New Discourses Bullets, Ep. 87
We all know we have to tell the truth, especially in these trying times. Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn told us that a single man telling the truth could bring down a regime. Well, how do you tell the truth against those odds? You need a lot more than knowing you should tell the truth. You have to love the truth (and fear it!) with all your heart, all your mind, all your soul, and all your strength, and then you need to tell your neighbor the truth as you would expect him to tell the truth to you. In this episode of New Discourses Bullets, host James Lindsay breaks down one of the most important principles against tyranny: loving the truth. Join him to get based.
Additional episodes of New Discourses Bullets can be found here.
Subscribe to New Discourses Bullets on SoundCloud, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music, Pandora, YouTube, Rumble, Odysee or by RSS.
6 comments
TRUTH is deceptive on a perceptual and perpetual manner.
Take this :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCSdWZkfM08&lc=UgwvP7ZKum2EZSMOkkt4AaABAg.A1dF9G5xATlA1dctmWR83Y
Most rare and probably never seen before is the way Dawkins gently tip toes around craig hamilton parker , volunteering to uphold the psychics integrity himself even = only good words for him.
Isn’t that cute – interesting – warm – and delicious ? Perhaps it is too beguiling in fact & the science method detests oddities that play chicken with occams razor like this. Such odd / strange / anomalous results rarely do accord to empirical tests & i’d fancy this one is the same.
What might they have in common ?
What organisation forbids its members to grass each other up ?
What org will not let one house of it split on another house of it ?
Above all – what club insists its members believe in a Supreme Being or that cannot join it ?
I must stress we have zero fact by making the sort of inquiries i have now & also that its Dawkins himself that strongly advocates we follow SCIENCE. That begins with a search for an axiom, i have done that – i’m not sure a hypothesis can result -but thats not the point. There is a sociological anomaly going on that isn’t present in any other engagement Mr Dawkins has with other supernaturalists.
We didn’t see their handshake style obviously, so i’m not sure what evidence can result if any. But them once totalitarianism habitually extracts a post truth’s ‘evidence’ by implication and in advance, is effectively not available in any case. For it is impossible to derive a central ‘TRUTH’ from an algorithmic hegelist structure thats abstracted most of the truth before even proceeding to inflict the proletariat the social construct involved.
I’d be suspicious of anyone who pulls up on their heels so illogically like a grand national wonder horse not taking a low fence. Dawkins was as complementary to Parker and as deeply gushingly respectful to him as his tongue appears to be u the archbishop of canterbury’s .
Suspicious that he simply could not bash this man for other reasons is reasonable.By default so is the difficult matter of the supreme being that would need to be worshipped. Not even an Axiom/could be wrong. That most STRANGE hard to explain phenomena is present is not questionable – it IS.
I prefer Occam – not this weasel level tonguetastic drivel by Dawkins.
When done James on a freshness of spring type plaintive way to approach such a topic. I recall recently someone saying they found it peculiar how you speak communicate to people as if a jointly atheist / believer. That just looks like positive accommodation knowing the basic facts of who comes to read for me. I’m not a believer either, but it certainly is sensible to show respect – after all it would be like cutting out men or women, there being so many believers around.
AN ASSUMPTION = A LIE = THE TRUTH.
A rather mangled dishevelled vector based ‘truth’ concerning what happens to any chance of ‘fact’ that when a sufficient number of violations to logic are present. A not very hygienic or nourishing type of ‘truth’ available. This type of ‘truth’ just pertains to way enough overarching structural deceit is present for it all to be lies ( and thats the low quality of truth possible ). All new atheists et al are ’spunk in their hair’ persons. This is when its obvious the LTR is close to finish as ones partner ( be you female to male ) has constantly ben unfaithful secretly and its obvious. At the final showdown 3.00am / just come back etc they haven’t done it still / the denial inertia persists. But there is clearly spunk in their hair.
= New Atheism.
