Kierkegaard, Nietzsche and Dostoyevsky Versus the Enlightenment Mythos

March 13, 2012 2 Comments

"Ve proclaim ze death of ze Enlightenment!"

By: Jay

      In the course of what is now titled “Continental Philosophy,” three figures stand out as preeminent thinkers able to probe the innermost depths of the human psyche in a way previously unknown since perhaps Shakespeare: Soren Kierkegaard, Friedrich Nietzsche and Fyodor Dostoyevsky.   These three were more or less contemporaries, and all shared a similar fascinating interest—that of tearing down the ideological idols of their day, and in particular, the facade the individual post-Enlightenment “modern man” conceived himself to be.  While these men certainly had differing worldviews and would likely have debated such grand topics as the precise meaning of God and man’s relation to Him in the universe, they shared a similar distaste for hypocrisy, lies and falsehood, and made it partly their authorial iconoclastic goal to unmask such veils.

     Francis Bacon had made it his goal as an early Enlightenment luminary to tear down what he perceived to be idols in his Novum Organon—idols of the tribe, cave, marketplace and theater.  Idols of the tribe meant the destruction of abstracted social ideals foisted upon reality; idols of the cave referred to  myopic interpretations of reality according to a particular fancy of some individual academic; idols of the marketplace refers to the misappropriation of word and thing, assigning an undue identification between the two, assuming that out talking an opponent has then caused the reality of the topic under discussion to actually exist as such; and idols of the theater, where ideas are erected on a false presupposition of theology or metaphysical speculation, becoming ensconced in the public discourse.1 This tractate encompasses the impetus of the Enlightenment and its obsession with what Rene Guenon called the “reign of quantity.” Everything is measured and classified according to some quantitative stricture of man’s reason.  Scientific knowledge, or more specifically, scientism, becomes the dominant paradigm by which all things are measured, be it religion, politics, economics and the marketplace, all things are in potentia capable of rational formalization and, like a big algorithm, all of humanity’s ills simply await the solution of the academy and its laboratory calculators.  Read more of this post

Filed under Books/Literature, Culture, Esoteric/Speculation, Philosophy, Politics, Psychology/Sociology, Theology Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Epistemology of Dogmatic Sciencey Skepticism

March 5, 2012 10 Comments

"I am the hierophant of epistemic autocracy! Behold my labcoat and collective groupmind scientifically melded to all other scientists past-present-and future!"

Or, The Enlightenment rationalist laid bare

By: Jay

An interesting discussion/debate recently transpired.  A friend who is a scientific “skeptic” discussed his dubious demeanor in terms of there being advanced secret technology for two reasons.  First, such ”conspiracies” are doubtful because they are “theories” and come from persons who want to promote a certain worldview (namely a conspiratorial one).  Evidence is gathered, so the theory goes, that is interpreted in a certain fashion to back up the said theory.  Pause for a minute: doesn’t that sound a lot like the modus operandi of those who utilize the “scientific method” to “prove” a certain theory?  Why, yes it does!

Second, he made the argument that the process of scientific advancement is such that whatever advances occur, occur because “someone contemporary to said person would eventually discover the same thing.”  Scientific advancement and discovery happens (so this narrative goes) in a community of objective, non-biased “scientists” committed to the use of “reason” and the building up of human knowledge and progress.  Communities of scientists don white lab coats and thereupon, like Mormon underwear, become sacramentally endued with a sciencey force field that shields them from bias, groupthink, deception, forgery and other nasty human tendencies.

Let’s examine both of these arguments philosophically.  The business of philosophy is the questioning of assumptions and presuppositions, and all the sons of the Enlightenment gloat to no end about their forebears who exalted “reason” above and all “revelation.”  The operant assumption at work here is that there is a universally shared international discourse of egalitarian scientific rationale that men are nobly committed to.  The warrior souls have long battled religionists, only to wrest control of the university and the social arena from “God talk” and letting “science” have the free reign.  These enlightened ones are the true Promethean heroes who distilled the superstition of the middle ages and brought about the dawning of the new age of evolutionary progress into computers, cellphones and the Xbox.  Do you notice that this is starting to look like a religious mythology?  There is a narrative developing, you see, that encompasses past, present and future, and the fittest (namely, those who have sufficiently mastered this reductionist quantification of all reality) press on to inherit the future.

