Tag Archives: rational

The Psychopathology of Islam and Muslims

untitled About 8 years ago Bruce Buena de Mesqita did a TED talk in which he purported to have an algorithm that could predict social events.  He applied it to Iran and generated a number of predictions.  At that time I was working on fleshing out my psychopath models and I immediately responded, “his algorithm doesn’t account for psychopathic behavior.”  To this day almost all of his predictions are dead wrong, the only on he got right was that students would protest. What makes my psychological models so different from everybody else’s?  Well regular psychology is based on comparing the individual to the normal person in society, but if society itself is becoming psychopathic then psychopathy is the norm. My models don’t compare the individual to the norm they compare the individual to the rational person. My models were created, in part, observing troll behavior online.  When I am trying to understand a person I ask myself who is the person saying this,?  What story are they in?  And what character are they playing in that story?  How well are they playing that character and what missteps are they making in portraying that character?  Some people refer to this as profiling and they think that something is wrong with it.  That presupposes a superficial nature to relationship in which you don’t really understand anyone around you and you don’t scrutinize or examine them closely. psychopathy PRAXIS IS THE KEY Ancient civilizations had this concept of Praxis, which is essentially, the individual has a philosophy, that philosophy is known and it informs the behavior of the individual.  The words Process and Practice come from the word Praxis.  People are a lot less philosophical nowadays but belief still informs action.  So it is possible, with careful attention, to know why a person is doing what they are doing and what they will do in the future, for reasons we will discuss. In my Organic Computer Theory I hold that humans are a lot more predictable than people think.  If you understand the individual you know how they will interpret events and how they will react to those events.  Every event has positive or negative survival data to the individual this is the Binary Code for Organic Computers.

PSYCHOPATHS

My psycholinguistic technique is to compare what a person says, with what they do, with what they think.  Psychopaths conceal who they really are and represent themselves strategically.  Psychopaths lie, they manipulate, they are authoritarian, they are aggressively narcissistic, they have innate feelings of superiority.  They do not have a sense of humor about themselves.  They feel that everything they do is good because they are the one’s doing it and they feel that they are deserving of everything they want.  They don’t respect the boundaries of other people because they don’t feel that other people are equal to themselves. ayatollah khomeiniSo, what is Islam? Islam is a tyrannical, psychopathic, masculine only perspective.  If your philosophy is arbitrary it creates a disparate impact and is therefore invalid, which is to say it isn’t a genuine philosophy.  If your philosophy can’t be used to falsify you it isn’t valid. MARRIAGE IN ISLAM The Greeks, Jews, and Christians in an effort to separate themselves from the tyrannical practices of the East created a different marriage contract, a business contract, women had rights but also responsibilities.  In Islam which is resurrected and cleverly re-branded ancient evil from Babylon and Persia, marriage is a property contract in which women have no rights but they do have copious responsibilities. OEDIPAL AGGRESSION Jews and Christians demonstrate aggression towards the penis slightly shaming men for the sexual urge.  Catholics shame girls so that they will take more responsibility for having sex and exert an influence on themselves to choose a mate wisely.  In Islam it is a common practice to cut off the clitoris and  labia and bind the legs together so that they grow over the vagina so that the first act of intercourse is painful.  Women are not supposed to enjoy sex in Islam, that makes them whores.

14 - 1

SEXUAL SHAMING In the west we have a feminine bias, which means we tacitly frame women as the cause of the good and men as the cause of the bad.  In Islam it is reversed.  Men can get closer to the children, the penis is the cause of the good and is not suspect, women and the vagina is the cause of the bad.  Men are not shamed for their sexual desires.  It takes 4 witnesses to accuse a man of adultery, and he can have multiple wives and sex slaves.  If a man is accused of adultery and is to be stoned, he is buried up to the knees or waist while a woman is buried up to her shoulders, if he escapes he gets to live, same goes for her.  While bestiality is forbidden here is how Muslims typically punish offenders. http://www.wikiislam.net/wiki/Islam_and_Bestiality#In_the_Islamic_world AUTHORITARIANISM Islam was designed to create disparate impact in it’s own favor.  The fastest growing population on earth is also the stupidest and most violent.  Mohammed resurrected a priest class which hasn’t been seen since Ancient Egypt or earlier. Writing evolved and religion evolved but Islam devolved.  The Priest class interprets the holy writings and tells Muslims what to think, how to feel, and what to do.  Saudi Arabia translates fewer books into Arabic than any other country by far, Greece translates almost 2x as many books into Greek. story of Mo

