- Registrado
- 24 de Jul, 2019
Something new.
Abstract:
I've been fighting with morons on Twitter. This is my solution.
In Plaintext
Abstract:
I've been fighting with morons on Twitter. This is my solution.
In Plaintext
Advancing Models of Interpretive Awareness
Alex Buckley
Central Organizer of New General Management
4/2/25
Dedicated to the Kiwi Farms
Today's problems are incredibly difficult. I have already made the way easier by providing sophisticated machinery. I wish to present a more advanced model.
They are Lying to You
The scientific-political paradigm is supported solely by faith in the ability to find objective fact in physical nature. This position is used as a cudgel, meeting political ends by philosophical means. This establishment, far from scientific investigation, serves as an employment opportunity and retirement home for “made guys”.
This is my purpose, to pull back the blind, to show my readers the error in outsider ways. I wish to expose this criminal organization, to make clear the fraudulent devaluing of their own currency and to bring to light the most common business practices performed by the members of “our thing”. This is the goal, to explore the present situation: I plan on extending the argument elsewhere.
But there is a question. How is this subversion being completed? It all stems from a claim to the nature of knowledge, that which is called physicalism. It may come by another name, perhaps materialist reductionism, Empiricism, or Scientism, but these signals all point to the same form.
Scientists use physicalism as a shorthand, a kind of cheap thinking, as a way to hand-wave away certain difficult or uncomfortable issues related to the epistemic status of knowledge. This ideology also provides a firm but false basis from which the educated may sneer down at the uneducated: a position of supposedly true knowledge as compared to the layman's unorganized system.
Laymen love the false assertion towards objectivity: it gives them carte blanche to political action. Any statistics or empirical report can be fabricated and presented as legitimate solely on the grounds of scientific truth. They enjoy the false sense of security that such faith provides. Because a correction on this point may damage the credibility of science and scientists, and because taking action and remediating the layman's understanding of truth would be a strenuous and unrewarding adventure, the problem never gets resolved and an omertà has developed around this taboo subject.
The problem is twofold: scientific establishments function as power structures that marginalize alternative ways of knowing and protect their own authority, while at the same time writing a blank check for anyone claiming the public title of scientific backing. This arrangement benefits both scientists in job security and status, and with lay people in certainty and political justification.
This is all rather obvious: political leverage being shrouded by an “objective” pursuit of knowledge. And, like I said, there’s not much that can be done about it from within their own systems given the establishment of political power and the size of their institutions.
A Solution
I am suggesting the notorious tool of “deconstruction”. We must “bust out” their business: there can be no negotiation. Individuals may be “flipped” but I would imagine this can happen only under great pressure. Instead, the members of this crime family should be ignored, and their valuables looted.
I am showing you that the monsters only exist in your own mind, and that those afraid of change have the most to lose.
Alex Buckley
Central Organizer of New General Management
4/2/25
Dedicated to the Kiwi Farms
Today's problems are incredibly difficult. I have already made the way easier by providing sophisticated machinery. I wish to present a more advanced model.
They are Lying to You
The scientific-political paradigm is supported solely by faith in the ability to find objective fact in physical nature. This position is used as a cudgel, meeting political ends by philosophical means. This establishment, far from scientific investigation, serves as an employment opportunity and retirement home for “made guys”.
This is my purpose, to pull back the blind, to show my readers the error in outsider ways. I wish to expose this criminal organization, to make clear the fraudulent devaluing of their own currency and to bring to light the most common business practices performed by the members of “our thing”. This is the goal, to explore the present situation: I plan on extending the argument elsewhere.
But there is a question. How is this subversion being completed? It all stems from a claim to the nature of knowledge, that which is called physicalism. It may come by another name, perhaps materialist reductionism, Empiricism, or Scientism, but these signals all point to the same form.
Scientists use physicalism as a shorthand, a kind of cheap thinking, as a way to hand-wave away certain difficult or uncomfortable issues related to the epistemic status of knowledge. This ideology also provides a firm but false basis from which the educated may sneer down at the uneducated: a position of supposedly true knowledge as compared to the layman's unorganized system.
Laymen love the false assertion towards objectivity: it gives them carte blanche to political action. Any statistics or empirical report can be fabricated and presented as legitimate solely on the grounds of scientific truth. They enjoy the false sense of security that such faith provides. Because a correction on this point may damage the credibility of science and scientists, and because taking action and remediating the layman's understanding of truth would be a strenuous and unrewarding adventure, the problem never gets resolved and an omertà has developed around this taboo subject.
The problem is twofold: scientific establishments function as power structures that marginalize alternative ways of knowing and protect their own authority, while at the same time writing a blank check for anyone claiming the public title of scientific backing. This arrangement benefits both scientists in job security and status, and with lay people in certainty and political justification.
This is all rather obvious: political leverage being shrouded by an “objective” pursuit of knowledge. And, like I said, there’s not much that can be done about it from within their own systems given the establishment of political power and the size of their institutions.
A Solution
I am suggesting the notorious tool of “deconstruction”. We must “bust out” their business: there can be no negotiation. Individuals may be “flipped” but I would imagine this can happen only under great pressure. Instead, the members of this crime family should be ignored, and their valuables looted.
I am showing you that the monsters only exist in your own mind, and that those afraid of change have the most to lose.
