RSS Output
French    German    Spain    Italian    Arabic    Chinese Simplified    Russian

Letters by a modern St. Ferdinand III about cults

Gab@StFerdinandIII - Plenty of cults exist - every cult has its 'religious dogma', its idols, its 'prophets', its 'science', its 'proof' and its intolerant liturgy of demands.  Cults everywhere:  Islam, the State, the cult of Gay and Queer, Marxism, Darwin and Evolution, 'Science', Globaloneywarming, Changing Climate, Abortion....a nice variety for the human-hater, amoral, anti-rationalist to choose from.  It is so much fun mocking them isn't it ?

Tempus Fugit Memento Mori - Time Flies Remember Death 

Back

Scientism - Recent Articles

Wittgenstein, modern cults and the abasement of truth with language games

Corona, Global Warming, Evolution - all frauds premised on word games.

Bookmark and Share

 

 Wittgenstein (1889-1951), was a Austrian philosopher primarily in mathematics.  He was however, quite critical of the cult of Reason or ‘Rationalism’.  In his work, ‘Philosophical Investigations’, he identifies the word-games of ‘Science’ as an impediment to truth and understanding.  Various language games for Wittgenstein are ‘tools in a box’.  Each tool can be used to justify our means.  A fraudulent data set.  A partially correct but essentially deceiving graph.  A theory with little proof offered as factual.  The use of ‘experts’ to verify conjecture as immutable truth.  Wittgenstein asks and answers what is science:

 

‘How many kinds of science are there?....There are countless kinds; countless different kinds of use of all the things we call ‘signs', ‘word’, sentences’….new types of language, new language games, as we may say, come into existence, and others become obsolete and forgotten.’

 

What Wittgenstein is saying is that if the need demands it, the tools will change it.  The rules of the language game may change, for example a chess piece called the Bishop may be changed to say the ‘priest’ who cannot move indefinitely far, diagonally.  This would make chess less interesting but would not change the ‘rules’ for the other pieces.  So it goes with math and science.  1 + 1 = 2 is a mathematical rule, it cannot equal 3, unless we determine that the ‘+’ sign is no longer one of addition between the two numbers on other side, but something else entirely (maybe it means add an extra one to the answer).  This language game, changes the rules and all of mathematics. 

 

Wittgenstein articulates that words, symbols and rules have meaning because of the language we apply to them.  Plato and Kant are philosophers who interpret the world of the material and immaterial, using their own language, bound by time, knowledge and culture.  The search for rationality then, is likewise problematic for Wittgenstein.  1 + 1 = 2, seems self-evident, but what if the rules supporting the language game of mathematics were completely altered so that the equation equals 3?  What then of ‘rationality’ and truth?

 

These may seem like abstract arguments, but they cut to the core of rotten science.  Instead of the scientific method, we have long sentences and complex word structures, attempting more to confuse, then enlighten with proof and clarity.  Dogma replaces investigation and truth.  Global warming, Evolution, Corona and other cults are all evidence of the ‘language games’, Wittgenstein warned about.  He believed that if the basis of any discipline is the ‘use of language’, than when that language is abused, debased, or altered out of all meaning, the discipline in question, must inevitably be degraded and distorted out of all recognition to the truth or reality of existence. 

 

Nietzsche and the end of Reason and the fantasy of Democracy

Corona is an example of Nietzschean truth.

Bookmark and Share

 

Corona is nothing but two years of lies, terror, deceit, dead, wounded, society deranged, elections stolen, mandates, impositions, passes, endless propaganda, and evil.  Why?  There is no pandemic.  Death rates never changed.  The average age of death from Corona in the UK is still over 80, many obese, almost all with pre-conditions.  The chance of a child under 18 dying is statistically 0.000%.  The real number of dead from just Corona in the UK is about 10.000 (ONS admits this).  The rest (some 130.000 they claim), died ‘with’ Corona, based on the falsified and useless PCR tests, itself found in 5 courts of law, not to identify Corona strains but rather simple and common strains of the cold and influenza.  If you take away the PCR tests and the ‘with’ category of allegedly Corona dead, there is no pandemic, no need for mandates and certainly no need for lockdowns or ‘passes’.

