Chaos Patch (#105)

(Open thread + links)

Metaculture. The global polyhedron (1, 2). Fake flights from selection. Mandatory participation in providence. Cropped-back ‘concerns‘. The asymmetric spectrum. Raw power. Mind-control. Uncontrolled government (is cancer). Hoppe against democracy (podcast). The weekly round (the SSC link-fest).

The “war on western lifestyle” [*facepalm*]. Droned. Submarine Karachi? SA mark-down. Europe raped (1, 2) rightwards (1, 2, 3). Canadian immigration madness. Multicultural knots. Where it could end. China in Djibouti. The inevitability of war (plus). Weakness provokes aggression (1, 2). Democracy and globalization in retreat. End of Neoconservatism.

Price discovery on Rohypnol. The metallic break-point. Trust destruction. Panic at the ECB. SF versus tech. Oil economics. Surveillance capitalism.

Trumpenführer panic report (1, 2, 3, 4). Street politics (plus). Revolution 2.0. “… the GOP would obviously prefer to lose the election rather than have Trump win” (note). Racial politics. Signs of sympathy (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8). Ditch and switch. An upside-down version of the Outsideness strategy for leftists. Trump in context (1, 2, 3).

America’s four parties. “In order to accelerate the collapse, the best president will be the person who is the most corrupt, the most pro-government and most anti-liberty.”

Twitter and beyond. Cli-fi. #TheTriggering (plus). Politicized science (video). The diversity scam.

IQ matters more. Han genetics. The $999 genome. Biology goes ape. Psychology in crisis (1, 2, 3). What should a theory of consciousness look like? Genius geno-tech (video). Faith in evolution.

AI beats LSD (1, 2, 3), but the human resistance wins one (+). Eye-to-claw coordination (via). Scalable quantum computation update. A micropayments marketplace. Fear of blockchains.

Largest object in the cosmos? Bacterial electro-communication. CRISPR revolution. Boneless (video). Isolation.

Productive philosophy. The Omega visionary. Its from bits. Enlightenment to entanglement. In defense of boredom.

March 13, 2016admin 24 Comments »

TAGGED WITH : , , , , , ,

24 Responses to this entry

  • SVErshov Says:

    ‘Productive philosophy’

    great short article in defence of philosophy

    ‘philosophy thrives when enough is known to make progress conceivable, but it remains unachieved because of methodological confusion.’

    exactly as it is now, science went ahead and society remains 100 years behind, simply because it does not have methodology to transform itself.


    Posted on March 13th, 2016 at 2:43 pm Reply | Quote
  • Chaos Patch (#105) | Neoreactive Says:

    […] By admin […]

    Posted on March 13th, 2016 at 2:52 pm Reply | Quote
  • Alrenous Says:

    In the field of linguistics, from roughly 1945 to 1975

    …there was an object demonstration of the uselessness of postwar academia. “how certain linguistic performances change social facts.” Sometimes talk is listened to? Groundbreaking. I’ve read some of Kripke’s papers, because he was praised as the best. They are not good.

    The best I’ve been able to find is David Chalmers. He set up an online archive of philosophy of mind papers. It was a mixture of stuff I had figured out on my own and stuff that I had already figured out was wrong. Only place to find novel concepts in all of modern philosophy is our host’s writings.

    Now is the best time to be a philosopher, because there’s no competition.

    Some of Soames’ claims may in fact support his thesis, but without more specifics it’s impossible to tell what his claim is supposed to be, exactly.


    gave us the formal theory of computation that ushered in the digital age.

    It’s far from proven that formal computing theory was necessary for building the Von Neumann machine. I would be glad if it was, but it can’t simply be assumed so. I don’t know enough offhand about his other claims to prove any of them are more reliable than this one I do know enough about.

    This article is a social act, not a scholarly act.


    Tentative Joiner Reply:

    What do you think of (1) J. L. Austin (ordinary language philosophy, speech acts), (2) embodied cognition?


    Posted on March 13th, 2016 at 4:59 pm Reply | Quote
  • Alrenous Says:

    What is subjective experience?

    It’s this:

    I partly investigated consciousness to prove that nobody would listen. I would accept that as valid if anyone could point to a flaw in the theory. (I do occasionally get criticism that doesn’t even make sense as a criticism.) This has revealed a contradiction in my previous beliefs: I thought people were serious about wanting to know about consciousness, yet was aware that an actual scholarly investigation into it would be ignored. It’s clear that serious interest does not exist.