VEXATIOUS LITIGATIONS

With rich, vexatious lawyers, they change the laws so that you can’t criticize them or scrutinize them.  The prevent Bill Maher, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and other anti-islam advocates from stating their case.  They push to get blasphemy laws legalized so that you can’t make fun of their religion or their prophets.  I am not part of your religion, how is it that you can legislate my opinions and expression? Muslims presuppose their right to judge others by their values and then act as judge, jury, and executioner, literally.  If that isn’t a narcissistic, authoritarian mentality I don’t know what is.  Also the very act of speaking out against another Muslim is a potential act of apostasy which is punishable by death.  Which means that Jamal can go martyr himself and blow up a synagogue in Turkey, but if you say anything bad about him you are an infidel. PATHOLOGICAL LYING CAIR Omar Ahmad, Nihad Awad In Shi’a Islamtaqiyya (تقیة taqiyyah/taqīyah) is a form of religious dissimulation‘,[1] or a legal dispensation whereby a believing individual can deny his faith or commit otherwise illegal or blasphemous acts while they are in fear or at risk of significant persecution.[2] The corresponding concept in Sunni Islam is known as idtirar (إضطرار) “coercion”. A related concept is known as kitman “concealment; dissimulation by omission”. Also related is the concept of ḥiyal, legalistic deception practiced not necessarily in a religious context but to gain political or legalistic advantage.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taqiyya So a religion that admits it is based on a lie, that openly states the only people that believe Mohammed’s lie are the nations that are going to get screwed by the Muslims, also protects itself and promotes itself by lying.   In closing, it is obvious to me that Islam is a psychopathic ideology, more so than any other religion, and Islam is doing what it intended to do.  To just sit back and think that they will somehow stop is delusional.  They have no incentive to stop.  They have no incentive to be reasonable.  They are already succeeding.

muslims

islam


http://www.girlsnotbrides.org/child-marriage/turkey/


untitledturkey

Advertisements

Strategic Communication

lies

As a psycholinguist I spend a lot of time listening to narrative.  My psychological models are based on how male brains and female brains communicate with one another, how they are in relationship with each other and themselves.  People play rolls they see themselves as characters and they are both writing themselves into a story, there own story.  All narrative is doxography or point of view and it give clues as to the character or roll a person is playing.  The problem is that relationship in the west is a kind of asymetrical warfare.

Asymmetric warfare is war between belligerents whose relative military power differs significantly, or whose strategy or tactics differ significantly.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asymmetric_warfare

Normative social judgments have become more and more reified and exaggerated, society has a feminine bias, and women and psychopaths in relationship take advantage of this.  Stupidity, insanity, failure, ineptitude, weakness, and irrationality all get categorized as feminine and are protected by society under the Feminine Moral Authority of Mercy and Charity.  We have all heard the phrase, “be the bigger man,” used to suggest that when someone is acting irrationally or emotionally and everybody knows they are wrong the moral and correct thing to do is to let them get away with it.  The problem is, for psychopaths this enables the behavior, incentivizing it and encouraging it, furthermore, people being aquisitively mimetic will copy the behavior they see being rewarded.

I see the root of this slide into the collapse of society and insanity in the way people communicate and reason.  When I made an effort to learn all of the logical fallacies and cognitive biases, I came to the conclusion that we were basically talking about reason and unreason, delusion and non- delusion.  How the female mind is in relationship with the male mind.  If you want to sound like a woman use every cognitive bias and logical fallacy all of the time, and never make an effort to detect your errors or admit when you were wrong.  Rationality is about being correctly in relationship with the outside world, not imagining that you are living in a magickal fairy tale where you are a Disney Princess and everything is about you and for your benefit.

