More Bullshit . . .

March 15, 2014 at 10:17 am (Uncategorized)

. . . on A Cold Eye (where I describe myself frankly as a bullshitter). I hesitated to post the link here, thinking, “What’s the point? All I’m doing is inviting realpc to come over here and tell me I’m wrong about everything.”


  1. realpc920 said,


    Sometimes you write things that I very strongly disagree with. I am definitely not trying to give you a hard time. But one of my central missions in life has been to question certain aspects of our culture’s mythology. It has turned out that the “progressive” and “liberal” mythologies have seemed the most wrong and dangerous, from my perspective.

    My perspective is holistic philosophy. It would be hard to explain briefly how that contrasts with our culture’s central philosophies. For now I can just say that the contrasts are extreme, and in my opinion they are extremely important.

    I visited your original blog because you were questioning some progressive/liberal ideas, and I strongly agreed with most of what you said. You didn’t seem to be resonating with any mythology, and you seemed to be getting information from various perspectives.

    But there have been other times when it seemed to me that you were resonating.

    Of course we all resonate with something, all the time. But if we try hard we can be skeptical. We are all brainwashed, but we can at least question our own brainwashing.

    I saw resonance with certain progressive ideas in your post about nuclear weapons. Of course I could have interpreted it wrong. But if I did, you could have explained that you didn’t mean what I thought you meant.

    So for all I know, your thinking has been influenced by some progressive ideas that I find very wrong. So I expressed my opinion, instead of trying to be agreeable and get everyone to like me. That’s what people do when they are having intellectual debates, and no it doesn’t always make everyone feel good. But I never ever intend to insult anyone. If I say you are wrong, I just mean what you said is wrong, in my opinion.

    I know that I do get triggered by certain ideas that we all have been soaking up since childhood. Some are considered “liberal” and others are considered “conservative,” and others are just “other.”

    I originally started questioning those ideas, a long time ago, when I was trying to figure out my own spiritual beliefs.

    But more recently, I am questioning, even fighting, those ideas because I see them destroying the world.

    I think you agree with me that the world is in danger. Of course we can’t really do anything about it. But the “progressive” ideas, that we are smarter than nature and can do anything we want with it — those ideas (which are so widely accepted in our culture most people aren’t even conscious of them) — those ideas are killing us now. In my opinion.

  2. amba12 said,

    That’s a great, thoughtful response. Thank you.

    I don’t think we are smarter than nature. It’s not biology itself I want to escape, it’s so many scientists’ smart-ass, dumb idea of it.

  3. mockturtle said,


  4. kngfish said,

    I’ve never cared about reductionism; it explains nothing, really. The consequences of things may mean more than any mechanical explanations!

    Look, when you walk into a casino you know who’s going to win? The House. They know it, you know it, hell, if you DON’T know that, well…here’s an invitation to my casino, which I’ll have up and running before you get there! But for all the reductionism about the financial reality of gambling, people still go! Are they self-deceived? If they are, what is the reductionist explanation for that?

    You go, you get amazingly cheap surf-‘n’-turf, Cirque de Soliel does amazing things in front of your eyes, pretty girls bring me liquor (for free!) when I’m at the blackjack table, maybe a free room or a trip to a spa if you use enough of those “chips”….fantastic!

    In a world where clocks are the true tyrants of our lives, they purposely built a place where no clocks can be seen…is that heaven, or just The Sands?

    I had a friend for whom Marxism was beyond religion. EVERYTHING had to be reduced to some economic calculation, and once you got there, wham, Evil Capitalism Must Be Defeated! He couldn’t even accept the idea that anything could have a non-economic motivation. It was fear, really, on his part. Once you allow ONE such thing, there’ll be more, and as soon as you can say ‘Don Draper’ you’re a Minion of Evil Bankers.

    Maybe ‘ghost in the machine’ type thinking is necessary to allow us to think up reductionism!

    Reductionists think all jokes are just punch lines, but comedians know better.