    In a sense this is a privilege. I get to know, and nobody else does. I clearly should have picked something with military applications instead of humanitarian ones. More fool, younger me.

    But the theory provides no mechanism that connects neuronal oscillations in the brain to a person being able to say, “Hey, I have a conscious experience!”

    My theory is specific enough to imply a concrete, presently-feasible machine to build. Unfortunately, it’s also partly why I know I must be smarter than I test. Despite successfully provoking several critics of the theory, I’ve yet to meet one that can even think the thoughts I’m forwarding. Thus, not only does no criticism make sense as criticism, it’s clear it’s impossible for them to criticize it even if they were serious. Unlike consciousness per se, it’s legitimately difficult. (The theory, not the machine. The machine is easy.) Note this is a testable prediction.

    If information is present, so is a primordial, conscious experience of it. […] One must simply accept consciousness as an elemental property and abandon all hope of understanding it.

    Being less handwavy, it dies to Occam’s razor. If information per se is conscious, then consciousness doesn’t do anything. We can describe information completely without invoking consciousness. It’s the theory equivalent of, “I don’t care anymore, let’s stop talking about it.”

    A theory doesn’t have to be emotionally satisfying to be true.

    But, coincidentally, every true theory is satisfying to experts in the theory’s field. Nagging doubts are a reliable guide to theory flaws.

    The brain constructs a distorted, cartoon sketch of itself and its world. And this is why we’re so certain that we have a kind of magic feeling inside us.

    Congratulations, you’ve got your own phlegm theory. The handwaviness of the above was not a coincidence, it reflected sloppiness of thinking. It’s a miracle you even noticed the phlegm theory trend with such a poor understanding of the underlying logic.


    Posted on March 13th, 2016 at 5:27 pm Reply | Quote
  • Kgaard Says:

    The high-IQ, white, non-fundamentalist American is finished as a human sub-species. There is no path forward, politically, intellectually or spiritually.


    Posted on March 13th, 2016 at 5:57 pm Reply | Quote
  • grey enlightenment Says:

    The plant in a bottle article was fascinating. Had no idea it could be self-sustaining for so long. Couldn’t our universe be giant ‘object’ in the emptiness of the gaps between multiverses.


    Posted on March 13th, 2016 at 6:06 pm Reply | Quote
  • grey enlightenment Says:

    @ It seems like the future of philosophy is for it to become more STEM-like, complementing subjects such as neurology, cognitive science, computer science, and physics. There’s definitely a synthesis. Philosophy are like beads that fill the gaps between lager spheres, connecting everything together.


    Posted on March 13th, 2016 at 6:12 pm Reply | Quote
  • Anonymous Says:

    Here’s KDW’s latest from National Review, by the way, if you don’t want to pay:


    Posted on March 13th, 2016 at 8:31 pm Reply | Quote
  • Anon anon anon Says:

    KDW’s latest at NR:


    Posted on March 13th, 2016 at 8:32 pm Reply | Quote
  • Alex Says:



    Posted on March 13th, 2016 at 8:49 pm Reply | Quote
  • Irving Says:


    High-IQ, non-fundamentalist whites will do fine, but God help the other, less gifted whites.


    Kgaard Reply:

    Yeah that is the question. I see the argument as to why high IQ should be an advantage (can still make a living in an increasingly AI-dominated world). But against that one has to weigh various negatives:

    * Relentless campaign against white males by Dem coalition (which will never end);
    * Incentives against marriage for women. Reading a very good book on this now:;
    * Control of state, universities, media by the left;
    * VR;
    * VR porn.

    I struggle to see how, if you extrapolate the above trends out 2-3 generations, there will be a critical mass of high-IQ whites in America who have not heavily bought into some kind of religious structure that pushes back against all the above trends in a systematized way. Otherwise, with each generation, some high percentage of the kids get lost to any (or all) of the five above mentioned forces.

    We’re already two generations into this process and the results are pretty nasty. Seems clear to me the dysgenic effect has been worse at the higher-IQ cohort.


    Irving Reply:

    I still think that, for the most part, high-IQ, non-fundamentalist whites are doing fine, and will continue to do fine in the future.