 

Worse the ‘vaccinations’ which contain metals, poisons, spike producing mRNA or adenoviral matter (both end up doing the same thing in your body, namely producing 30 Trillion or more spike proteins which ‘attack’ the Corona virus); are killing and injuring people worldwide.  VAERS in the US now lists 17.000 dead from the Stabs, the UK almost 2.000.  Millions are injured.  These reports are only 10% or less of the real totals.  Add in the dead from lockdowns estimated to be 50.000 in the UK and the 20.000 allegedly murdered through government orders in old age homes, through the mandated usage of midazolam, an end-of-life drug, and we have at least 100.000 murdered by the government in the UK, juxtaposed against 10.000 or so who died over 2 years, from Corona. 

 

The past 2 years have seen freedom and people slaughtered.  It is mass murder and carnage, yet 80% of the population is happy with it, willingly complies with the inanity of wearing a face-anus-wrap or diaper, and with bulging eyes, believes every criminal utterance from Fake News, Politicians and Pharma, about scariants or dead totals.  The Sheeple are plugged into their cult and matrix, oblivious of real life, or the destruction of their civilisation, terrified and cowering over a 99.85% survival rate flu.  The Criminal Pharma stands to make $100 billion in profits just in 2022.  Plenty of money to buy health agencies, news outlets, Politicians and Parliaments. 

 

Now we have the fascistic hate toward the UnJabbed.  These people are now demonised, abused, accused of murder and being anti-science.  In some locales they are locked-down and locked out of society and have lost their jobs.  All the evidence is that they were right, and everyone else was wrong.  Yet the fruits of being prudent and above the roaring hysterical insanity now means that being Unstabbed is the new, hated Jew.  A vermin, a pestilence, an ‘anti-vaxx’ war monger, parading and fighting with ignorance against the ‘science’.  Some ‘thing’ to be eliminated.

 

How did all this happen?

 

Nietzsche despite his many faults and probable insanity, was prescient.  He did not accept the ‘Jeffersonian’ view of Enlightened ‘rationalism’, viewing Jefferson and the Enlightenment, quite rightly, as irrational and self-serving.  He equated Jeffersonian and Enlightenment ideals as repackaged, and repurposed Christianity, with the Orthodoxy of Christian belief stripped away, allowing for the creation and manifestation of the modern world’s intellectual and philosophical crisis, namely a diseased form of nihilism.

 

Jefferson hated the Catholic Church and viewed it as an institution of dogma and mysticism, with layers of writing and beliefs designed to hide real Christianity and the doctrines of Christ.  He viewed himself as a rational and pure Christian and condemned ‘monkish ignorance’ as providing an obstacle to progress.  He blames the Platonic influence and melding of Plato’s philosophy with Catholic doctrine which wrapped the Church, in his view, in mystical irrelevancy and supernaturalism, destroying the immanent and unifying vision and preaching of the Christ.

 

Nietzsche disagreed with Jefferson and his Enlightenment peers.  For Nietzsche Christianity is a complete whole and cannot lose any attendant parts or it shatters.  It is a religion based in time and perspective and is neither immanent nor universal.  For Nietzsche both faith and ‘reason’ are based on perspectives, historicity, and world-views.  There is no independent religion of reason.

 

“We see that science also rests on a faith, there simply is no science without presuppositions.”

 

There is no ‘value free’ interpretation.  Everything is based on the ‘zeitgeist’ of the viewer.  In Will To Power, he explains the end product of the Enlightenment, namely nihilism, ‘A nihilist is a man who judges of the world as it ought not to be, and of the world as it ought to be that does not exist.’  This means that the disappointment with this world will mean a welcome end to it, in the hope of attaining something post-life.  Democracy can’t deliver what most want in this world, which leaves the Christian idea of the after-world, and God, still potent articles of faith and hope.  Nietzsche argues that without God, civilisation will implode.  Democracy won’t save it.

 

Nietzsche is right.  Without Christianity there is no civilisation.  It is untenable.  Democracy means little when elections are stolen, mandates imposed, government power unlimited, and people are terrified by ‘experts’, ‘scientists’ and deny what their own lying eyes see.  The Corona scamdemic and endemic fascism proves Nietzsche’s point.  Without spiritual strength, a coherent integration of reason and faith, democracy leads to an imploding society and tyranny.

Alexis de Tocqueville – a critic of the irrational Enlightenment

Rationalism leads to a centralised state and totalitarianism.

