The Failure of Female Secular Writers… May 3, 2017

I find that I cannot read the stories written by female secular writers. It seems their writing has been tainted by the ideology of feminism. Invariably they denigrate and disparage men, blaming men for all of their personal failings in life.

Failing to name one right they lack but men have they nevertheless claim oppression by a non-existent patriarchy. Without conscience effort they put their disdain for men in full view for all to see.

This is why I do not read secular female writers. Their writing is terribly tainted with ideology generated by man-hating feminism.

Posted in Reason | Tagged | Leave a comment

House of Cards….

Which religion is real and which is Memorex? ®
It is my  contention that all are merely fabricated whole-cloth from human imagination. This discussion centers on Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.

Clearly, the origins of Judaism cannot be fully delineated. Much seems to have begun before written language was available to preserve it. There is no doubt that originally it was passed by word of mouth. There is no way to know whether it was of the same nature in the beginning as when it was finally transcribed.
Is this the real religion? If one examines the history of the Jewish people it is clear that being a favorite of god was not their fate. Though I imagine looking through human history one can find a people as persecuted, as unfortunate, as unlucky as the Jewish people, it would be a task. Nowhere was it seen that a god of any kind stepped in to save the day. Biblical “history” has a few incidents, but even those are impossible to prove legitimate rather than folklore. Those who are not looking for reasons to preserve Judaism can dismiss this religion as untrue.

Christianity is entirely different in that its origins were clearly in literate times. From even shallow investigations it is easily found that Christianity originated no earlier than 70 C.E. and most likely much later than that. The Bible itself was voted into existence around the 4th century during Constantine’s stint as a Roman emperor. He directed Christianity as the national religion in an effort to pacify the people. There are no contemporary records of Christianity’s existence prior to 70 C.E. There are no Roman records of Jesus’ existence. In fact the only record of Jesus’ existence is within the pages of the Bible. Rome was meticulous in record keeping.

Islam originated with the prophet Muhammad (circa 570-632 A.D.). He introduced Islam in 610 A.D. He claimed to have been visited by an angel… in other words he either hallucinated, imagined, or had a dream. In any case, being founded upon both the Judaic and Christian platform, all he succeeded in doing was building a taller house of cards.

In conclusion it can be said that all are untrue.

Posted in Religion and Reason | Tagged | Leave a comment

Atheism Is Not A Religion… April 23, 2017

There is great difficulty in maintaining an ideologically free form of atheism. As I have often repeated all atheism consists of is non-belief in gods. Yes, I personally assert that there are no gods. Some have said that by so saying I have created a belief. Yet, I think that my conclusion is totally in line with the present lack of any evidence of any gods. This assertion applies especially for those gods presently touted, as the one of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam. The gods they present would be unable to hide from close scrutiny… and yet they have no evidence in their support.

Upon a declaration of atheism, many other atheists make assumptions about what other ideas you must support. They make assumptions that have no foundation, just as religion has no foundation. This establishes an ideology. A foundationless ideology no different from religious ideology. Instantly, they assume, you must support every perverted idea about gender, sex, and about members of the various religious cults in existence. Granted, they make it difficult to hold certain opinions, especially those that are difficult to articulate. Just because they are difficult to delineate, however, is no reason they are not valid. Valid or not, without adequate reason to abandon those ideas, and possessing a gut “feeling” that they are valid, I see no reason to adopt the mantra of any group and abandoning my own principles.

Exactness, perfection, is impossible where principles are concerned. This is especially true when information is scant, or unavailable. When there are two sides to an issue, and both have reasonable logic backing them, it is almost impossible to simply select one over the other. Even when one side claims evidence, if that evidence is not absolutely conclusive, then a gut “feeling” may render it neutral. Is it logical to assign such power to a “feeling”. In light of the evolution of humankind, I think it is. Many times a simple “feeling” of foreboding nature has saved someone from dire consequences. Feelings cannot be dismissed outright. Evolution has created and preserved these feelings. Evolution has not been noted for wasting energy. If feelings had no purpose, no reason, we would not possess them.

Despite my efforts to control, to suppress my feelings, I grant they must have a purpose.

