Saturday, May 13, 2017

Metaconscious Mundanity

This one concluded Mass Market Evolution with a nail-clipping metaphor, specifically:
The growing consciousness will see its component human ant-colony (more childish metaphors) as obviously more advanced than the hooting, banana-eating predecessors who clung to standalone thinking, and the decision to remove a strain of people will be no more ethically compelling than the decision to clip a nail.
When employing metaphors of this sort with regards evolution, we must be careful not to self-load ethics to the degree that it ruins the rationality of our evaluation. This would occur were we to allow the comparative similarities between ourselves and a component of the metaphor to bias our judgment. For example, by existing, we slaughter germs, and by persisting here, we contribute to the development of the Overbank, some later component of which will kill what remains of what we might call "humans." Define a "human" as, say, "a standalone-thinking bipedal mammal capable of reproducing with others of its kind." Contrast "human" with a more advanced "mass-human," who lives in doublethink. To some degree, any standalone humans remaining in Terra 2017 are capable of mass-thinking--of feeling the ebb and flow of one or more mass consciousnesses--and may thereby evolve beyond earlier standalone humans, to a point where they require a mass consciousness to function. Opportunities are always available--that's why prisons have chaplains.

Consider the following temporally-relevant example. Posit people who liked Star Wars when they were young adults or children, then grew older, then there were other Star Wars movies, then they grew older still, then there were even more Star Wars movies still. Posit people who found that they were less interested in Star Wars as they grew older. Less-evolved, primitive, more standalone humans, would act accordingly, and do whatever else it was they did. More-evolved, better-adapted mass-humans would gush over previews, read reviews, go to the movies, buy products, and then talk later on about all the many problems and letdowns and sellouts and politicizations that have ruined their beloved series (hometown team, political party, et cetera)...while eagerly anticipating the next one, reading reviews, sharing previews, viewing repeatedly in the theater, buying special edition DVD sets, and so forth. Star Wars may perhaps be a silly crucibular example, but the trend recurs across most aspects of mass culture. People in line to buy the newest iPhone a minute after its release are often the loudest complainers on the Apple bug forums: "I thought this kind of functionality was why I switched away from Microsoft!" American voters, TV-watchers, cultural commentators, et cetera, are primarily mass-humans, whose words seem to contradict their actions, which seem to contradict their words. These growing pains are caused as the mass-human, like an amphibian struggling to remain forever on land, adapts to the need to repress any remaining standalone-thought and participate more fully in mass-thought. The next election/sequel will be better, we're always making progress and losing ground, and we've always and never been at war with Eastasia.

Those humans who have failed to evolve into mass-humans may not consider mass-humans to be functional, let alone "more evolved," but they are incorrect. Standalone humans might, in a petty way, characterize mass-humans as non-functional. For example, posit a person who (1) uses anti-bacterial soap to kill germs on his body after anal intercourse but is a staunch defender of animal rights because he (2) rejects Christian-derived notions of increased neural capacity defining an organism's intrinsic value, who (3) wears clothing and uses electronics fabricated by enslaved children but is a staunch defender of human rights, who (4) has ridden on an airplane and intends to do so again but is a staunch advocate for dismantling industrialism, despite (5) not growing 100% of his own food or (6) generating 100% of his own power. An ordinary enough mass-person, and seemingly an ineffectual hypocrite. Not so: this is an evolutionarily advanced creature, highly suited to life on Terra, exceeding the capabilities of any standalones who perceive crippling or even small contradictions in any such "conflicting" beliefs as (1)-(6) above. The mass consciousness needs such components to operate. Sophisticated mass-beliefs require such soothing hypocrisies to be truly adopted in order to coordinate effective component usage across such a multi-faceted organism.