Bookmark and Share

 

 

de Tocqueville (1805-1859) toured America in the early 19th century to discover why Americans were imprisoned far less than Frenchmen, and why American society seemed more civilised and refined in both governance and matters of criminality, than in France.  He wrote extensively on his experiences, expressing concerns that people in ‘modern democracies’ would allow their freedoms to expire and become defunct, as they were born along, in the popular modern philosophy, by ‘events’ or ineluctable phases of ‘development’.  As de Tocqueville wrote, new kinds of slavery follow, when reason becomes insolent.  In the madness of Corona ‘scientism’, when freedom all over the globe is being crushed to fight a 99.85% survival rate virus, when fascism is now being implemented on once free peoples, this observation from 200 years ago is more appropriate than ever.

 

Even in the 19th century it was clear to de Tocqueville that ambitious social engineering was fully in train.  Elites and ‘experts’, unimpressed with individual and social liberties promised full emancipation and equality for all, as long as the ‘all’, followed the experts’ certitudes and rectitude.  To achieve these grandiose dreams of full equality, a truncated and corrupted view of history, human nature and science was necessary.  An endless amount of ‘Enlightenment’ dogma and irrationality poured forth to provide the justifications; Marxism, Darwinism, Materialism were of especial importance.

 

de Tocqueville would be classed as a modern ‘liberal’ informed by Aristotle, and he clearly recognised the fanatical religiosity of the Enlightenment and knew it would end up in the destruction of individual rights and freedoms.  de Tocqueville recognised that the Enlightenment philosophes despised Christianity and medieval Catholic heritage and culture.  Yet their own atheist-humanist religion sounded like a holy crusade, with egocentric prides offended by God, with an equally hateful ‘parvenu pride’ expressed towards the average human. 

 

de Tocqueville believed that reason and liberty are indispensably united, yet often in conflict.  Intellectual integrity requires freedom, and freedom demands the use of reason.  Excessive reason or rationalism, is however, the enemy of freedom.  Political rationalism assumes that there is only ‘one way’ to settle matters and that individuals must be relieved of responsibility to achieve the ‘right, rational’ path.  Political rationalism as given by the Enlighteners demands that the individual give up the right to act, judge and assess for themself.  There is to be no negotiation with the framework of political rationalism.  Only acquiescence and compliance are needed.

 

In his critique of the Enlightenment, de Tocqueville correctly identified that rationalism is entirely partisan and largely irrational since it ignores all other aspects of the human condition including the immaterial, spiritual, emotional, cultural and historical.  It assumes that all people are children, irresponsible, naughty, ignorant, dependent, a burden.  In order to achieve ‘systemic’ equality and ‘justice’ it is thus necessary to organise these hordes of children and usher them in the right direction, with ‘accepted’ ideas and attitudes.

 

The Enlightenment as de Tocqueville rightly assessed, would lead to the belief that people are beasts.  Freedom is one of the main factors of separation of people from animals.  Once freedom is removed, it is much easier to render the human as a just another beast, and lead, punish, slaughter or use them in the same fashion.  de Tocqueville saw this centralising tendency within government with the rise of the physiocrats in the late 18th century, as epitomised by August Comte.  Material interests inform centralised plans, and is called ‘positivism’, or ‘progressivism’.  Declamations on material progress, health and safety, social justice, and white supremacism are examples of such doctrines.  They result in unlimited government and interference, evident with the Corona dictatorships being erected in many countries which support the already obese and intolerant state and its endless array of agencies and regulators.

 

When the atheist-humanist French Revolution failed and ended in an orgy of violence, blood, war and Christianophobia and destruction, the general mass agitated for a ‘saviour’ and turned to the ‘state’ to make society ‘safe’ and ‘peaceful’.  As de Tocqueville noted the regime had already exchanged the role of ‘sovereign’ to that of ‘guardian’ in the early 19th century, embarking on various programs of ‘equality’ and ‘justice’.  He knew that the parsimonious philosophies of the ‘rationalists’ were at odds with the irreducibly complex and variegated flows of normal life.

 

Democracy in America contains de Tocqueville’s experiences in America.  The problem statement he was endeavouring to understand was why were there far fewer crimes and imprisonments in America than in France?  When you parse through his observations and listen to his own conclusions, there are two reasons.  The first is the limited form and freedom supporting nature of US governance.  The second is the local support and affiliation with churches and from that, the extension of Christianity into societal, political, and economic affairs. 

 

Culture was and is King.  In 19th century America there was a belief in self-development, morality, Christian ethics and limiting the power of tyrants and government.  None of that applies today in most of America.  Government is uber alles, elections are fraudulent, state power omnipotent, people are viewed as undeveloped sheep, and the full-throated, Orc-like animus against the Churches and Christianophobia only accelerates.