  5. mockturtle said,

    IMO, the study of cytology pretty well blows apart the reductionist position.

  6. karen said,

    I’m so skeptical about ~research~ and the results found- that it skews my impression of science. Like- economics- it simply depends on how one balances the columns. Or, what company one works for. The wonder of discovery purely for that sake seems to have disappeared- w/the Dodo.

    As farmers, we work w/nutritionists, geneticists(actually, salesmen that peddle genetics)(semen) that will tell you anything to make a sale. Soil scientists tell you what’s needed to make a more fertile land- which seeds to plant in said soil and what equipment most efficient to harvest said crop from said soil. Being organic, we get info on the benefits of grazing and using no artificial fertilizers or chemicals… i happen to agree w/a lot of that because i don’t necessarily trust artificial or chemical. And, don’t get me started on Genomics!

    Something has been lost, IMhumbleO. Like, journalism. Nothing is weighed w/out someone somewhere slyly pressing a thumb to the scale. Always in their favor.


  7. karen said,

    … and, after looking up the definition of ~cytology~ :0)…

    = i think i would have really like to have studied that. I wonder if it goes hand and hand w/organic chemistry- which i also missed to boat on. Maybe- when Spring comes and i feel up to it- i’ll find a book somewhere and learn something.

  8. realpc920 said,

    kngfish, I don’t think mathematics and reductionism are the same thing, at all. Reductionism, to me, means focusing in on a part of something and ignoring the larger context. It’s ok sometimes, but you have to eventually consider the context.

    I don’t agree with your example of casinos or Marxism. The mathematical truth that casinos always win is not reductionist, it is a simple fact. And Marxism is an incorrect philosophy because it’s wrong, not because it tries to reduce everything to economics.

    It’s hard for me to explain exactly what holistic philosophy is, and how it contrasts with our culture. One important contrast is that holistic philosophy says nature is alive and conscious, while our mainstream science says the opposite.

  9. realpc920 said,

    Karen, I think you are saying it’s hard to know who to trust, and I think you are right. I don’t think we can trust our mainstream science anymore, or even if we ever could. But we definitely can’t now. It is especially bad in agriculture, as I’m sure you know. They are very reckless with genetic engineering, and it’s all because they feel they are much smarter than nature. That is the tragedy of our civilization, its contempt for nature.

  10. mockturtle said,

    Nowadays, at least here in the US, it’s all about $$$. One need only look at pharmaceutical companies to see where the emphasis in research lies. And the FDA is a joke.

  11. mockturtle said,

    OTOH, I love what has been accomplished in DNA research. Especially as it pertains to convicting perps [and eliminating non-perps].

  12. Icepick said,

    Casinos don’t always win. Over enough bets the casino can expect to come out ahead a certain percentage of the time. The more bets that are made, the greater the likelihood that the casino comes out ahead. (Not counting any vig, that is.)

    And THAT is why people gamble, for the thrill that comes with being a winner occasionally, and especially for that feeling of expectancy before the little ball falls into its slot on the roulette wheel.

    Like the man said, “The next best thing to gambling and winning is gambling and losing.”

  13. realpc920 said,

    Yes I agree the FDA is a joke. But I expect things to be all about money. I don’t expect people to do things just because they want to be nice. Except maybe once in a while, or if they happen to be rich or retired, and looking for something nice to do.

    Taking for granted that every human society will be all about money, I think our real problems come from something else. Contempt for nature is a big part of it, I think. If we didn’t have contempt for nature (and by “we” I mean our society in general), then .. then what? I am not sure.

    Supposedly the Native Americans had respect for nature. But I have also heard that they killed off many species of game animals. Even with simple spears or bows and arrows, humans are superior hunters, and therefore destructive of the balance of nature.

    Long before we had modern science, our species was over-reproducing and destroying forests.

    So why did Nature, with its infinite wisdom, create a species that would be so destructive of eco-systems?

    Well I guess I have a theory about that. On the dimensional level we inhabit, evolution proceeds from simpler to more complex (on a higher level, time and evolution would be nothing like what we have here).

