—“Curt I do agree you and Daniel Schmachtenberger are coming at things from different angles but I think if you two sat down for a weekend you would see existential gains for both of your goals, he’s the yin to your yang and an absolute genius. Also the number of unwitting Red Pills Weinstein drops is an added bonus.”— George from Youtube.
I don’t disagree with Daniel Schmachtenberger on much of anything. Just the opposite. He uses more of the inspirational new age west coast language, and I use prosecutorial scientific economic and legal language. He’s a great example of the via positiva just as I am of the via-negativa.
I re-recorded podcast #0002 and removed his name from it, and added more on math and physics.
But my criticism in the podcast stands. Every (((leftist))) intellectual whines and complains and undermines because they are cognitively female, and demonstrate female cognition with undermining seeking, GSRRM, Magical Thinking, lack of creativity in solution provision, demand for consensus building and monopoly authority as a substitute for system-thinking and incentives, and demanding ‘real men do something’, as if they would do a better job when in charge when exactly the opposite happens when they are in charge – which is why the Jewish and Muslim leaderships always fail to crate stable high trust societies no matter what they do, and produce decline and collapse wherever they go.
If you can’t write a body of policy changes, a project plan, contracts, shareholder agreements, a body of law, and a constitution to make a society function you’re just talking smack – because that is the hierarchy of algorithms that produce not a simulation but the operating system of the real world that we live in.
You must program a computer via positiva, because it cannot imagine, or predict, and so cannot choose without those instructions. But you must program humanity via negativa because it can imagine, predict, and choose – which is why humans can adapt and computers can’t.
And while both a computer and a human are amoral, the computer cannot choose between morality and immorality. The human can. And the purpose of our manners, ethics morals, norms, traditions, institutions and laws is to rase the cost of the immoral choices so that only moral choices remain.
But we all test that limit at every opportunity.