“But wait!” comes the cry from the army of lab coats, “you now reveal yourself as a Luddite!  Nietzscheanpostmodernisthorkheimeradornoist!  You are refuted by the very computer you type on!  Unenlightened fool! You’re no philosophe, you’re a philo-oaf!”  I say no such thing.  I reject the mythology of the Enlightenment just as much as what I believe to be the false mythology of the postmodernists, Marxists and existentialists. I still hold to the rationality of religious revelation and tradition, but that is another argument.  For now, we are examining whether it is “rational” to take our doubting to a deeper degree than the Enlightenment thinker above did.  He doubted his religious views of youth and so adopted what he saw as a freeing, “scientific” worldview.  This then inducted him (so he would think) into the glorious association of the communion of saints of “science” and lab-coated genii.  But wait–the foundation of all this is the “scientific method.”  This great building block of all modernity is now what grounds our many theories upon a certain and firm basis – trial and error, which then confirms our theories, or conversely falsifies them.  Read more of this post

Filed under Conspiracy, Esoteric/Speculation, History, Philosophy, Politics, Psychology/Sociology, Religion Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Samberg Synchronicity?

March 4, 2012 2 Comments

This is oddly similar to my standup routine from two years ago, where I read the Facts of Life theme as a poem that I overtly rip off, but present as a real, heartfelt piece. Readers of my blog know this is not the first time this has happened.

http://www.nbc.com/assets/video/widget/widget.html?vid=1388804

Filed under Comedy, Comedy Videos, Video Tagged with , , , , , , , ,

“GoldenEye” EMP in the News

February 24, 2012 6 Comments

Golden All-Seeing Eye

By: Jay

Two years ago, I did a brief analysis of GoldenEye and mentioned the reality of EMP weapons.  This appeared February 22, 2012 in the Telegraph, mentioning the possibility of a ‘GoldenEye’ EMP weapon.

The Telegraph reads:

“A nuclear device detonated up to 500 miles above the earth’s surface could   generate an electro-magnetic pulse (EMP) with a “devastating”   effect on power supplies, telecommunications and other vital systems, the   Commons Defence Committee said.

It warned that countries such as Iran – which is resisting international   pressure to end its nuclear programme – and even eventually some “non-state   actors” could acquire the technology to mount such an attack, in a   scenario akin to the plot of the 1995 James Bond film ‘GoldenEye’.”

Continued here.

While the “EMP” talk could be paranoia and psych warfare, it could also be real, as NASA and other outlets warn.  Pay close attention to what is said here: “Hollywood could be involved in this…”  (?)

Filed under Conspiracy, Culture, Esoteric/Speculation, Film Review/Analysis, Psychology/Sociology Tagged with , , , , , ,

The Avengers (1998) – Esoteric Analysis: Weather Warfare!

February 16, 2012 2 Comments

Note the exploding Big Ben, a standard Hollywood terrorized edifice. Will the twilight language eventually show Big Ben detonated like "V for Vendetta" also shows?

By: Jay

Update!  See below, in regard to “umbrella” (in relation as well to John Steed’s trademark umbrella).

———

It’s been a while since I did a really juicy tinfoil top hat write-up, and the 1998 film The Avengers is a just such a romp, in terms of filmwise conspiriana.  Upon first viewing, I noticed a few esoteric elements, and upon second viewing, I noticed quite a few more.  The film was a financial and critical flop, yet the plot is not as absurd as it seems, prima facia.  The cinematography and art direction are top-notch, but eventually it fizzles into standard late 90s apocalyptic CGI corn syrup eye candy.  I suspect a lot of people failed to understand that the original series and the remake are a parody of the 60s spy genre, and not to be taken too seriously.