Given that logically theres no bone fide content possible within a book thats using metaphysics ( while claims its science) such content is not even hypothetical & its thousands of words null & void on account of being there to support pseudoscience via metaphysics. Grayling could point out he said ‘Metaphysical Debate’ and that is true. The tricky old philosopher has clear intent to discuss his remote viewing on the ‘contents’ as is married to that public statement. Since Grayling is also married to the denial the universe contains supernatural agencies – fine. The way he claims to know that by remote viewing simply smacks him back in the face. The fact is there are too many dogmatic statements combined in 1 sentence for Grayling to get away with this actually being ‘A Debate’. The words are below and its clear there are few options. 1 – Grayling saying he has special powers. 2 Grayling advocating some kind of philosopher class or totalitarian statism or post structural bone yarding of LOGIC.
Take the first of Graylings three ’Natural Debates’ for instance :
(a) a metaphysical debate about what the universe contains; denying that it contains supernatural agencies of any kind makes him an atheist;
Grayling defines atheism as a movement of persons with a remote viewing abilities such as alleged with the MK Ultra stories doesn’t he?. How would it be possible to implement the human mind into a exercise that reports the contents of the universe unless this specifically means remote viewing it ?
. He may have confirmed new atheism is a metaphysical belief system rather than scientific. Actually on reading his books Grayling seems incapable of saying much about anything before a giant gaff happens suggesting some form of imposter factor is taking place around him. I have read him extensively enough to know the man hasn’t a clue what he is talking about. On top of the strange cack handed habit of confusing of metaphysics with empirical science. he also states incorrectly that its a natural debate when actually anything derived from metaphysics is synthetic.
If this Grayling ‘ being a mad person’ or simply ‘ I Claudineus’ at large ? I don’t know. I cannot ‘know’ what the F is going on when a philosopher dripping in medals cannot understand the most basic positions! We have a man showing he cannot differentiate between metaphysics and science telling us he can use mind power to make inquiries related to the entire universe – and the one after that and that and that if there are more.
What is anyone to make of it unless its similar to the recent incident at Harvard ? – it is difficult understand a supposed grand master of philosophy who is inept. It is natural of humans to do metaphysics / metaphysics themselves are Synthetic – why does the Great Grayling falter so on these basics ? And go ahead a do the perfectly acceptable activity of Metaphysics – nothing wrong with it. it just depend if those persons then claim fallaciously that doing it is the ‘scientific method’ such as Grayling for new atheism has – THAT is a problem. How can Metaphysics be ‘natural’ in the empirical evidence sense when all it can do is provide novel speculative & non falsifiable ideas ? Educated guesses in other words – to even to proceed to the state go a ‘hypothesis’ would require a minimum of 1 falsifiable axiom. The axioms in this case all exist against Graylings claims I.\E it is axiomatic that ‘metaphysics’ is a synthetic ideological cognitive construct PERIOD. This not to be confused with doing it’ being Natural. A Statism level philosopher ( WEF / EU) who is this troubled by detail as tiny as this ? Theres endless permanent lapses of reason in house @ new atheism even though their ad nauseam renditions against others slam THIER metaphysics forcefully enough.
By illustrating new atheism models with this type is stated structuralism the totalitarian intent is clear. They seem to considered it their privilege as a ‘philosopher class’ to consider psychic power as scientific process THEY as an elite class are allowed to use. By doing so they bypass the same obstacles as people who claim to get messages from the DEAD. The ‘TRUTH’ once people behave like that is impossible. Dawkins et al may act like butter would not melt and fake objections to WOKE & the various claims that human sex is not biological / all whites a racist and so on & on. New Atheism is actively using the very abuse of logic that enables WOKE and seem to have no plans to stop. They know they are violation empirical science & its as if they are happy to ‘tough it along’ like something impels them to indulge in the rest of the smashing up of science / only to patch things up with those silly pantomimes where they condemn that behaviour.
Their organisation of logic suggests they are designing WOKE. But then again new atheism simply was the first wave of modern WOKE we experienced. They won an audience, and their models used against religious people were though crime based structures. Just like the ones now plaguing what can be considered post structuralist EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY WOKE concerning gender. We are being told a whole new meaning of biology has been discovered. On top of this we can see it spreads in a sociological memetic fashion i.e jumping from woke to woke.
Oh my goodness what a coincidence.
Thanks again James – nice to hear you reach out with a positive variety of – CENSORED – and ( CENSORED!!). And sincere manner of speaking about CENSORED and ( CENSORED!!). Its only a shame i cannot name – CENSORED’ & ( CENSORED!!) since they are ( not banned ) but not welcome here.
Here are their links :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empowerment
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enrichment
It would be interesting to know who precisely ( CENSORED!!) A.C to show out with such explicit balls ‘a bouncin’ naturism ( as it were ) as the most disturbing totalitarian philosopher in the valley ? IF THE WAS ONE & perhaps is or isn’t/
My best guess would be there isn’t such a mentor of explicit, & that they’d be horrified to see the his lack of grasp unknowing coming out via common or garden incompetence as it is – Below :
Among his contributions to the discussion about religion in contemporary society he argues that there are three separable, though naturally connected debates:
(a) a metaphysical debate about what the universe contains; denying that it contains supernatural agencies of any kind makes him an atheist;
(b) a debate about the basis of ethics; taking the world to be a natural realm of natural law requires that humanity thinks for itself about the right and the good, based on our best understanding of human nature and the human condition; this makes him a humanist;
(c) a debate about the place of religious movements and organisations in the public domain; as a secularist Grayling argues that these should see themselves as civil society organisations on a par with trade unions and other NGOs, with every right to exist and to have their say, but no greater right than any other self-constituted, self-selected interest group.
Cherio.
I speak the truth a lot. People ignore me. People do not want the truth because the truth is boring and doesn’t flatter any particular set of beliefs. After a while doing this becomes exhausting and embarrassing and depressing. If someone actually responded to me and gave me something to defend, that would be one thing. But they don’t. They ignore me. My new approach is that if people want to know the truth they can ask me. Otherwise let them drown, I don’t care anymore.
I am at the same stage: Let them drown because they want to drown. F-ck them all. I left Truth behind long ago and focused for a while on Reality. But now it’s clear to me that “people” have rejected both. Of their own free will, Western people have chosen Drowning. I’m old so my next frontier is neither Truth nor Reality: it’s Survival.
”becomes exhausting and embarrassing and depressing”
It indeed is hard going on the emotional senses. Particularly in the way we can see there are many globally uniform / unified NWO i.e joint strategy polices being carried out on a world government collaboration basis. Well if the psychological terror at least two continents have tagged teamed up for are to go by. More locally also agreed – the signs are that people are equally going potty are abundant. From my observations the madness of the crowd is more psychotic than ted bundy. And maybe thats just it really, as one of the central human weaknesses seems to be when social organisation is not organised by the binding force of the need to follow social rules to earn money. In the job context we’ll mostly act ‘sane’ & we’ll largely do that whenever theres an org with enough ‘bond’ to encourage us to be sensible. Like meets at a history society, or school reunion, or other structured activity. But in private people in general are finding it harder and harder to play fair when alone. When not alone ( during own not monetised time ) but in a tribe of say neighbourhood watchers – people have gone absolutely fucking mad. That kind of loosely political / do gooder / on the peripherals of personal FEAR type local organisation tends to need a joined up straight jacket for 100 persons & a funny farm van lengthy enough to match. Local preservation societies all tend to have good intentions, but they are being plagued by ingresses of people who seem respectable / fringe level psychopaths / where theres nothing wrong with their brain until their challenged I.Q. merges with other Challenged I.Q. resultant in a psychotic group consciousness. From that position it can seem more complex by the way 1 person from any madness crown can seem to act alone. However whilst anyone is in a gang, they are group psychotic & being ‘alone’ is never alone to someone that attached to gang mentality. The thing i will say is that ‘thick’ thus open to suggestion white people have become a type of funky rap cookie crew who ””’don’t need no other skin”” – they just don’t know it either. This madness of the crowd syndrome tends to affect the better dressed and lowly/locally politically connected of the working class. These are the ones who are in charge of localised and clubs / & theres a splattering of low middles wallowing away with them who dad almost went to the moon once, but his bollocks could not pass the centrifuge tests.
This rules James Lindsay out, so much so he is what he is today ?
On the whole though theres two main groups.