    But that’s only for the most part. There isn’t a doubt that our time is one of downward mobility, and that the downward pressure is working on high-IQ whites, at least some of them, too. I don’t think that those high-IQ whites who get economically left behind are going to give themselves over to religion, at least not in the sense that the term religion is conventionally understood. Rather, they’ll translate their frustration into political activism, especially WN. (Frankly, I think that a lot of the smarter, better educated young WNs are emblematic of the trend that I’m talking about. Many don’t seem to have a profession, and quite a few are liberal arts types who are extraordinarily bookish, and extraordinarily hostile to capitalism and technology, likely because of what these things have done to employment prospects.) There are going to be more of these guys as time goes on, and I don’t know how the system is going to deal with them.

    In the long-term, though, yeah, I agree with you, especially where the question of birthrates are concerned. Women are being incentivized to eschew marriage and children, and consequences of this are clear for everyone to see. For those who think Eastern Europe is the future of the white race or whatever should look at the birthrates and extraordinarily high rates of emigration, especially of their best educated people. At this rate, countries like Poland will disappear long before Germany does. When the sexbots come, things are going to get even worse, if that’s possible.

    In the end, you might be right: the high-IQ, non-fundamentalist white may not have a future. For now, though, they’ll do alright.


    Kgaard Reply:

    Perhaps we’ll see something like a Mad Max/ Dark Ages social ecosystem: Lots of enclaves filled with high-IQ non-fundamentalist whites, but dispersed throughout the world. In New York, for instance, there are a couple of high-IQ whitopias left, the main one being Greenwich Village up through the 20s. That’s probably half the size of what it was 15 years ago, but it’s still there. The Upper West Side is in the process of being lost. In DC there is Cleveland Park (and Northwest generally), as well as much of Arlington. Much of that should survive. Fairfax County is being completely lost.

    Globally there is the hippie town of Nosara Costa Rica. One could also consider a place like Bali as the seed of something new that will grow and develop. (Hong Kong has been completely lost.)

    The Midwest will have strongholds for several generations at least because it is still basically all white, and there are some reasonably smart people there (though non-fundamentalist? Well …).

    I think many places will organize not along consciously WN lines, but along sub-consciously WN lines, with plausible deniability. I find interesting what some of these neo-Viking dudes are doing in Scandinavia, reviving old Norse culture. Probably won’t go anywhere but an interesting exercise.

    Posted on March 13th, 2016 at 9:24 pm Reply | Quote
  • Grotesque Body Says:

    Intellectually honest psychology grad students on suicide watch.


    Posted on March 14th, 2016 at 1:10 am Reply | Quote
  • Brett Stevens Says:

    They hate our lifestyle. That’s the the root of the problem is.

    Not that 99% of human beings are extraverted and without analytical ability or souls, and that they try to drag the rest down into their own pit of misery because it validates the 99% with the sacrifice of the 1%. Not that original sin was right.

    Not that culture is a rare thing, nurtured by a few visionaries every generation, that everyone else tries to destroy so they can use it is a vehicle for their own desires by validating themselves with its tokens.

    Not that society tends to become a misery cult where we enslave each other with boring, frustrating meaningless bullshit as a way of defending our own positions. Nope, those tax forms are essential.

    Not that taxes are always wasted except when spent on war.

    Not that all of humanity — with a handful of exceptions — is marching in lockstep delusion toward not a fiery end, but perpetual mediocrity, like mental heat death.

    And most of them know, and they don’t care; they want it this way.


    Posted on March 14th, 2016 at 3:12 am Reply | Quote
  • SVErshov Says:

    In defense of boredom

    there is much more to it. for example in ants colony only 3% hardworking ants, 25% never work, 72% work sometimes only. if we will separate some ants from lazy group they wiĺl respecialise to keep nearly same proportions. seems like such kind of organisation some how contribute to ants remarkable resilience.


    Posted on March 14th, 2016 at 3:40 pm Reply | Quote
  • Oliver Cromwell Says:

    “America’s four parties. “In order to accelerate the collapse, the best president will be the person who is the most corrupt, the most pro-government and most anti-liberty.””

    Only optimists think there is going to be a “collapse”, let alone subsequent renaissance.

    What is going to happen is that the US will devolve to a level of permanent dysfunction but no one will notice because all other countries will be at least as dysfunctional or more.