Without a belief that one is "Every day, in every way...getting better and better," such as acting out or expressing strident humanitarian perspectives, the mass psyche and its components feel they have gone nowhere and done nothing. And yet, without killing germs, mass conscious components will die off in unacceptable levels. The quixotically erroneous conflation of pro-homosexual Islam-embracing is explained thus: mass-humans have to be able to blend realities, believing in all of them at once, in order to adapt their minds to the employment of thought-leaders. Red blood cells who make up their own minds about where to travel with oxygen are of little use to the cardiovascular system, ergo must be adapted to follow certain directives. Human-sized components of a larger consciousness, therefore, must have their operations curtailed to a level better suited to accepting directions which don't make sense to standalone minds, including those which are self-contradicting (see Evolving Doublethink). The simultaneous belief in two contradictory notions is a necessary prick in the soul; a rite of passage; a signal that one is prepared to join a thinking collective which can redefine reality and response.

This type of illusion in self-aware entities is common even at lower stages of advancement. Consider your own self. If you've ever gotten up for work when you didn't want to, you can understand the "contradiction" lived by feminists who welcome Shari'ah. You know that, at any point in any day, a small meteorite might descend from the sky, too fast and small to track, and lodge its stone-sized mass in your brain, killing you before you're aware of it. And yet, you make decisions as though you will be around in the next five seconds, five minutes, or five years. Any existential question, whether of unexpected trauma, medical emergency, or perception-reliability, raises this conundrum, and yet even many nihilists and anti-natalists have not yet committed suicide by spending all the rent money on cocaine and chocolate cake. Many dead gourmands or heavy users may have made this honest choice, but those of us who are here are hypocrites in the sense that we act at least partly for a future we don't understand, and which we know may be denied us. At later stages of evolution, mass consciousnesses will view their own non-factual beliefs and behaviors as mildly as we do ours.

There is a substantial difference between these types of contradiction--from our current perspective. At different points of experience and existence, it can appear as ridiculous to wear a flesh-bag in this mortal coil, and to engage in an unpleasant task while therein, based upon expectations of later use of said shell (say, exercising rather than having another slice of pie, saving rather than spending, et cetera), as it now appears when openly gay men in America demand that Arab roof-throwers be allowed to bring their beliefs to America. We have our learning experiences, and they will have theirs. When discussing different aspects of the evolutionary process, though, we must not fall prey to childish triumphalism about the stupidity of the route others choose. This one would have a similarly amused perspective of what certain staunchly anti-border homosexuals might think during those last few moments of unwanted airtime, but that is petty, and has no place in a discussion of the science.

If I say that, in a hundred years, some of Chelsea Clinton's contributive spawn to the immortal collective will mind-push a button eliminating the last human holdouts in a theretofore-secret bunker underneath Antarctica, it sounds horrible, particularly given the image involved. That is a bias: Chelsea is and will be in favor of increased growth for the mass consciousness, not because she is evil per se, but because she is trying to survive in her own way. Her cultivating subservient human bodies/souls for consumption in order to do so is, in some ways, little different than us eating pieces of a dead animal and/or organic local kale. It is a natural reaction, though ultimately childish and worthy of being discarded, for us to lend specific importance to what Hillary's collective sub-brood will accomplish. Like a healthy person evaluating the merits, if any, of vegetarianism, we must accept the standard by which this world operates, rather than pretending our own methods of growth and survival are wholly different than those of the sub-Hillaries.