An 80% who never were & never will be interested in any kind of topic outside the ordinary. These people never discuss their feelings, and they are not open to hear the feelings of others. I know thats a staggering figure but it holds up. I have no idea why naturally selection saw to it that most persons are dispassionate unless its for war. ‘Wars’ do tend to bear that out. Not so sure how long this still current demographic has got to run. WOKE for instance would not only spill their entire emotional to avoid conscription, they’ll deposit a hot ploppers all over the billet screaming trans rights baby. So are the 80% ‘Disinterest Teds’ ( if you’ll pardon ) a dying breed ? I must admit as a person who need to communicate myself, i’ve long ben intrigued by what these taciturn types ‘mean’ from the perspective of nature & nurture. Since we are dealing with nature we cannot fight it that is certainly true. Thus its not impossible for us to see that if certain people won’t speak its really as they are designed not to – it is not You. Some might not agree that this so called 80 per cent of disinterest heads is right / its not big deal if wrong tbh. I think it is about right in a context, not all context. None of us what to know unless we have a reason to know things & communication rarely lasts if theres none.
Even if the natural disinterest level suggested was so. The remaining / who love to hear their own voice ( it might be ) – or there love of coms could be sincere. They still might not talk much unless the specific top suits them. Some ( like myself ) enjoy communication far more if the subjects which occur are entirely unpredictable / random in appearance. Some people must have planned topics. Possibly these informal social exchange protocols are increasing in formality due to the psychological pressure coming in from these abusive political atmosphere. In short its getting harder to ‘Talk’ because the totalitarians might ave coded a rationing process into the WOKE mind fuck in order to inject the kind of subliminal level rules that take hold of group madness – which do not appear to have affected you regardless that there seems to be a traumatic sense of loss concerning outcomes from this breakdown of society. For instance ( not to be confused with predicting breakdown ) – i would not even suggest that ‘survival’ is defined by avoiding nervous breakdown. I’d feel survival can have them included quite alright. I would feel those breakdowns need to be done alone, not within the breakdown the group conscious psychosis experiences. The worst thing these days is to crash and burn WITH a tribe of fucking nut cases trying to act all important on low mental agility. < For that – is the basinal alchemy design speciality formulated to control WOKE. The scholars of totalitariania designed their mind F to addict them to a level of 'POWER' that is meaningless. It is very counter intuitive this, as one normally expect only MONEY to give mad causation. That is correct but WOKE buy of on a social contract thats given them the right to BULLY others. This is why WOKE have all the low paid security jobs and are over dominant low management. They've accepted LOW pay only because the job includes a legally protected right to Bully. And the special magic ingredient is ?
Just observations of HIGH paid persons ( CAVIAR Woke Ala Decoy ) – who are clearly useless but are MAYOR or UNIVERSITY PRINCIPLE and mainly there to make COLD WOKE ALA GRUEL – work themselves to death insulting & bullying people for the STATE thinking they'll be where Claudine was soon.
Thus the odd few basket case plagiarists and other fakes get BIG TIME high paid employment just so millions of others look at them and dream on. 'Claudines' are collectively cheaper than an advertising agency basically. Moreover using a human for sole purpose of decoy could not be matched by a purely media bound campaign no matter how much was spent. Its feels VERY counter intuitive – but its right out of the Joseph Goebbels book of propaganda,
And its relentless out there too i.e the sociological / psychological warfare by this totalitarian miasma. White skin interrogation / white fragility – the list never ends it seems. Its purpose is to incite racial hated against white people. They've spun the excuse that its a forced self examination on the ground that white people would not discuss race buts thats lies too.
Its very stressful
Its hard to have a conversation as people have narrowed their interest
A lot of people feel a profound fear
The order 'white people must interrogate their racism' is nothing short of a direct token of genocidal intent.
Perhaps then it is very difficult to discuss such matter to 80% of person effectively since they haven't noticed what is going on / the other 19.5% as their interests have narrowed to to to either FEAR or the desire to join the band ( WOKE )
That means your interests narrow to eliminate them too.
It should not happen / but anyones chances of making contact with persons is unnaturally minimised. These are only suggestions, but i hope they might have made matters feel just a little less not suffocating.
I would say that you need to love honesty.
I watch a lot of kid’s shows when my girlfriend’s daughter comes over to visit. And almost all of the comic plot lines depend on a character telling a fib and then later being found out. It is a universal story line. But that’s honesty, not really “The Truth.”
The TRUTH is what actually is. Most people don’t have a clue what actually is so do not have any real opportunity to love the truth. I believe I have learned more about what actually is, and I do love that knowledge. Of course, it all starts with being honest.