Posts Tagged ‘Cladistics’

Quote note (#280)

Bacteria are often invoked as agents of ‘rhizomatic’ (horizontal) disruption of tree-like genetic lineages, so it’s intriguing to see them being proposed (p. 161-2) as cladistic engineers:

If two groups of the same insect ignore each other and only mate with their social circles, they should eventually split into distinct species. These splits occur all the time in nature, and the forces that cause them can take many forms. They could be physical obstacles like mountains or rivers. They could be differences in timing, in the hours or season in which animals are active. They could be incompatible genes that prevent two animals from interbreeding. Anything that stops animals from mating, or that kills or weakens the offspring of those couplings, can create ‘reproductive isolation’ — a gulf that drives species apart. And as [Eugene] Rosenberg had shown, bacteria can cause reproductive isolation, too. By acting as a living barrier that stops two populations from meeting up, microbes could potentially drive the origin of new species. …

September 4, 2016admin 76 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Speciation

Fish People

Since the opportunities for XS to agree (in advance) with PZ Myers don’t come along too regularly, it’s worth seizing upon those that do. For anyone who thinks cladistics are important, this point is worth strongly defending:

There are multiple meanings of “fish”. We can use it to refer to specific species or an extant category of animals: salmon are fish, halibut are fish, herring are fish. No one objects to that, and they all understand that if I said “humans are still salmon”, that would be wrong. […] But another way the term is used is as a descriptor for a clade. A taxonomic clade is a “grouping that includes a common ancestor and all the descendants (living and extinct) of that ancestor”. […] So, for instance, humans belong to the mammalian clade, which includes mice and cats and cows. If we have transhuman, part-cyborg descendants, they will still be mammals, because, note, by definition a clade must include all the descendants of an ancestor. We’re trapped! There’s no way our progeny can exit the clade!

In fact, it’s such a sound point, it’s worth generalizing.

July 6, 2016admin 17 Comments »

Quote note (#224)

This needs to be up here as a reference point:

… [L]et’s admit it: Globalization does not automatically benefit France. […] Globalization develops according to principles that correspond neither to French tradition nor to French culture. These principles include the ultraliberal market economy, mistrust of the state, individualism removed from the republican tradition, the inevitable reinforcement of the universal and “indispensable” role of the United States, common law, the English language, Anglo-Saxon norms, and Protestant — more than Catholic — concepts.
— Hubert Védrine, February 9, 2002.

NRx is not French (all confusions apart).

February 25, 2016admin 20 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Neoreaction
TAGGED WITH : , , , ,

Twitter cuts (#12)

Inaccurate, sadly, but still probably worth stealing. (Also meriting a quick glimpse.)

March 5, 2015admin 3 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Discriminations

Religious Clades

Peter A. Taylor relayed this magnificent cladogram of world religions:

d8ecc07e906127bf0fd4623504b7eca8 (Click on image to enlarge.)

If there’s such a thing as a comprehensive cultural map of the world, it’s woven on to something very like this. No opportunity to comment on it right now — but I’m confident it will spark some responses.

April 29, 2014admin 28 Comments »
FILED UNDER :History , Images , World

Our Inheritance

With my nervous-system still too disintegrated by turn-of-the-year excess to begin a set of 2014 prognoses convincingly, I’ve simply stripped this argument from my twitter stream (quoting myself):

Neoreaction cannot understand itself without directing far more sustained attention to its own cladistic identity. As a natural cultural species, it is a fragment of dissident ultra-protestantism, and this is quite certain to guide its fate. The forces of internal fragmentation working through it will make fratricidal Trotskyism look like unperturbed mind-meld. It will be thriving this time next year, but the tides of dissolution it will have overcome to do so will be truly colossal. Those thinking Neoreaction is a platform from which to complacently deride Neo-Puritanism have a highly-educational 2014 ahead.

Neoreaction is not a series of premises (or articles of faith) but a cultural species. I don’t think that we have begun to seriously digest the consequences of that yet.

January 2, 2014admin 48 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Neoreaction

Double Predestination

Cladistic inheritance necessitates that I begin talking about the Calvinist doctrine of Providence here (soon), despite my total cognitive depravity on the topic. I’ve been reading the Institutes of the Christian Religion, and around it, but inevitably as if from Mars (and as a Confucian). It has to be the case that many of the visitors here are vastly more intellectually fluent on the subject, so any anticipatory comments will be hungrily seized upon.

The fatality, as far as it is initially evident:

(1) Neoreaction, cladistically located, is a Cryptocalvinist splinter.

(2) The doctrines that placed Calvinism in H. L. Mencken’s “cabinet of horrors” (“next to cannibalism”), have never been philosophically dissolved, whether by theological or secular argument.

(3) The moralistic dismissal of Modernity and, through association, of Protestantism, evidences an almost incomprehensibly crude conception of Providence — as if the way things have turned out was not a fatality, and in theological terms a message (or punishment), but rather an accident, or man-made contingency. The rigorous theology of Modernity cannot reduce to mere denunciation.

(4) Calvinism is an instrument with which to explore Catholicism, especially in respect to its implicit philosophy of history (and recourse to teleological reasoning). The ‘Neo-‘ in Neoreaction appears to be a Calvinist mark. There are any number of influential secular explanations for the way history has tortured the Church — such that even the religious seem typically to default to them. Where does one find a radically providential account (excavating the theological meaning of Modernity)?

(5) Is not the very word ‘Cathedral’ in its Neoreactionary usage a complex providential sign? (Which suggests that it has far more to tell than anything either Neoreactionary writers or mere accident put into it.)

(6) The cluster of disputes around ‘predestination’ (or the action of eternity upon history) is the Occidental key to the problem of time.

I’m sure there’s much more …

[This helps to set the tone.]


November 30, 2013admin 70 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Arcane , Philosophy , Templexity
TAGGED WITH : , , , ,