Yeah, that's right, like Aristotle's - only better. Shorter, at any rate, I ain't got the time or the patience for ten fucking volumes. Or one.
Actually... let's pad things a little with history, make it seem like longer than it really is.
mircea_popescu 25iq.com/2015/03/28/a-dozen-things-ive-learned-from-startup-l-jackson-about-venture-capital-investing-and-startups/ << quarterly review of the whole "start-up" gargle as amusing this quarter as the last, and the many before that.
assbot A Dozen Things I’ve Learned from Startup L. Jackson About Venture Capital Investing and Startups | 25iq ... ( http://bit.ly/1TABnDY )
mircea_popescu "Here's the things we want you to think : a) that you need us ; b) that you shouldn't look out for yourself". Yeah, totally. What you want when doing a start-up is to "raise" a lot of money so you can pay the people who you "rose" it from renti so their real-estate sidelines do really well (in exactly the opposite fashion of what's preached for your benefit), while "not optimizing for your size of the pie". Sounds like exactly what they told the indians, too. Which happens to be exactly what's happening, for that matter. Indians "had" land, the nature of which they failed to understand, but it was the funciarii good for good reason back then. These indians have time, the nature of which they also fail to understand, and well... it's the funciar good today. Oh right, and I forgot, "c) there's a shortage of you suckersiii [and really, alot of money you can give right back to us is "chasing" this deal. totally.]iv "
punkman It does say 25 iq...
mircea_popescu So it does huh. Except it's a weird thing, I've seen this lots in US-born slavegirls. Woman could be well above 100 iq, think herself stupid, and indeed exhibit ~30-50 iq in selected fields. So well selected for the convenience&perpetuation of the stupidity she comes from that one can hardly believe it's not deliberately trained. But whatever, fight "patriarchy", not the incredibly unhealthy system that makes you be dumb in the few spots it handles you by so your smarts in the rest of the spectrum can be best sucked dry. Average UStard is, I would guess, a 110 to 115 iq college graduate whose 110 to 115 iq is composed of 150+ iq in beating himself up, 25 iq in establishing relationships and so on and so forth. Ethical idiocy, where ethical does not mean what ESLtardsv think it means, but merely "how to correctly live". This is actually indicative of the very fucking problem : ethics means how to live. Such as for instance, how to drive a fucking airplane in the tax office if you live in the USvi. That's ethics. Meanwhile the carefully, deliberately debilitated UStards actually think ethics means the exact opposite of what ethics means. To them ethics is "the ways to inconvenience your life".vii
So, how does ethics actually work ? The real kind ? Simple enough :
1. Write down all the things you aren't willing to live with, or without.
This step is important, so give it some time. Nobody says you gotta figure ethics out in one sitting.
If your list consists of a bunch of vague bullshitviii, this means you are a child, which is to say not yet intellectually mature enough to have any sort of ethics. You're amoral for reason of stupidity, be a darling and say so in social intercourse. You wouldn't let a guy think you're of age just because you found him hot, right ? So don't participate in discussions of ethics, morals or generally speaking any sort of shoulds. Simply state "I am amoral for reason of stupidity" and move on to whatever jwzing momentarily catches your eye. Hopefully there won't be too many of you, or else society collapses, but anyway, things are what they are, maybe one day you get your wits together.
If your list contains even a single item of a temporalix nature (such as "my kids" or "my dearly beloved wife"), this means you are a woman, which is to say fundamentally barred from considering any questions of ethics on your own by the same fundamental disability that makes you bleed every month. Find yourself a man, who is by his substance and nature the only possible ethical agent, and live by his word entirely and exactly - either until such a time you develop an actual list of your own or else until you die.
2. For each item produced through 1 above, figure out if you have it or not.
If you have all those you want and don't have all those you don't want, you're happy. If you don't "feel" happy, that can only be because either you're misunderstanding what feeling is, or what happiness is.x There's nothing wrong with your misunderstanding either, and you can fix it in your own time if you feel like it. Just as long as you're aware that's what's actually happening there.
If you don't have one you want, or if you have one you don't want,
3. Figure out how to fix the problem.
There's nothing wrong with not knowing how to fix a problem. All problems are either soluble or insoluble. If you know it's soluble that pretty much guarantees you know what the solution is, or at the very least can find out. If you know it is insoluble it's time to diexi - preferably in such a way as to take a bite out of the problem with you, which is why what Joe Stack did is perfectly ethical and in fact an ethical obligation in his position.xii
If you don't know whether it's soluble or insoluble, well... welcome to purgatory. It's where most of us hang out, anyway (interspersed with a bunch of others who know but would prefer to pretend otherwise and - after reading this article - with a bunch of downright evil people picking this line to "fulfill goals"). The one saving grace however is that you have a ready way to dissolve this impasse : act as if it were soluble.