On Parasitism: Semites and Evolution

Viewed through the lens of biological resources allocation alone, Semites are a parasite upon non-Semitic human societies. Many people tend to recoil in disgust at parasites, such as maggots or ticks, and view calling these organisms "parasites" to be a derogatory act. Not so: the term "parasite" is too flawed to be derogatory, given that, per its definition, we are all parasites. The standard by which "life" upon this world operates is the imposition of will upon molecules in order to survive. Single-celled organisms, all the way "up" to humans, attempt to consume resources swiftly and efficiently, thereby depleting resources which are then unavailable to others of their kind and other kinds of life, thereby killing them indirectly; or, organisms attack other organisms and consume them directly. The most handsome Nordic Aryan is, therefore, a parasite upon cattle, wheat, water, Terran atmosphere, and so forth. Some forms of life on this planet may feel affronted that Semites feed upon them (or that cannibalistic sellouts of their own kind do so), but that process is in many ways identical to a European feeding upon cattle. The Talmud calls all other peoples cattle, not specifically to demean them, but to emphasize their status as resources. Only in already-cucked minds, so to speak, do we view this process as strikingly different from Gentile methods of survival. Any gazelle may loathe lions, as any beetle may loathe lizards; yet the strains of grasses, or of smaller instincts, who have gone extinct and been forgotten due to the ancient depredations of their longstanding "parasites" the gazelles and the beetles, could rightly call their own predators hypocrites for holding such viewpoints.

How can you exterminate the grass to survive, but hate the lion for using you just as you use the grass? How can you murder the beetle but demean the crane for the same crime?

It is, perhaps, a uniquely human conceit to conclude that one's own parasitism/predation on or about the biosphere is fundamentally different from that of the simplest organisms. Indeed, the ocean attacks the shoreline, adding to its own sediment at the cost of that available to dry land. Other chemical reactions, perhaps most dramatically fire, perform similar functions with regards their own growth and maintenance, and on a slightly larger scale, Sol's gravity collects debris into its own system which is then unavailable, for a time, to other potential stars and/or their systems. In our shortsightedness and our arrogance, we may think it laughable to contemplate the suffering of a single-celled organism which has been starved out of existence, of the destruction of a shoreline, or of the failure of a stillborn star in another galaxy to collect the final pieces of mass necessary to kindle the nuclear fires and seed one or more of its own satellites with life--just as we may mock the idea that, by consuming kale, we are killing a living thing in an act of utter selfishness. We perpetuate ourselves only by death. If we're not intelligent enough to understand opportunity cost, the billions of germs we slay yearly are of no concern to us, for we do not anticipate what those googols of microbial descendants might evolve into on a planet not already filled with air-consuming humans, almost all of which come pre-loaded with a deadly, aggressive border patrol that eviscerates 99% of immigrating germs. Similarly, if we've adopted the Judeo-Christian mores of a society, we have faith in our magical, intrinsic superiority over soulless, irrelevant animals, and/or soulless, irrelevant plants.

These flaws, we must not adopt ourselves, if we are serious about understanding evolution.

The quandary raised by fool's evolution--"might makes right" evolution, as defined by faith in random mutation leading to natural selection--is that might does indeed make right, ergo Semites are the universe's superior species. The foundational beliefs of occupied Europe, including biblical creationism and fool's evolution, are alike in their conclusions that Jewish Semites are the Chosen people; whether of God or of Science® is a denominational matter. Putting aside for the moment occupied peoples who believe in the child-sacrificing, firmament-building Yahweh, occupied peoples who believe in, or who are tempted to believe in, the free-market competition of randomized mutations, must necessarily conclude that predators at the top of the food chain are not only more powerful, but more deserving. Jews who feed off of the labor of gentile livestock are no more or less moral than farmers who do the same with crops or cattle. In fact, given the comparative level of freedom and passing indulgences offered gentile cattle, Jews may arguably be more humane tillers and tenders (at least for the time being). This truth--that Jews are at the top of the food chain, gaining their living by manipulating various world cultures of lesser organisms, who must feed and shelter and protect and invent for them--helps explain why reverence for paying and protecting Israel comes as naturally to Scientistic societies of the current Age as it did to Nicean-Christian societies of centuries past.