SOCRATIC DIALOGUE IS THE LANGUAGE OF REASON

strategic communication

Assertions are the masculine part of language and Questions are the feminine part of language.  If you listen to people speaking they don’t speak correctly, which is to say rationally, they speak strategically.  Both the feminine part of the conversation and the masculine part of the conversation are corrupt, which is a reflection of society.  Instead of trying to relate to one another functionally and rationally they relate strategically in order to socially climb on top of one another.  A passive aggressive battle in a race to the bottom.  People don’t evaluate themselves correctly, they don’t reason correctly, they don’t relate correctly, they don’t think correctly, and they don’t act correctly, instead everybody races around trying to one up each other in a douchey attempt to attain a sense of victory against relationship.  A bunch of retards fighting over who gets to hump the door knob.

If you listen to the way people discourse online, and I blame Richard Dawkins and his large group of online trolls more perhaps than any other group although feminists and other groups are to blame as well, the majority of the narrative is useless and non-informative and non-educational.  Why do these people waste their time to waste the time of other people?  Instead of unleashing the Highest Common Good, they would rather be passive aggressive, manipulative, covertly hostile, and emotionally abusive.  How is that making the world a better place?  How are Atheists proving themselves morally superior by engaging in such childish antics?  I realize that many of them aren’t capable of doing anything more because that is the level they are on and they are doomed to be forever on that level, but I challenge the intelligent Atheists to exert an influence on the Emotionally Morbid Atheists to be positive, and rational in their discourse instead of causing division and not allowing a higher level of discourse to be present on the internet.  Also I condemn Atheists for operating on a meritocracy of god hate and not falsifying themselves or correcting themselves when they have been falsified by a religious person.  Atheists hate the smart religious people including deists who worship reason MORE than they hate silly fundamentalist Christians.  Not only does that not make any sense it is despicable and evil.

Mistakes people make in Judgment

Image

Strategic behavior can be irrational insofar as it deviates from rational and sustainable behavior depending on the environment and teleology of events.  It would be silly to blame a person in an irrational environment for behaving strategically, since that person couldn’t survive any other way.  Likewise strategic behavior in a rational environment is more egregious but people seem to be able to get away with it by making certain emotional appeals and throwing histrionic fits.

ImageImage

In the Harry Potter movie, Harry behaves strategically and uses his magick and irrational act, in a rational environment, but he is provoked by a Dementor attacking himself and his relative.  So, teleologically speaking he behaved irrationally in a rational environment after being provoked by an irrational action, why is this ok?

 

Jus ad bellum

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

Just cause/ Right intention[edit]

According to the principle of right intention, the aim of war must not be to pursue narrowly defined national interests, but rather to re-establish a just peace. This state of peace should be preferable to the conditions that would have prevailed had the war not occurred.

 

Proportionality[edit]

The principle of proportionality stipulates that the violence used in the war must be proportional to the attack suffered. For example, if one nation invades and seizes the land of another nation, this second nation has just cause for a counterattack in order to retrieve its land. However, if this second nation invades the first, reclaims its territory, and then also annexes the first nation, such military action is disproportional.

 

Last resort[edit]

The principle of last resort stipulates that all non-violent options must first be exhausted before the use of force can be justified.

What is interesting with people and their judgments nowadays, is that people respond with horror when a rational person defends themselves against an irrational person that is forcing a confrontation, as if there is a virtue in letting psychopaths force their will on everybody and get away with it.  This just emboldens them to do it again in the future.

Contemplate if you will, the rules governing gun play in the cowboy days, shooting an unarmed man was an act of murder, but shooting an armed man was acceptable because shit happens.  Now what is interesting is that today you have psychopathic structures of authority in relationship with protecting and expanding their authority, and they have an incentive in a situation where the rational person defends himself and wins, to fly in the face of reason and rule against the righteous person defending themselves against the lawless, irrational man.