My “gut feeling” is that many atheists are not only atheists today. Many hold the label atheist but are actually humanist. Humanism is an ideology which encompasses many societal ideas that are of a religious nature. Someone somewhere decided that such and such must be believed and that from that such and such must be done. Atheism, on the other hand, is only non-belief in gods. Today many “atheists”, that are really “humanists”, are dictating to others what they think you must believe if you are an atheist. If you vary you pay by way of ridicule or outright shunning.

Are “gut feelings” ideologies? Perhaps to a degree, but then ideologies should be easily deconstructed via reason and logic and often times this task is nigh impossible. If you have an established outlook and it has not caused you harm, unless there is reason given for its abolishment why do so? Unless the evidence is conclusive and indisputable why change it? To change too easily lends one to manipulation. Malleability is necessary, gullibility is not. Gullibility is used by religions.

Posted in Religion and Reason | Tagged | Leave a comment

Human Species Doomed… April 16, 2017

Although humans will linger for some time to come, as a species it is doomed.

The cause is radical feminism.

With the help of a number of men who formed a loose alliance called MGTOW, radical feminism has managed to guarantee the end to family. MGTOW, as you know, are a collective of men who have simply given up and walked away. Having eschewed marriage and women and “going their own way”, these men have guaranteed the victory of radical feminism and the eventual extinction of human-kind.

Feminism, now being taught in schools under the code name “empowerment”, has contaminated all women under thirty. They are no longer interested in family, nor children… all that matters is “career”. They are no longer fit for marriage.

Media, including animated and live action movies all teach the feminist message. There is no where that you can look on television or the big screen and not see men denigrated and women elevated.

This reinforces my misanthropic stance.

Posted in Social morality | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Phony… April 9, 2017

How can a human being keep from being labeled “phony”?

In many ways this may be an impossible task. Anyone can label someone else “phony” arbitrarily, without cause. Everyone erects false façade to everyone else. Such action as erecting this false front can be considered a form of defense.

Definition of phony:

phonier

phoniest

  1. :  not genuine or real: such asa
    (1) :  intended to deceive or mislead
    (2) :  intended to defraud :
    counterfeitb :  arousing suspicion :  probably dishonest.

 

Why do people raise false fronts?
This is done most often because people are timid and do not wish to alienate others. They may think who they really are, what they really are, could offend others.

I have lived over 60 years. I have never met anyone that was easy to read, without defensive façades. There was always something later found that was not sequitur with my initial subjective analysis.

Why has this become important?
Perhaps my perception of this phoniness is a result of seeking others who would be compatible for discussions. I do not seek to control what others think or do, but seek those that are already mostly complete in alignment with my position. Everyone needs a group that will help defend their position. This does not preclude new ideas, nor does it indicate closed mindedness. It does denote a solidified position. New ideas are sought that extend and strengthen that position. The position itself arrived at over many years experience in the world. There may be conflict… others may not agree with ideas within that position… they may even pronounce the position one of closed minded nature. Their pronouncements do not reflect reality. Everyone has a position for the purposes of stability.

Part of the defense of a stable position can include the façade.

The question then as to how one can keep from being labeled “phony” becomes irrelevant. It no longer matters what others think of you.

A solidified position need not be totally inflexible. It must change if new facts that make the position untenable are found.

Posted in Personal | Tagged | Leave a comment

Misunderstandings… April 2, 2017

Human language developed to describe the world and existence. A crude instrument, language fails to convey thought to its fullest accuracy. Conflicts and war have resulted from misunderstandings.

Whether it is due to the inability to match thought to word or the lack of words available to fit the thought, misunderstandings seem inevitable. In the interests of peace and good will, this fact should be the first fact fully illustrated… that is, the inadequacy of language.

Whereas the difficulty is apparent among speakers of the same language, the problem becomes more acute when more than one language is involved. Translated words exacerbate the difficulty of relaying thought in words. The chance of error increases. This also should be made clear before any negotiations, especially those that may lead to violent conflict if not successful.

Subterfuge in words is often used to obfuscate meaning. Even what is not said can have meaning unperceived by the recipient. For example the sentence:
”The Bible has nothing to do with my views on gays and transgenders.”
In reality this statement fails to actually disseminate what the individuals views are. All it does is designate the Bible irrelevant in the formation of the views. Sometimes it can be used to deter conflict by not making your real views clear and letting the audience make assumptions.