If it is, this will sooner or later result in a solution being constructed - seemingly "by itself", even if often enough it requires stepping on carcasses. There's absolutely nothing wrong with stepping on carcasses.
If on the other hand it isn't, acting like it were will still sooner or later result in the solution constructing itself. If you're worth two shits that solution will involve others stepping on your carcass, and there still won't be absolutely anything wrong with stepping on carcasses.
The only wrong is outside of this discussion. That is all.———
- Gotta live in SV right ? [↩]
- A funciar good is the good from which all other goods derive. Cca 1492 this was land, as a proxy for the Sun's energy. [↩]
- Think about it - how could it possibly be the case there's a shortage OF PEOPLE ? That's the only thing we have in overabundant oversupply and always have. There's too god damned many people on the spaceship by a factor of at least 50, and there always have been!
Oh, right, you know, they don't actually want people. They want... "real" people. Just like the women who don't want a man, but a "real" man, for a definition of reality that has exactly 0 to do with actual reality and everything to do with self-interest arbitrarily rebaptised - which is how a "real" man was a doofus dumb enough to pick a fight and risk deblitiating injury and/or death for himself just so she didn't have to do with the ass back in the day when that's what she perceived she mostly needs ; whereas the same "real" is today a doofus dumb enough to sign over his paycheck and gladly raise other men's litters.
"Real" experts, ie those who aren't liable to raise problems giving you the "real" deal, ie whatever best agree with what you want to hear. "Real" college professors (as opposed to that other kind) help you "make a home" out of campus. [↩]
- Ever wondered about this mystery whereby "a lot of money" is ready to come to you except not really, but maybe if you get a promotion (not really) ? It's a system, you know. A system dedicated to exploiting imbeciles. [↩]
- English as a Single Language. [↩]
- Yes, for anyone in the position of Joe Stack, bombing the offices of the USG is an ethical imperative, while claiming otherwise is immoral. [↩]
- Isn't it ? How you "should" do things, right ? Exactly opposite of how you'd do them, or to quote that excellent Al Pacino bit,
Let me give you a little inside information about God. God likes to watch. He's a prankster. Think about it. He gives man instincts. He gives you this extraordinary gift, and then what does He do, I swear for His own amusement, his own private, cosmic gag reel, He sets the rules in opposition. It's the goof of all time. Look but don't touch. Touch, but don't taste. Taste, don't swallow. Ahaha. And while you're jumpin' from one foot to the next, what is he doing? He's laughin' His sick, fuckin' ass off!
- Or you "don't know what to write", which is what you're trying to cover up with the bullshit. [↩]
- Temporal here is a term of art, following all the way through history to the original Worms dispute. The resolution of that crisis was enacting into international politics a distinction between temporal authority, represented by the ring and vested in the prince, and spiritual authority, represented by the staff and vested in the bishop. How to pick whether a specified item is temporal or spiritual is the most complex part of this entire discussion, as the distinction is not always obvious.
For instance, "I couldn't live without Mary" is strictly a temporal concern of the damned ; whereas "I won't live in a world where I can't ensure the survival of arbitrarily chosen single females on my say-so" is a spiritual concern of the saved. For a certain, fallen mind living in a state of sin these two are interchangeable in theory, and will be interchanged in practice "to fullfill goals". This is, for your convenience, the only point where ineptitude actually crosses over into evil. There's no other paths to evil you might take, nor really any further substance to evil than this simple thing.
Nevertheless, subtleties remain, and one is sadly never free from the risk of possibly discovering down the line that he was mistaken. For instance "good health" is notoriously iffy. [↩]
- This happens to people who spend too much of their time interacting with / immersed in bizarre cults, which by definition includes anyone consuming English media preponderently. [↩]
- Know that there is absolutely nothing wrong with this. It's not bad, it's not shameful, it's just as obligatory as eating when hungry or fucking when horny. Not all life-in-being should continue, and the only dispositive authority on that point is the life in question. So on this matter you absolutely can never be wrong. Yes, others may lie about it, for the same reason they lie about "real" : self-interest. Their womanhood is their concern.
- Obviously this sword cuts just like all the other ones : if you can, you must. No part of this discussion is really optional in any sense. [↩]