Image

ImageImage

 

Obsession and Psychopathology

Image

Dr. Stylianos Atechlys known as Daskalos (Teacher) once said that obsession is demonic possession.  Something I have always thought was interesting is how quickly people introduce you to their issues.  I believe that things end as they begin so I am always very interested in the first meeting I have with a person.  How they approach relationship.  The initial approach.  If relationship is an approaching where two people begin to understand each other, than how we approach relationship is how we approach approaching.  In the initial approach does the person approach authenticly and honestly or do they approach strategically?  Do they approach me as a superior talking to a subordinate?  Forcing a frame and trying to get me to participate?  or do they approach me looking pathetic and trying to elicit sympathy?  Do they approach me telling me how awesome they are and expecting me to agree?  In the case of Charles Manson the first thing you see is the swastika carved into the middle of his forehead.

People flaunt their issues and attract attention to their issues.  How many times do you start a conversation and the person ends it by saying, “god bless.” or “All I need to know is do you believe in Jesus?”  The fact of the matter is that I do believe in Jesus but not the Jesus you believe in.  I believe that Jesus in the quintessence, the fifth element, he was the incarnation of reason which is why they called him the Logoish, and I believe that god is the faculty of reason in man.  So should I say no or yes?

The fact of the matter is that people are either rational and in relationship with truth and reality (which is much, much, rarer than you think)  or they cling to morbid emotions and delusions and psychosis.  Some people are traumatized in certain areas, and rational in others.  When you stimulate a certain issue they enter a refractory state, but each individual has to be responsible for their own mental and emotional health and willing and desiring of being a whole person.

Image

In relationship people will ask you in some form or another “are you a good person?” and this is stupid because psychopaths conceal their emotional morbidity and misrepresent themselves.  They are manipulative.  Psychopaths have to do the wrong things, they have to do things psychopathicly in order to work their will and attain their good.  So stop asking people if they are good people, figure it out for yourself, stop exposing yourself to being manipulated, learn to recognize the behavior and challenge people to be mentally and emotionally healthy.

Image

One of these people always lies and one of them always tells the truth.  If I ask, “are you a good person?”  the psychopath is going to be the first to respond very convincingly in the positive and they will probably even have reasons why they are a good person.

People understand themselves and agree with themselves.  Contemplate that for a second.  The world view of the individual makes them correct in their behavior.  In order for them to be correct in doing certain things they have to perceive the world in a certain way.  This is their gestalt.  This is their philosophy, their soul.  The problem is that people don’t enter relationship to understand the other person in the relationship which is a necessity.  You have to understand how the other person in the relationship thinks.  You have to understand the human organism.  You have to understand yourself,  only in understanding yourself correctly can you understand other people correctly in relationship to yourself.  You have to understand the logical fallacies and the cognitive biases.  You have to know your issues, what stimulates your issues, what puts you in refractory states, when you are in a refractory state should you act and what actions should you take, and how do you get out of a refractory state and back into a positive mental and emotional state.  Do you act when you are in relationship with your morbid emotions?  When do you act?  Do you get good results, do you get the result that you desired?  Why not?  Why are you trying to get the result that you are trying to get?  Why do you desire that result?  Are your relationships based on shared diseases?  or on allying yourself with the better angels of others?

The Psychopath has to attack.  They can’t not attack.  They can’t keep themselves from attacking and they are looking for people to attack and reasons to attack.  They don’t have self discipline or self control.  They can’t stop looking for the thing that they hate so they can kill it.  Recent research suggests that feeling thwarted is the source of anger.  Based on my Shared State Theory of Communication, we communicate whatever state we are in.  So if we are in a state of feeling thwarted, we communicate thwartedness, and we want to thwart.  But antagonizing the problem is not necessarily moving towards the solution.  To use my terms something happened to the person that they never want to happen again, a state they want to avoid, but the psychopath is in relationship with desiring to kill the thing that they perceive as the cause of the state they want to avoid.  But in doing so they are constantly restimulating the refractory state reminding them of the state they want to avoid.  Which means they are keeping themselves in a permanent refractory state permanently, which Paul Eckman says is the same as being insane.  They are obsessed with the thing they are trying to get away from.  The only way the can rest is if that thing ceases to exist in reality.  So we have the form of the conquest.

Image

http://thoughtuncommon.wordpress.com/2013/08/31/shared-state-theory-of-communication/

http://thoughtuncommon.wordpress.com/2013/12/03/problem-centric-narrative/