Add a new blog post to the above list:

https://blog.jim.com/culture/women-like-sexual-coercion/

And an older one:

https://blog.jim.com/culture/role-models/

---

Let’s remember to keep some perspective:

---

Do you deny the research on how their biology causes them to want to be treated? Would you advise fully emancipating a child and treating them the same as tribal elders or businessmen colleagues? So then why would you elevate females on such a pedestal which their hindbrain does not want. Is it because you erroneously think you can overcome nature and change the nature of female to not be ruled by her hindbrain. The links above explain that emasculated men who put women on pedestals are not respected by the subconscious, hindbrain which rules women.

Feminism is a manifestation of female hypergamy and irrationality, and emasculated “men” who feed that defect-defect dysfunction:

---

I had already explained from an entropic resilience of the species perspective (and the fundamental law of physics which presumes entropy inexorably trends to maximum) that it is not superrational to deny the necessity of hypergamy.

The stereotypical idealist thinks nature is savage and beneath what they myopically perceive to be the superior ideals of the intellectual and/or righteous.

I do not feel kinship with these idealistic, emasculated “men” who (as explained above) feed the hindbrain of women by putting them on pedestals which enables the multi-generational slide into leftist economic failure, hedonism totalitarianism, and negative birthrate— creates a clusterfucked society.

Society is sliding into hedonism because of idealists who stopped enforcing the necessary chastity on kids and females, placing them on pedestals encouraging their multi-generational slide into leftism. But nature needs these irrational idealists, so as to enable the defect-defect R stategy clusterfucked societies in order to diversify the gene pool. Every cycle has a purpose in nature.

Idealistic irrationality (obfuscated as claimed superrationality) is necessary.

There’s no universal truth. We pick a role. And every role is part of nature. And no, we’re never above nature nor above being an “animal” (as if a thinking creature is not an animal, lol)

Idealism is so dangerous like any good drug, because since they’re drugged on the “happy chemicals” of their idealistic delusion (lie), in exchange for swallowing the intoxicating blue pill, they’ll go to any extreme irrationality to maintain the delusion, such as junk science, forced sterilization, war, etc.. They drink their own Koolaid and truly believe their irrational “we’re making a better world”. News flash: the universe is constructed on ongoing randomness. If not, nothing would nor could exist other than as a static, prescripted recording. We’re not making a damn thing. The entropic reality is we’re finding ways to randomly destroy everything created— IOW by increasing the entropic diversity diversity of knowledge thus maximizing the distribution of uncertainty.

Follows an example of the irrationality of the stereotypical idealistic, self-proclaimed intellectual, righteous zealot:


The above is a baseless tautology because it claims that superrationality or universal truth must exist, as it declares (without proof) that all life must be coherent.

IOW, Bruce Charlton presumes the universe must be totally ordered and tells us to take this as an fundamental truth. Yet we know there can’t be any universal truth because if there were then spacetime could be totally ordered, the past and future light cones of relativity would collapse into undifferentiated and thus there would be no concept of unknown future. Thus we would not exist, except as some prescripted recording from which any point in spacetime can be replayed at will (where such replaying is part of the recording which is of course insane because it means the recording can’t exist because it must be unbounded thus can’t be enumerated in a deterministic, prerecorded spacetime!). If there is a God who has full knowledge of our universe, has preordained what and when can be replayed in our spacetime, then that God must necessarily be a partial order (by elevating the same argument as the prior sentence to God’s existence) and thus only one of an unbounded numbers of such Gods, but then we’re back to the same conclusion as my prior sentence. Theologians might retort that God’s existence is beyond our comprehension; and thus why we prefer to retain a belief in a God as faith, not rationality.

In short, total orders can’t exist because they must contain themselves, but then they would not be total.

So tell me who is insane?! Certainly Bruce Charlton!

Yet it seems to bother us because we can’t fathom the meaning and context of our existence given reality is unbounded such that entropy trends inexorably to maximum.

Charlton fails because he attempts to use logic and rationality to argue for a faith. Faith is by definition a phenomenon that can’t have a rational basis.

Human nature (as it currently is structured) apparently however does need (some of) us to have idealistic faith as it is part of the cycle of our evolution as I alluded to earlier. In between Nihilism and overt/zealous faith, there’s various other philosophies such as conquest, cults, jihad, and/or preference for community good will and cooperation via some shared values or modicum of idealism.

My rejection of Nihilism is based on the irrelevance of an existence void of human (or at least other reasonably intelligent animal) interaction. In additional to the need for humans to cooperate/network for survival, competition, and resilience of the species, thinking animals have emotions which drive them to seek a connection to humanity (and other species). It’s quite logical simply from the standpoint that the relevance of our existence is quite stark (and lonely) without other humans.