However, as will be shown, the plot is anything but a parody, but instead a cloaking of some of the more unbelievable, yet real elements of conspiracy lore.  In fact, the film is notorious for “razzies,” but in all honesty, it isn’t that bad.The intro begins with different weather systems and what appears to be various energy wave patterns “beamed” at the ionosphere.  Then, following these images is a blood-red moon, looking somewhat like Mars.  This makes sense, since Mars is the god of war, and the film will be be about the very real subject of weaponized weather.  The blood moon is also a biblical apocalyptic image, and the moon governs the weather patterns of the tides, clueing the viewer into the tone to come.View the intro. here, with the blood/Mars/moon visible at 2:26.

Ralph Fiennes’ character John Steed is similar to James Bond: he is a cultured gentleman that works for British Intelligence.  In fact, he even hangs out in Boodle’s: the same club that Ian Fleming, the James Bond creator and author, favored.  The head of the Ministry of Defence apears to be a bumbling man named “Mother,” which hearkens to “M,” 007′s famed boss.  “M,” many believe based on Anthony Master’s biography, was at least in part derived from controversial British Agent and occultist, Maxwell Knight.  In The Avengers, “Mother” is a bumbling crippled man, who works as a front for “Father,” pictured as a manly woman operating as the real head of Secret Intelligence.  Judging by the timing of the film, this could possibly have reference to then head of MI5, Stella Rimington.

Rimington’s novels are said to be “insiders” espionage, and certainly this film is a presentation of a host of conspiriana that, in 1998, were only apparent to “insiders.”Uma Thurman’s character Emma Peel has worked secretly for a weather warfare program that has been hijacked by a double that appears to be her.  The head of the project is the eccentric former head of British Intelligence and black ops, Sir August de Wynter, a Scottish lord-type played by Connery, who lives a reclusive existence in his palace (And of course Connery played Bond, adding to the synchro-mystic associations).

"Say Moneypenny, would you like to reverence my obelisk?"

The name of the program is “Prospero,” which naturally calls to mind Shakespeare’s The Tempest, and Connery functions like the character Prospero as a kind of Masonic magician, using  instead his scientific prowess to create what is essentially a HAARP/weather warfare operation.  Keep in mind that although weather warfare was known to some military personnel, and although it had been written about by Zbigniew Brzezinski in 1973 in Between Two Ages, the public was utterly oblivious to such a thing in 1998.  The public is still oblivious to such a notion on the whole, yet much internet conspiracy lore speculates about HAARP and weather warfare.  As you can see, the VLF Group which is the basis for HAARP is undeniably real, and does more or less what de Wynter describes.

Brzezinski writes: Read more of this post

Filed under Books/Literature, Conspiracy, Culture, Esoteric/Speculation, Film Review/Analysis, History, Philosophy, Politics, Psychology/Sociology, Religion, Uncategorized, Video Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Doctor Who & Call of Duty Twilight Language: Predictive Programming

February 15, 2012 1 Comment

Filed under Conspiracy, Esoteric/Speculation, History, Philosophy, Politics, Psychology/Sociology, Video Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , ,

8 Examples of Unusually, Overly Specific Typecasting in Hollywood Movies

February 15, 2012 3 Comments

"I, ugh, I ugh, I'm I'm stroking my chin now, right now, as a proper Jeff Goldblum should do, and I, I, I, um, am about to tell you some, some, um, disturbing FUBAR event that we will marginally escape..."