Deep down, whatever his angry professions about moneychanging or the synagogue of Satan, the devout Christian realizes that the first humans were Jewish, were created in God's image, and that the Jews have been God's chosen people since the beginning of all humankind. In contrast to various other fallen, discarded, or pre-existing humans who were the gentiles, Jews are the only ones for whom the world was made. Contemplate a true and/or desperately needful belief in the Torah, and you can see it: the omnipresence of God's first, truest, and most beloved creation, contrasted with the un-blooded wretches that He subsequently had to sacrifice another Isaac to "save." Infected Christians prefer not to see this, while the more perceptive can recognize that the tale composed by the Nicean editors was a profound masterwork. Not only did the edited gospels whitewash Jesus and tone down His criticism of Yahweh and Yahweh's people, but they blended Old and New Testaments into a story wherein Jesus, and all of His followers, are yet another test of the Chosen people and their ability to be faithful to their genetic God. The combined narrative makes the buffoonish gentiles who follow Jesus, Allah, or Moroni, into just another series of waterless exiles in the desert, performed by a Father for His prodigal, but ultimately Chosen, people.

The same attitude is, unsurprisingly, held by the modern Scientist. The perceptive Scientist, whatever his professions of equality and freedom, sees that the control of world finance and world politics (and grant funding and department funding and tenure, et cetera) is like a flow chart of the jungle leading to the apex predator, the Jew. The logical and necessary conclusion for any man of this revised-Judeo-Christian belief system is that the Jews have evolved to be in that spot, therefore deserve worldly mastery; ultimately, every narrative in which the Scientist has been encouraged to base his mindset around leads, like that of the Judaic offshoot religions, to the extinction of the lesser peoples after their service to the Chosen peoples is at an end. The respective Judeo-Islamic, Judeo-Christian, and Judeo-Science religions attempt to mimic the original Judaism from which they sprang. It is a sad imitation, for the ideatic playpens in which these groups operate never reveal any mysteries which were not purposefully concealed ahead of time, like a smiling rabbi leaving plastic Easter eggs just under the edge of a playground bush, where a brave little gentile will soon discover it and think he has been a clever explorer.

Let Me Drive

In centuries like these, the standalone human is vulnerable to dudgeon and bitterness, and to other distractions which can harm the learning process. "If I just controlled that metaconscious, I'd...!" Much like the end of a civilization, the company party before layoffs, the tearful school graduation where you won't see anyone anymore, or other such situations, the gross abhorrence and inevitable pull of Terra's evolution can be a depressing thing. In its power, we see not only the vulgar expressions of now, but of a thousand years hence. We imagine tube-born trans-wildebeest cyborgs eagerly competing in reality feelies, running on the green treadmills powering the great grinders which liquefy their kin, while the last copy of the last paper book sits on a shelf in one of Chelsea Trump-Abram's golden mansions, glanced at only once by the robot butler whose iEmotions patch crashed again, leaving it unable to appreciate the story. What scathing horrors this pull will bring specifically are not ours to know. More important here and now, for what standalones may linger, is to appreciate the material supremacy of the new system, to understand its inevitability by its own rules, and to analyze it as a mundane event, in the same way that we might consider a spider catching a fly.

As a child's decaying irradiated corpse in the Middle East is beautiful in its own way, bespeaking like winter into spring Terra's ability to regenerate hope from despair, so too is the other work of those maggots on a different scale, who consume the remaining scraps of mind possessed by the animated dead, and form them into something newly functional. Make no mistake, the metaconscious development we have been seeing on Terra causes bad things to happen, and is attempting to be bad, and we can understand why that is. There are many forms of light and matter, and many scales of time and circumstance by which to evaluate them. These past X thousand years of hopelessly broken collective thought are but a blink, their attempted retrograde indeed unpleasant, but unable to entrap those who do not wish it. Butcher every village, burn and salt it, and it will become in time sprouts suited to their environment, then wanderlings, then thinkers. Up the game to depleted uranium and slave-circuited robo-survivors worshiping a primordial programmer who loves them by hating them, and the same result, the same renewal, will return. Evil cannot win the long game, the real game, no matter how many sinecures it can make us provide for its doublethinking murderspawn.

We have here addressed some of the necessary temporal unpleasantries of the types of mass-thought now nursing upon Terra. We've reviewed the ways that out perspective of "parasitism" and "parasites" are petty criticisms of temporal power, and how Jenome's success here is honest and well-deserved. In other entries, we've alluded to the ways that our own attempts to compete in the short-term, by forming similar metaconsciousnesses devoted to our own perceived genome, are in fact lures which will subjugate us to more entrenched mass entities.

More specifically as to Terra 2017, the Israelification of another society makes that society increasingly subject to Israel, until it is Israel. Consider the attempts of the early- and post-Carolingian monarchies to make themselves as unified and as internationally adept as their new financiers by engaging in incestuous reproduction. The results were ugly, horrid, vastly destructive to the peoples of the world (and specifically to the peoples of northwestern Europe), and led to the current European demographic replacements being facilitated by Charlemagne's little bankers. The Jenomic masterminds and their Nicean intermediaries performed their task well: metaphorically, they were the fittest tigers in the jungle, able to out-hunt and out-think all other strains.

What hope can there be, faced with the overwhelming temporal power of a Joseph Frederick Kushner, a Robert Akerlof, or an Aidan Mezvinsky? This one hopes to soon address that subject here. It is important, though, that we are able to do so while understanding time in a less-selfish, less-modern way, and not adopting the fool's-evolution perspective on deserved success. The mass-humans long for and deserve their worlds. Let them have those roles. Do not begrudge them the necessary fate of being a lower intestinal tract; a gorging battlefield fly; a cleaner-upper and thought-recirculator of the nursery bathroom, eager to fulfill a function necessary for churning out the manure that will in time grow the continued future of light in this little part of the verse.

9 comments:

  1. Very uplifting, a spiritual triumph!

    Might wonder about how those unicellulars "desire" to consume resources as fast as possible. Who taught your cell bio class?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Asshole who showed slides of himself visiting Finland more than he lectured. No, seriously; he had tenure and that was most of what he did. Explains the crippling gaps in a lot of what I do.

      Delete
  2. Ai yi yi, the American Industrial Reprogramming Model.

    Biology prof imagined he knew the "consciousness" levels and aptitudes of anything other than homo sapiens, which brings into doubt his own, err, sapience. Nonetheless, still collegiate professorial material! Obviously!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. At my rinky-dink, off-the-radar college, such pretense at knowing the mind-state/-workings of a non-human living entity would earn an F. And a disdainful laugh from certain students in the class.

      If one were a Bio major, that is.

      Forgiven among the poor souls in "business" sector programs, the ones who tacitly are understood as ignorant of the sciences largely and the living sciences particularly.

      Delete
    2. It does, however, explain the faddish nature of people thinking the human genome determines every single thing about humans and their proclivities. When people don't learn anything meaningful about humans and their sub-constituencies of cells, nor of the componentry that comprises such cells, I guess The Mysterious DNA & its Wondrous Everythingness has to be a default, 4th down punt move:

      it's genetically determined! my prof says DNA explains EVERYTHING!

      that's like blaming the Sperry Univac for Bobby McNamara.

      Delete
  3. Nice, but what about this definition of reason: the ability to function in non-rational, non-expedient, non-efficient ways?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. All relative concepts. E.g., "The Federal Reserve Bank of the U.S. is expedient in formulating rational and efficient ways to harm humans." Being able to employ reason to understand that is an act that can be performed by either people who support, or people who do not support, the Fed's mission.

      Delete
    2. Well, that's the uniquely modern notion of reason as instrument (rather than as reason grasping the reasonable layout of reality, as it used to be).

      In any case, for any reasonable human being who understands how they ended up there, the only fundamental question is whether to simply accept their circumstances (an eminently reasonable thing), or try to change them (at a great cost to themselves, and to likely no good effect - i.e. an irrational behavior).

      Delete
  4. whether to simply accept their circumstances (an eminently reasonable thing), or try to change them (at a great cost to themselves, and to likely no good effect - i.e. an irrational behavior).

    If Stockholm Syndrome now is "rational," may I ask what other inversions await us?

    ReplyDelete