Holy shit user, this is possibly one of the smartest ways I've ever seen Memetics used as mind manipulation. if it isn't too much too ask, do you have any more details on the subject? This has gotten me really excited about its potential
Butterfly War Update
Ian Ross
Matthew Peterson
What about the creation of a fake emotion? One which actors manually insert into the lexicon and culture. Due to sociopaths ability to change their colors "imitate emotions" without having the frame of reference of understanding those emotions at the level non sociopaths do, could this be done to out them? It'd be like they developed a poison wing pattern for which no other butterfly possesses, therefore the predator has no conditioning to avoid it.
Asher Anderson
Hey you beautiful faggot, you're gonna want to look into Gödel's completeness and incompleteness theorems. More important than the maths involved, are the philosophical implications - knowledge is infinite, and it is a real (and likely, in his estimation) possibility that it is all attainable.
In his unpublished 1961 essay, "On the Modern Development of Mathematics in Light of Philosophy", he outlines his hopes for new mathematics. You'll find he points to Husserl's phenomenological method, which is a mental exercise not unlike creating a new emotion that allows one to study how to know the known unknown.
Best of luck, know you are accompanied by a silent minority of high IQ individuals who will work alongside you to free the creative mind from the bonds of slavery. The logos will prevail.
Benjamin Butler
The hatred anons have for modernity and its postmodern abandonment of human dignity is something have been intimately familiar with since my earliest memories. I grew up in a post-industrial wasteland and watched a newly broken people justify their own descent into animalism. I had the luxury of being the recipient of the very worst of human nature at a very young age and that drove me to find ways to put an end to it.
The way I see it, the world used to be fight or flight. Now it is fight or capitulate. Flight is off the table. I seek to bring it back, but that is a very hard problem to solve. Minds far greater than mine have spent more years than I've been alive trying to solve the problem of restoring flight (planetary exodus) and, at best, they could only make incremental improvements. To my horror, I would later find the entire structure of modern mathematics plagued by this trend. No level of self-inflicted autism would allow me to reach my goal within the span of my lifetime. I had to pivot heavily and think creatively.
I started to entertain the idea that mathematics itself was being limited by neurological biases. Not cognitive biases, but neurological, as in, the structure of the visual cortex was finely tuned to comprehend three-dimensional space, not n-dimensional Penrose tensors. I had asked myself a question: “How did intelligence even evolve into being?” and the only answer I could find were hand-wavey new age masks for flimsy political initiatives. It was slim pickings in those days and the situation hasn't improved much.
Francis Fukuyama inadvertently gave me a clue in Our Posthuman Future, which was his apology to Samuel Huntington after Clash of Civilizations smashed Fukuyama's End of History In it, Fukuyama gave a brief mention to bioengineering new brains and the implications that will have on moral and legal frameworks as an interesting what if. He left it dangling and couldn't connect it to the evolution of intelligence.
This missing piece connected the following conclusion: If a posthuman brain could mean new morality, then that would imply new emotions. If new emotions were now a concept, then how did any emotion evolve into being in the first place?
It was a long and error-prone journey, but the short of it is that our neurological impulse to extract emotional data from behavior implies an apriori limitation of what patterns we can and could not see. Therefore, a new emotion would imply new pattern detection, which means new truths about reality could be seen as well. It wouldn't just be morality and legal frameworks that would be turned on their head in the advent of a postmodern mind, but the entire realm of mathematics and logic itself as well.
You propose an interesting concept. Lemme explore it.
The concept of a new emotion is possible, and giving it a name is also possible. Let's say our new emotion has a label called “flomagork” and we use mass media to associate behavioral properties with flomagork. The novel behavioral properties can take hold in culture, but those properties are still compliant with the emotional data that an individual can already extract. Any behavior these recipients emit would be encoded with emotional data for emotions they already possess.
A fake emotion could exist as part of a mass hallucination in which all sensory input is firmly controlled, yes. But it would still appeal to already existing emotions, and so sorting out the easily deceived from a sociopath might be a difficult challenge.
Godel. Goddamn Godel. He was critical in my understanding that no level of intentional autism would help me achieve my goal.
In fact, pic related is the current scope of where I'm at. It's a protoype, but its for a very applicable and immediate pragmatic purpose, specifically expressing machine epistemology in entropic terms.
And off into the very deep end we go!
Carson Anderson
Thank you for the new thought paradigms to those in this thread who have sparked them. It's pleasantly rewarding finding a blog that looks like lunacy turns out to be brilliant.
Brody Taylor
When you speak of visual cortex user and perception, does any of the following mean anything to you?
We have been deceived into believing, that we possess (Euclidean) vision, incapable of sensing an infinite, non-Euclidean universe. The opposite is true. Our vision is non-Euclidean and we are experiencing a finite Euclidean reality.
Direct realism vs perceived realism…
hooktube.com
The work of Thomas Reid.
Nathan Jenkins
Godspeed, I like the way your head works.
Levi Cook
I suggest you stop listening to secondary sources, then - the conclusions of his work are summarized by talking heads as a message of futility. However, in his own words (please do read or listen (link) to the essay I mention, it is short) he rejects this and asserts the opposite.
The crucial point of distinction: a human mind is capable of intuitive leaps outside of any set of rules of thinking. The incompleteness theorem applies to systems confined by set rules. Man =/= Machine. Machine has limited knowledge. Man has unlimited knowledge. All that is needed is to think, and think well.
Newton was an egotistical hack. He is famous for saying "Hypothesis Non Fingo". Leibniz, however, was a true man of genius, who unabashedly ate of the fruit of knowledge of good and evil and sought to share it with the world.
Leibniz sought to bust the mind free of its chains with en.wikipedia.org
Gödel, in researching Leibniz's work on his universal language, discovered evidence that Leibniz had been censored posthumously by those who seek to perpetuate man's ignorance for reasons of power. Source: archive.li
Adam Parker
This is a fair analog.
The evolution of this thought is hilariously paraphrased as::
Plato: Ideal forms exist
Hume: Ideal forms cannot be known unless they generate sense data.
Descartes: I can't prove a damn thing about any of that except that I exist.
Nietzsche: Not even you exist, only ideal forms of you exist.
Orwell: Even in absolute nonexistence, power always finds a way to assert authority.
Forgive my flippancy, I was being colloquial.
I do not extract futility from Godel. His destruction of Hilbert was essential and I fear we will be facing Round Two of that fight as the promises of machine learning fail to deliver.
Which supports your observation very well:
A very fun revelation. Thank you and I shall read immediately! :D
Robert Carter
Being a sociopath is, as far as I've understood, the best character option for this kind of warfare. My question is, how do you create a new emotion that is outside of at least the majority normiemotions?
Which sources are good to start getting into improving pattern recognition of the kind?
I think the majority of anons here tend to keep one meme pretty close to their heart.
Those two words kinda tend to destroy each couple of months big portions of things we thought to be true or even ignored and replaced them with, if not whole truth, a glimpse of what could actually be happening. Making us recognize some patterns thus creating a new emotion(?).
Also good insight about secrecy. I have been doing that myself, but practicing it more in the real world. Engaging all kinds of people with the only goal of controlling their emotions and testing their reactions to words, touch. Developing a set of triggers.
Memeing as a skeptic leftist sometimes dropping redpills left and right without leaving the charade. Talking with fags, negroes, etc. Only to learn from them, imitate them and use their personalities emotions for defense/offense purposes when needed.