complement.”

In societies where survival is difficult masculine values dominate, in societies where survival is easy, feminine values dominate.  To believe is the current virtues of Western culture you have to presuppose a leisurely ability to survive.  But that isn’t the case is it?  The economy isn’t coming back because we do not have a large surplus of anything to sell that we don’t appreciate or need.  We do not have an infinite supply of energy with which to transport those products.  Atomic energy has proven to be unsustainable, which is why they are shutting down the atomic energy plants.  We are running out of oil which America needs because it has the larges military in the world and China needs that oil because they are industrializing.  So the military is a depreciating asset and the oil is a resource that every day gets more expensive and less abundant.  

A few years ago I downloaded all of the free classes from Itunes university from all of the Ivy league colleges on all of the subjects I was interested in, and I listened to them over and over.  Cognitive science, philosophy, and psychology.  I also downloaded a bunch of commentaries on literature and such.  One of the things I downloaded, and I wish I remembered her name, was a speech by a black female Judge from Chicago, explaining how the no fault divorce was created in order to get women out of abusive marriages, but what it did was it allowed a windfall of women divorcing their husbands for no reason.  She specifically blamed women for the divorce epidemic.  And I believe she was correct.  Once a man has been divorced he doesn’t have a home but he still has to pay her bills, he can’t see his children unless she allows him to, and somehow, depressed and alone he still has to support himself.

The female mind is naturally insensitive to the male mind.  So in a society which every day is being scaled down to please women NO VALUE IS BEING CREATED FOR MEN.  Men don’t have an incentive to protect this society or these women.  Every woman that comes along wants to hitch her wagon to my horse.  She enters into relationship for her own benefit presupposing herself good and correct in her desires and giving not a single fuck about my desires and happiness unless my will is to serve her needs alone.  What is being said to American men is this, “Oh, I am sorry, me and the children do not have enough stuff, perhaps you can kindly go kill yourself so that we can get the insurance money.”

Now ponder this, Muslim men and the Islamic culture CAN control their women, while our women are not reasonable and refuse to be controlled.  Which society is going to survive?  Especially, when women edit their consideration sets so that they only look at the things that make them happy, immediately are suspicious of western men, and blame and abuse the very men they expect to serve and protect them?

The liberal, elitist, feminist mentality is only sustainable in a society that is highly successful.  Imagine that we are in ancient Greece and it isn’t that easy to survive.  You have to survive into the future or your culture will disappear, so you have to have children.  You have to have a relationship that maximizes value for everybody.  Everybody has roles to fill and they have rights. You can’t afford to give any person in that relationship more than is sustainable from the surplus of value created by the success of the relationship.


MUSLIMS CONSIDER CHRISTIANS POLYTHEISTS

Muslims consider Christians polytheists and therefore heretics and blasphemers BECAUSE of the Doctrine of the Trinity.  From their perspective:

“There is no god but God, Muhammad is the messenger of God.”

That is a rhetorical tautology of a masculine only perspective.  So who is going to inherit the earth?  What precedes the collapse of Western rule historically?

In my psychological models what I did was I studied, Deborah Tannen’s work on male female communication rituals.  All narrative is doxography, which is to say point of view.  So it characterizes each person speaking.  What you realize is that the human brain was compartmentalized into 2 different brains by evolution. Due to their natural strengths and weaknesses a division of labors if you will.  What modern society is doing is undoing what evolution did, while at the same time destroying  modern society.  If you observe female vs. male communication rituals you see also how the male brain and female brain are in relationship with one another.

Now here is the key for you, when I say “male and female” part of that is based on yin and yang or broken and unbroken.  Which is to say an inferior mind to a superior mind and the relationship between them.  The reason you cannot infer from your experience to falsify my research is this, you are not normal, you are a lot smarter than most people and completely different from any other woman I have met.  From your perspective, the majority of psychopaths/female minds that you have experienced in relationship are men.  Psychopaths are aggressive in relationship, they approach relationship strategically for their own benefit.  They expect you to stay in the relationship while they continue to judge you, abuse you, lie to you, manipulate you, and punish you.  No matter how many times they are wrong or they fail they still feel themselves your equal and refuse to participate with reason.

The Science of yoga is the art of finding all of the logical fallacies and the cognitive biases that the human brain makes.  In essence, throwing the mind.  Emotions warp and distort reality around us.  I call this the averseness of the mind, it happens unconsciously without our knowing it.  Familiarity breeds contempt.  Nassim Nicholas Taleb documented a similar phenomenon.  On long flights statisticians were more likely to buy insurance for things that were far less likely to happen, like terrorism, than insurance for accidents that were far more likely to happen, due to what I call the averseness of the mind.  Observe if you will the behavior of the Atheists.  They are far more verbally abusive against Christians than the far more menacing threat of Muslims.  Even in the middle of a global Jihad push they would rather harass Christians.  Richard Dawkins himself says that you won’t see atheists leading troupes into battle.  Who is fighting the Muslims?  The Christians.

Women are aggressive communicators while at the same time being deaf to reason.  If appeal to emotion is a logical fallacy than communicating emotionally is a dynamic tautology of the appeal to emotion fallacy. Observe how women argue, histrionic fits, changing the pitch, tone, and cadence of their speech, talking over your.  Observe how this deviates from Socratic dialogue.  Men are sensitive listeners, women adopt these communication rituals to abuse the male mind, and to force it’s compliance.  When I was younger I actually developed a psychosomatic response to the sound of Diane Chamber’s voice on Cheers, my eyes would dilate and my heart would race, I was having a panic attack, it was stimulated by my having to talk to my mother and my relationship with my sister.  All of her smarmy sanctimony and her self appointed moral authority, presupposing her right to judge everybody from her own narrow perspective.  The funny thing about her was that she wasn’t acting, that is really who she was.  Everybody on the caste hated her.  One time they threw a party and they gave her the wrong address.  True story.

Inferior minds are bitch move artists, (I am sorry, I know you don’t like that word)  they are artists that express themselves through the medium of bitch moves to appear to be more than they are.  They try to expand and increase their authority and interrupt the rational conversation.  They approach the conversation strategically, concealing their true intention and misrepresenting themselves, they try to control what can be said, the direction of the conversation, the focus of the conversation and they attempt to force the conclusion of the conversation.  The conversation is the relationship, every event in the relationship characterizes the relationship.  All of these tactics are the same tactics used by mothers on babies.  I call it “jingling the keys” the mother tries to control your focal point, and then communicates to you emotional data as to how you should feel about the thing and what you should do.

sasd

The feminine bias in society is also associated with tacit judgments I refer to as superficial aesthetic snap decisions.  This is based on the flow of negative emotional data.  The child can communicate negative emotional data to the mother, and the mother to the father, but the flow of negative emotional data cannot be reversed without invoking the refractory state of the western mind which reveals a tacit bias in favor of femininity.  Here is a picture I photo-shopped to illustrate the way in which the male and female mind are in relationship with one another.

090613133116

In ancient times they had the age of accountability. It was at that age that the authority of the mother ended and the authority of the father began.  The role of the father was to make the child suitable for society, psychologically sound and whole, capable of being a citizen and understanding the values of the culture.  The highest form of the good and the worst form of the bad.  With daughters when the age of accountability was reached, they were given or sold or married to a man and he took over her instruction.  In our current modern society the authority of the mother never ends, and people never take responsibility, they never understand, they never grow up.  We have created an entire generation of babies expecting to be provided for.  When they do something wrong or stupid they just appeal to feminine authority to mercy and charity, claiming that they weren’t responsible and they didn’t know what they were doing.

Other countries and cultures have no problem recognizing that men and women are different.  It is only because of propaganda in Western science that we hold this prejudice.  Even Western science is starting to realize it’s error.  If Western society hasn’t degenerated it is degenerating. . .

At least that is the view from my seat.

ngbbs4f5d3dd925d86

Advertisements

Psychopathology and Entitlement.

Image

The last evolution of the human brain is the frontal lobe, it is also the last part of the brain to fully develop and neurally myelinate.  It essentially deals with proper relationship, right and wrong.  

Image

Function[edit]

The executive function of the frontal lobes involve the ability to recognize future consequences resulting from current actions, to choose between good and bad actions (or better and best), override and suppress socially unacceptable responses, and determine similarities and differences between things or events.

The frontal lobes also play an important part in retaining longer term memories which are not task-based. These are often memories associated with emotions derived from input from the brain’s limbic system. The frontal lobe modifies those emotions to generally fit socially acceptable norms.

Psychological tests that measure frontal lobe function include finger tapping, Wisconsin Card Sorting Task, and measures of verbal and figural fluency.[5]

In my psychological model, psychopaths are over coddled children if they are not psychopaths due to damage or deformity.  They have been in an enriched environment in which they were able to have anything that they desired, this creates a normative process for them where they always expect to be able to have anything that they desire.  Psychopaths feel entitled, they feel worthy of everything.  There is the object that they covet and they are deserving of it, so the question becomes how do they get it, not how to they earn it.  

If you listen closely to the narrative of a psychopath they rationalize why they should have what they want even if it is a resource they don’t possess, even if it is somebody else’s resource, even if they have to trespass somebodies boundaries to get it.  They will lie, communicate strategically, obfuscate, conflate, every form of strategic communication in order to convince somebody that they should have what they want, that they deserve it.  I find this so interesting in observing psychopaths, the some of their actions has to take them in a direction where they can approach doing their will.  If their is something they want right now, they will communicate that this is the correct and moral thing to happen.  They will go back to something they already did, in a tit for tat exchange and they will inflate the value of a past service in order to get what they want right now. 

I had an interesting experience lately with the L case study.  I recently acquired a new dog, L is territorial and is threatened by any positive attention that is not being given to herself, she feels that she deserves to be the focus of all positive attention all of the time.  So based on shared state theory of communication and the communication rituals of the mother trying to control the focus of the child and control the way the child is emotionally in relationship with the object of focus it was interesting to deconstruct her narrative.  She kept on asking me over and over again if I had made an effort to find the dogs family, I had and was continuing to do so.  She would talk about how sad they must be and that the dog belonged to somebody in spite of my telling her that signs had been put up and somebody was taking them down and nobody had called to claim the dog.  Everything she was saying was a tautology of the dog not being mine, belonging to somebody else and leading towards framing me as doing something wrong  by communicating emotional data(the female mind uses fear, guilt, and shame to manipulate the male mind).  

Last night I was taking my dogs for a walk and lo and behold there was a little girl drawing on the pavement with chalk, and Pazuzu (that’s what I named her) started freaking out and wagging her tail, kissing the girl and snuggling her.  The little girl ran in the house and informed her parents that “shelby” was back.  The mother appeared and she was very chagrined, she chose her words carefully in front of the little girl, I asked her if she would like to talk somewhere out of earshot and she agreed, I asked her if she wasn’t able to afford a dog at this moment and she said that her family had just moved here from Texas, and they had just found out she was pregnant, and everybody was gone all day and the dog was very unhappy.  I said I would keep the dog and the little girl could see her.  I told her that I have a room mate that works different hours than myself and we have another dog about the same size, she was very happy.  That is as far as I got in the story with L.  

What happened next was a very special connection and emotional release with the dog.  She was inconsolable, whining and making noise, very sad.  Now here is the part that I wanted to tell L, the part that was important to me, me and Lisa my room mate started howling like wolves, and Pazuzu joined in wholeheartedly.  It was soulful, mournful, whaling, I didn’t realize the emotional impact of howling until I experienced this with Pazuzu, we became a wolf pack at that moment, sharing her suffering with her.  She was a little virtuoso at howling. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5T-ZThSE5rQ)  <<<RELATED LINK. 

What L did, is she was like, “WAIT A MINUTE!  I THOUGH YOU SAID YOU FOUND THE FAMILY.”  She started repeating herself like a retard, with a lot of negative emotional data, reiterating that it was their dog, and the correct thing for them to do is for them to take responsibility for their actions, (L doesn’t take responsibility for her actions…) Notice the use of self appointed authority in her narrative, she can’t say what she is saying unless she is speaking from a perspective of moral authority.  She didn’t let me tell her about the healing part, the cathartic part that was so beautiful and meaningful to me.  She hijacked the conversation and drowned the narrative.  She even kept on calling me back and starting the conversation at the exact same place, increasing the intensity and emotional data.  

It is also of interest that two co-morbid psychopaths will join forces for the same reason, of getting what they want, even if they shouldn’t have it.  Also of interest is how much quicker people will band together to do evil than do good.  Just like L they don’t think about the happiness of everybody or anybody else, only their own happiness and feelings.  She completely ignored that value had been created for just about everybody, which is part of my theories on relationship “efficiency towards value”, and maximizing value, a meritocracy of results.  She even said to me on another subject that when she does stuff for me she doesn’t want anyone else benefiting from it, lol, the exact opposite of my stated purpose for our relationship.  (((SMH)))

Image