By: Peter Parker

Most movie goers are familiar with the phenomenon of typecasting, where a certain actor, be it by his or her own efforts or by the capricious whims of some Hollywood Executive, ends up playing the same basic role over and over again. Examples include John Wayne’s myriad performances as Cowboys, Arnold Schwarzenegger’s frequent portrayal of guys who’ll “be back” and Shia Labeouf’s endless depictions of people I want to repeatedly punch in the face. However, what has gone largely unnoticed by folks with so-called “real lives” is what I have labeled “U.O.S.T.” or Unusually Overly Specific Typecasting. U.O.S.T is often so bizarre that it seems more like some wonky Synchro-Mystic reincarnation across an actor’s career history rather than a reflection of the utter unoriginality of Hollywood casting directors but perhaps we should just let the examples of it speak for themselves.

Mary Steenburgen: The Girlfriend, Turned Wife of Guys Who Travel Between the Late 19th and Late 20th Centuries.

Other than playing Bride of Frankenstein to giant foreheaded hubby Ted Danson, Mary Steenburgen is probably best known for playing the part of Clara Clayton, a schoolmarm romanced by nutty scientists Emmett “Doc” Brown, when he travels back to the year 1885 in the third Back to the Future movie. After contemplating destroying his time machine on the grounds that it might fuck shit up on a galactic scale, Doc eventually says “screw the laws of causality,” marries Clara and returns with her to his own era.

"We named our kids Jules & Verne, so basically, we’re one of those annoying yuppie couples that makes you wanna barf! But at least, be thankful we didn’t pull a Will & Jada Smith & call em Clemet & Emra."

What’s less remembered, however, is Mary played almost this exact same part ten years earlier, with only one slight inversion. In the 1979 film Time After Time, Mary plays Amy Robbins a late 20th century woman who is romanced by a time traveler from the year 1893, specifically the pimp-daddy of time travel himself, H.G Wells, who came through time to pursue none other than Jack the Ripper. After saving Amy from “Saucy Jack” Wells decides he must return to his own time and destroy the machine. Proving the old adage “time machines are the ultimate pussy wagons,” Amy begs Wells to take her with him. They return to 1893 with the ending credits telling us that they later married.

Hell, both movies even feature scenes where Mary gets all pissy when her respective beaus, reveal that they are time travelers. Apparently, she believes “I’m a time traveling scientists” to be a sleazy con to get up under her hoop skirt and as we’ve already established, it’s definitely an angle that works!

Speaking of perfectly executed segues; our next example of U.O.S.T also involves another actress from Back to the Future.

Maybe this movie traveled through time to become “Back to the Future 3.”

Lea Thompson: Young Women in Sci-Fi Related, Deeply Disturbing, Sexual Relationships.

If you weren’t creeped out by the Steenburgen/Danson pairing, then this next segment probably won’t phase you one bit, however if your disturbo-threshold is that of a normal human, prepare to go “eeww!”

The lovely Lea Thompson has twice played parts that combine sci-fi and totally wrong sexual relationships. Many of us remember, mostly in therapy sessions, the scene in Back to the Future where Lea plays 1950s chick Lorrain Baines, who through the miracle of time travel, tries to get it on with her own son, Marty.

Hell, both movies even feature scenes where Mary gets all pissy when her respective beaus, reveal that they are time travelers. Apparently, she believes “I’m a time traveling scientists” to be a sleazy con to get up under her hoop skirt and as we’ve already established, it’s definitely an angle that works! Read more of this post

Filed under Comedy, Culture, Film Review/Analysis, Psychology/Sociology Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Rabbi Horowitz Presents the Deterministic Fallacy

February 13, 2012 1 Comment

Filed under Apologetics, Books/Literature, Culture, History, Philosophy, Religion Tagged with , , , , ,

1981 Film “Rollover” Predicts Present Financial Qualms

February 12, 2012 Leave a comment

Filed under Conspiracy, Culture, Economics, Esoteric/Speculation, Film Review/Analysis, Video Tagged with , , , , , , , ,

Prediction of Next Major Event in “Trespass”?

February 12, 2012 1 Comment

Filed under Conspiracy, Culture, Esoteric/Speculation, Film Review/Analysis, Video Tagged with , , , , , , ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 100 other followers