    We live in a realm of striving. Look at trees — they are constantly growing and reaching for sunlight, they are a picture of striving.

    And from the moment we are born, we are striving for something or other.

    This constant evolution, learning and striving works according to the principle of failure. What I mean is, every living thing is always reaching for something, and changing its strategy whenever it fails. That is how learning and evolution works — responding to failure.

    In our concepts of heaven or nirvana, there is no striving and everything is static, and perfect.

    But here in our world, there is failure after failure after failure. Without failure, or error, there would be no striving. The reason we are here, I think, is to strive.

    So, in conclusion, every species, every civilization, must evolve itself into hell eventually. No individual lasts forever, and no species or civilization lasts forever. There are many successes and failures, but ultimately failure wins. And then other individuals, species, civilizations, get their chance to strive.

    So if our culture could learn to respect, and even worship, nature, would it make a difference? I would like to see that happen, even if it couldn’t save us. I would like people to respect nature, and to know it is infinitely smarter than we are, just because to me that is the truth. What our mainstream science believes now is an ugly lie.

    Truth is better than lies, even if we get destroyed anyway.

    And I believe the physical world is only a tiny fraction of what exists anyway. I think all of us will survive even after our civilization has destroyed our planet.

    Is destruction a terrible thing, or just part of the normal cycles of striving and dying? In Hinduism, destruction is considered perfectly ok and necessary, and there is a destroyer god.

  14. realpc920 said,

    Casinos win overall, but of course individuals can win sometimes. If people really understood the odds, they might not gamble though. I don’t see any fun in gambling at casinos, or buying lottery tickets, knowing the terrible odds.

    Gambling makes sense when the odds are reasonable, and if skill or knowledge gives you an advantage.

    One day when the lottery prize had become gigantic, I overheard someone talking about what she would do with all that money. This person was obviously not a math genius.

  15. realpc920 said,

    “OTOH, I love what has been accomplished in DNA research. Especially as it pertains to convicting perps [and eliminating non-perps].”

    We are all thrilled about certain things our civilization has accomplished. If it were all bad and no good, then it would not even exist.

    Technology has given us a lot of fun things. We are so entranced, we may not notice that every fun thing has its unhappy side effects.

    Even someone like me, the ultimate technology hater, has some use for it. I actually fell in love with computers in the 1990s and have worked as a computer programmer ever since.

    I still passionately despise smart phones and maybe I always will. But I love youtube.

    The internet is so weird and crazy, overall, but in the past my only access to information was libraries. Is it better to be overwhelmed by tons of unreliable information, or to be restricted and limited to what someone decided was worth putting in the library? Better to be overwhelmed, I think.

    But it doesn’t matter if we approve of technology or not, it is here.

  16. karen said,

    Someone’s gotta win.
    It could be me.
    If i ever played the game.

  17. karen said,

    Real- what’s to actually trust?

    We rely on so much new technology- or information anywhere and we believe what we are told and what we have learned, only to have opinions change or goalposts moved. What’s old is new again, that kind of stuff. With money involved.

    Like– Pluto is no longer a Planet.
    Or, Mercury is actually 9miles smaller in diameter than previously thought because– it shrunk, somehow. So, i wonder if it’s doomed to dwarfism status now– as opposed to enjoying actual Planethood for-like- ever. Who- REALLY- knows?

    Eh- i got a tetanus shot today(w/a hidden Whooping cough(pertussis)vaccine hidden inside. My rm hurts and i just milked the herd w/it. I am whining:0).

  18. realpc920 said,


    We can’t possibly find out everything for ourselves, so we have to trust information from other people. We have to decide who to trust and what we think makes sense.

    Science is not an infallible source of truth. It’s just humanity’s best guesses at any moment.

  19. karen said,

    Which they sell as time-tested and approved fact.
    Which influences our choices of what to buy or where.

    … more bullshit. :0/

  20. realpc920 said,

    We should know not to blindly trust people who are trying to sell us things.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: