Soap Jackal is foraging:

As fission becomes the major topic of discussion the main foundation of that tangent becomes clear: action. This is strange as NRx hasn’t even begun to crack the shell of true analysis. Nrx has been described as a toolbox (especially in terms of analysis) from which individuals can pick and choose in order to better inform their world view. One of the major areas of the toolbox is the general study of learning as that is required in order to digest the massive amount of information neoreaction has uncovered as worthy sources. The Cathedral has failed at providing these tools and that seems in of itself a major focus worth investigating. My question to you is: ‘Are there any resources you deem relevant to the general topic of learning and knowledge accumulation?’ These can be as exact as nexialism or the Ignorant Schoolmaster or they can be as tangential as Non-Euclidean Politics by RAW. All are welcome in the general trend to get NRx on the path forward.

Note: Cap-stripped terms are bolded, while the format discussion rages.

October 8, 2014admin 12 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Neoreaction


12 Responses to this entry

  • Ansible Says:

    Scavenging like the good little man-crab (or should that be crab-man?) that he is.


    Posted on October 8th, 2014 at 8:17 am Reply | Quote
  • Postnietzschean Says:

    “as fission becomes the major topic of discussion the main foundation of that tangent becomes clear: action”

    Atlas Shrugged talks a lot about how practical action is often seen as somehow low-status, and talking and thinking are seen as high status (the purer the subject the higher the status, generally), along with some speculation about how this relates to body/mind dualism in Western thought. Veblen’s theory of the leisure class is a more intellectually rigorous exploration of similar ideas.

    Another related observation: the Cathedral portrays pure scientists in movies as soulful a-Beautiful-Mind types, whereas engineers and inventors are portrayed as dangerous crazies.

    People seem to naturally gravitate towards meta-work as in theory it’s more important than the actual work. Why dig ditches when you can manage ditch-diggers, why manage ditch-diggers when you can start a ditch-digging franchise, why be a ditch-digging entrepreneur when you can be an independent consultant to ditch-digging entrepreneurs, etc.

    Purely intellectual activities are even more prone to this. It seems everyone in NRx wants to come up with the meta-framework to describe the movement, propose changes to the overall direction of the movement, etc etc.

    Paradoxically this makes the people who are willing to take practical action more valuable, and therefore higher status, like the TEFL teacher in this blog’s comments a while ago describing his attempts at redpilling his students.


    Posted on October 8th, 2014 at 9:21 am Reply | Quote
  • ! Says:

    For reverse memetic engineers, the two main cathedral pedagogies are:

    1. Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed. See here for its impact on turning students into radicals.

    2. American Pragmatism’s influence on progressive education. See here for its history and influence.

    Now (1) is explicitly leftist, while (2) is much more inline with Cathedral values, especially in spreading democracy via education. Both are the most influential in terms of widespread use in Western teaching.

    As for NRx, in general for a pedagogy to get off the ground, I think you’d the following:

    (i) An epistemology of some kind. Teaching something that reliably gets at truth. Not just reasoning with beliefs either, e.g. logic and statistics. But an epistemology that includes things like reasoning about decisions and goals, i.e. judgment (as well as knowledge of the heuristics-and-biases research program). Moreover, other abilities that are epistemic in nature, but more concrete, like building know-how and skills.

    (ii) A moral and political program. I’m not sure how’d you go about doing this. Depending on your view, you could eschew the political program, and stick with the moral, e.g. teaching classical virtue theory from the Greeks. Or you could eschew both in your program and leave morality up to religion. There is a risk here of going full Totalitarian via indoctrination. Depending on your NRx school, will depend if you think this is a bad thing.

    (iii) An education that contributes to your (exited) society. For instance, if you live in a techno-commercialist NRx state, you might place a premium on engineering, hard sciences, mathematics, economics, finance, and business.

    I would probably add under (i) some other entries that include understanding of areas that are forbidden under (1) and (2). You might call this “forbidden knowledge” (FK), using Shattuck’s terminology. Some “Dark Enlightenment” areas would fall under FK.

    Notice also that (1) and (2) have large amounts of their curriculum committed to (ii). (1) is nearly all about (ii), and (iii) doesn’t get a look in (why create a person who can contribute, when you can create an extra Communist footsoldier?). (2) is still about (ii), but does have aspects of (i), but if you read the last 10-30 years of progressive pedagogy the focus on (i) has pretty much fallen off the rails, e.g. epistemic relativism via the influence of (1) on (2).


    Posted on October 8th, 2014 at 11:42 am Reply | Quote
  • Altadoon Says:

    I’ll suggest a blasphemous, completely non rational, idea:

    We don’t need to do anything except keep existing and worrying about patching our own faults. When an Ubermensch, a Prophet or The Hero comes and breaks the ice by doing something significant in the real world (could be something we don’t flag as important imediately), maybe the floodgates of good fortune open and more NRx start following in the footsteps of his destiny and we suddenly find ourselves virile and active as we’ve never imagined, setting stones for the future, possibly completely under the radar of the mainstream, Universalist narrative. We’ll have to do it differently. How? I hope the Zeitgeist of a different future will lead us.

    Now, I invite you all to tip your *fedoras* and *crab pincers*
    I’m not a particulary religious person (at least not consistently), but I do realize we need a miracle and every miracle needs an interpretation, which is what I just gave here. in advance.


    Erebus Reply:

    Countless generations have awaited the rapture in just such a fashion. Still more generations of messianic Jews awaited their savior in just that manner. What do those untold millions have to show for their patience?

    I wouldn’t say that we need a miracle. Deus ex machina doesn’t exist for people like us in the real world. It’s more than likely that simply waiting for favorable progress will result in (a) the further entrenchment of the Cathedral, especially given demographic trends, or (b) any number of catastrophic scenarios, such as Nick Bostrom’s unfriendly AI calling the shots, runaway nano-assemblers covering this world in grey ooze, nuclear war, and so on. The sudden rise of NRx looks rather less likely.

    With all that said, we should do everything we can to better our position in a practical way. This first means analysis: Looking at strategies for ‘exit’ in a meaningful way. It also means outreach.

    It’s possible that with improved brain computer interfaces, nanomedicine, life-extension research, cognitive neuroscience research leading to improved nootropics, and so forth, we’ll soon have a two-tiered society: An enhanced overclass, and an unenhanced underclass. If this is diffuse enough, and I think that it might be, it could in itself present an opportunity for NRx growth and outreach. More, and more inherently capable, elites — and suddenly far less prone to populist sympathies!


    SanguineEmpiricist Reply:

    “With all that said, we should do everything we can to better our position in a practical way. This first means analysis: Looking at strategies for ‘exit’ in a meaningful way. It also means outreach. ”

    I will +1 this, but I hope that this was a foregone conclusion to most.


    Posted on October 8th, 2014 at 12:48 pm Reply | Quote
  • Brett Stevens Says:

    We can follow every other human school of thought into the grave and bury ourselves under layers of interpretation.

    Or, we can become organic: a truth symbolized indirectly that reveals more of itself to those with capacity and experience to understand it.

    The modern time is replete with examples of people not understanding what they read, but using it as a basis for their arguments nonetheless.


    Posted on October 8th, 2014 at 2:31 pm Reply | Quote
  • Dark Psy-Ops Says:

    My current engagement with general learning resources is remarkably immersive, it seems we willful, amatuer non-specialists stumble upon our prime sources quite indirectly (twitters’ timeliness can be spooky in this regard). When the main issue is over-abundance of resources rather than lack it becomes tempting to race through information, but whether this allows for proper digestion and accumulation of knowledge is questionable. Slow (re)-reading better absorbs textual density IMHO. In saying that, the question of ‘where to next?’ is daunting for something as potentially explosive and experimental as (outer)-nrx. Especially when one considers that an ‘explosion’ is precisely, and abstractly, what they are planning to create. So, compartmentalization of research gives order (however slight) to chaos, but the accumulation of learning (however modest) is more closely analogous to nexialism, or slow-growing tentacles. In the case of raw non-euclidean politics, is it possible limitations of medium could prevent some speculation on relevant research vectors? Or are we dropping the bomb the same time as we build it? Or do we simply rely on tact and good taste to self-censor? I’m thinking the latter.