    Kenya, Bolivia, Laos are shittily run but do not “collapse”, they just keep being shittily run forever.


    admin Reply:

    There are enough countries moving forward to make that scenario unlikely, unless you think America will fall down the stairs with some kind of stoic acceptance. When average American incomes are half those of the most rapidly advancing east Asian societies, I don’t know. But a third, a quarter, a fifth … a tenth? Regime legitimacy implodes, and the situation goes kinetic.


    Oliver Cromwell Reply:

    None of the Asian countries with living standards comparable to the US are rapidly advancing. PRC is rapidly advancing by switching from insane Progressivism to mild Progressivism, but no one in the US envies PRC living standards.

    Moreover the mechanism of failure is being misdiagnosed if you think it can be fixed just by people deciding to fix it. When the Democrats flood the US with low IQ, high impulsiveness immigrants, those immigrants are not capable of reconstituting the US that consisted overwhelmingly of Anglo-Germans. Assuming the Japanese fix their birthrate and their sclerotic mafia economy – which they show no signs of doing – the Brazilified US won’t follow the Japanese example because it can’t.

    The only possible route to restoration is a shift in *elite* opinion while the demographic makeup of the country is still salvageable. That might happen in the next few decades as the old commies die and the genetic reality of man becomes harder to deny. It probably won’t, but if Trump buys an extra decade, that boosts our chances of survival enormously.


    Erebus Reply:

    @Oliver Cromwell,

    In some respects you seem strangely optimistic. In others, pessimistic. You seem to be assuming:

    1. That American demographics are a ratchet that can only go from bad to worse, and may soon pass the point of no return. By extension, that ethnic cleansing, deportations, mass murder, grassroots progroms, civil war, and other such things are not potential solutions. (A cursory glance at any history book from virtually any era and any region of the world should be enough to convince you otherwise.)

    2. That fragmentation and/or secession are not going to happen or not worth consideration.

    3. That the “old commies” are worse than millennials and the youth of today.

    4. That a shift in elite opinion is somehow possible. (It has been non-stop progressivism for 100 years. I’ve seen nothing to suggest that this will change, and a lot to suggest that it’s getting rapidly worse — that, in fact, the opinions of the Cathedral have never been more explicitly leftist and less in-tune with those of the average white American working man.)

    5. That Trump will live up to his campaign promises and slow the decline. (I hate to break it to you, but it is never wise to trust campaign promises. If he gets elected, how about a friendly wager on that wall he’s been mentioning? Hell, I’ll even give you 10 to 1 odds that it doesn’t get built within his first term.)

    ….It will need to get worse before it gets better — this is my take on the present situation in America. Perhaps very much worse. Fragmentation is the best possible outcome, wouldn’t you say?

    Oliver Cromwell Reply:

    I think there is a lot of pessimism out there.

    The left of 1919 to the 1950s the Western left wanted the Soviet Union to conquer the world or for revolutions in Western countries to turn Western countries into the Soviet Union, over economic questions. The Western left has been completely routed on economic questions and that 1919 to 1950s Left is a semi-ostracised embarrassment even within the Left.

    The left can and has lost on policy questions, when its predictions clearly diverge with reality. There is a lot less communism around today than in 1950. It isn’t a ratchet.

    The new problem we face is that whites are being sold immigration on the basis of biological equality but inferior races don’t care if biological equality turns out to be wrong. They won’t vote to abolish themselves just because it is proven they are inferior. The working class did care that communism actually made them poorer rather than richer and they could and did turn on communism when that reality became clear.

    So the question is whether there are still enough whites (and asians) around to retake power when the reality of biological inequality goes mainstream. As it inevitably will. That’s really just a question of numbers. The US and Europe are not too far gone today. In twenty years they may or may not be; it really depends on policy specifics.

    If the millennial Progressive package of dysgenic demographic trends reaches escape velocity, though, there is no reverse gear until whites and asians have been completely destroyed. A government of a pure brown country might decide to implement eugenic policies internally but will never do so if it implies restoration of white-asian majorities. The progressive destruction of whites and asians, coupled with further dysgenic fertility among browns, won’t look like a collapse though, and won’t cause a legitimacy crisis. It will be a gradual and irreversible decline.

    Posted on March 17th, 2016 at 8:43 am Reply | Quote
  • Tentative Joiner Says:

    Human sacrifice.


    Posted on March 18th, 2016 at 7:38 pm Reply | Quote

Leave a comment