Assumptions, of course, are yet another source of conflict arising from inadequacies of language.  

Posted in Reason, Social morality | Tagged | Leave a comment

The Id Cannot Be Repressed; The Id Must Be Controlled………… April 2, 2017

The Id is the primitive part of your psyche present from birth. It is the part that demands instant gratification. It is the part that made you cry when you were a baby until your needs were satisfied. Though indispensable it needs to be controlled. That is the job of your Superego.

Your Superego manifests your morality, your goals, your intellectual desires. It holds reign over both Id and Ego… it must hold reign over your Id and Ego lest you become incompatible with a civilized society.

Part of the problem with society today is that people are not in control of their Id, it controls them. The Id does not obey or recognize morality. It is the base element of your psyche. To allow it to rule is the same as allowing an adult with the intellect and desires of a toddler to rule. This truly would be the “Everything goes” individual feared by civilization.

The challenge is to channel the energies of the Id into constructive purpose. It must be harnessed, regulated, guided, and not be permitted to run freely. The relaxation of control even for a moment could result in damaging and destructive behavior like greed, apathy, and violence.

Posted in Morality, Reason | Tagged | Leave a comment

Greed Rules… March 26, 2017

Humans are said to possess among the many neurons of their brains some particular cells called mirror neurons. Some seem to possess more of these neurons than others, or, alternatively habitually over-ride them. The reason I state this is that the majority of humans exhibit behavior that can only be described as greed and selfishness. Superficially it seems as if they failed to learn how to share, or at least, to share equally.

Human society suffers terribly because the majority of people are concerned only and solely with their own welfare, and to a lesser extent, the welfare of their own kin. This is why there is the rich and the poor. The rich struggle to accumulate an inordinate amount of wealth. The levels of this wealth are many orders in excess of what the individual can be said to have earned… or deserves. Instead of investing this wealth to help those less fortunate they accumulate this wealth in vast reserves. Most times they use various methods of transferring this wealth out of their native country in order to avoid having it fairly taxed.

Although the capitalist model may allow for vast and fast advancement, the lowest in society do not gain from it. Those at the top are the beneficiaries. Capitalism feeds the innate nature of human beings: greed.

Socialism would be a better model if coupled with capitalism. Yet there are those who are determined to keep everything they accumulate and the rest of humanity is left in ruin. The time of pure capitalism must come to an end… whereas the United States has had a mixture for sometime, the rich are endeavoring now to dismantle this model and return to pure capitalism: everybody for themselves.

This turnabout will result in more wealth at the top and more poverty at the bottom. The only way the top will be able to survive is by enabling vast military opposition to the unrest of the poor. The police and other means will be used to quash the protests of the poor.

There will be revolution.

Posted in Political comment, Social morality | Tagged | Leave a comment

Time Travel, You Say? … March 19, 2017

Why I Cannot Accept Time Travel

spheres of timeDoes time flow like a river or expand like a growing sphere? In either case there is mass moving down the river, or expanding infinitely. river of time

 

 

Is there differentiation between layers of mass? Each layer following the one before, going in the same direction? Are there other directions?

Conservation of mass and energy would indicate each mass is finite as it moves through time. Why would there be copies of each layer of mass moving down the river? Are they possibly alternates following one another, each progressing down the river?

Even if you do go back in time you would end up in another mass. Not only has earth moved on in space but in time as well. What if the segment following is empty? Would you end up no where? What could be the measurement between each segment? Millisecond or smaller?

It is said they proved that time travel is possible. They have not proven that it is bidirectional. My mental processes are unable to process this data.

Posted in Reason, Science and science fiction | Tagged | Leave a comment

Compromise Is Impossible… March 15, 2017

I have written about the human tendency to form groups or camps in the past. Each group has its own set of ideologies… even those that claim to be ruled by reason and logic.

This is why there is so much turmoil in a society that is “multicultural”.

Compromise is impossible. There is no solution to any issue that will please all groups. Even in those groups each individual member may have objections to solutions that are presented. In short… each group insists that the issue conforms totally to their way of thinking.

This is why humanity is like a ship that is dead in the water. This will never change.

Even in groups that are nearly homogeneous, there is dissension.

Posted in Reason, Social morality | Tagged | Leave a comment