    Will comment again tonight, but morning is needed to unfog…


    Posted on October 8th, 2014 at 2:52 pm Reply | Quote
  • Integral Nexialist Says:

    Ken Wilbers AQAL framework could provoke insight. He has some prog leanings but also harsh views of where the postmodern poststructuralist left goes wrong.

    ‘To the liberal social theorists, we say: You have not understood the
    difference between natural hierarchy and pathological hierarchy, and
    thus in your understandable zeal to erase the latter, you have de-
    stroyed the former: you have tossed the baby with the bathwater.
    Value ranking-hierarchy in the broadest sense-is inescapable in
    human endeavors, simply because we are all holons: contexts within
    contexts forever, and each broader context pronounces judgment on
    its less encompassing contexts. And thus, even when the egalitarian
    social theorists assert their rejection of hierarchy, they do so using
    hierarchical judgments: they assert that nonranking is better than
    ranking. Well, that’s a hierarchical judgment, which puts them in the
    embarrassing position of contradicting themselves, of secretly em-
    bracing that which they vocally condemn. They have a hierarchy that
    denies hierarchy, a ranking that hates ranking.
    What they are trying to do, of course, is get rid of pathological
    hierarchies, and in this endeavor I believe we can all follow them. But
    the only way to get rid of pathological hierarchy is by embracing
    normal and natural hierarchy-that is, embracing normal holarchy,
    which integrates the arrogant holon back into its rightful place in a
    mutual reciprocity of care and communion and compassion. But
    without holarchy you have heaps, not wholes, and no integration is
    possible at all. ‘


    Posted on October 8th, 2014 at 7:04 pm Reply | Quote
  • Michael Says:

    @or like our community organizer in cheif


    Posted on October 8th, 2014 at 10:29 pm Reply | Quote
  • SanguineEmpiricist Says:

    Agree with many are caught up with a lot of meta-narrative and some need to “narrative”. However the meta people we have are already golden.

    If this relates even tangentially, I was thinking about setting up “New Lyceum”. It has all the correct aesthetic, connected to dear Pericles? Aristotle comes later…. However I need to produce the correct template format that I can hand off to people so we can run our own robust groups in real life. It will be a grab bag of aesthetic, actual/fruitful discussion topics and to need to get to work, a NRx family pet, and a prototyping of minimum finances to run the group with some heart, charisma, and believing in the dream.

    If people in the middle east can be convinced to blow themselves up, I’m sure I can get people to study probabiliy, heuristics & biases, opsec, history, & career focus, + exercise.

    Note: not Plato, specifically them.

    However as it stands I am not ready. But this *will* happen. I hope we keep the non-moral highground as I’m not…. Pericles, I am a SanguineEmpiricist. After I am done prototyping i’ll hand it off so people can run their own stuff.

    Thoughts? Our own little robust groups & sessions would go one hell of a way.


    Posted on October 9th, 2014 at 3:43 am Reply | Quote
  • vxxc2014 Says:

    Maybe we could get some Mexicans to do the work….I suggest a Meta-Codex with Mixtec cues…it will be a central dogmatic pillar that nothing dirty get under the god priests of the narrative’s fingernails. If that happens the furry ones will come and eat everyone, including the peasant whites who pay for El Cambio Chequa. When they ask any tough questions be ready with the Mixtec Codex Narrativa with X-files like vagueness.

    The meta-narrative and it’s priests must be preserved from danger, discomfort and labor.

    Or the Furry Ones will come…


    Posted on October 10th, 2014 at 11:00 am Reply | Quote

Leave a comment