DrGregoryHouse's loony bin

[DrGregoryHouse]

The religion of the contemporary west has become the Cult of Multiculturalism. Apparently the heretics who refused to agree that the sun revolved around the earth and that the king was a sungod in the past have been replaced (by Groupthink International TM) with the non-believers in the ridiculously retarded religious dogma of multiculturalism and 'racism'**

HERETIC! HERETIC! HERETIC! HERETIC!

RACIST! RACIST! RACIST! RACIST!

**Is it a biological reality that subspecies of human exist? If yes, is it possible to acknowledge this reality without any ill will towards a subspecies other than your own? Or has the modern day priest class inextricably combined the meaning of both concepts into the same word for use by the zombified masses of simpletons: 'racist'?

Methinks what has happened is the contemporary priest class (media, academia, politicians, religious leaders, etc) have in fact convinced their flocks of sheep that the two concepts (biological reality and irrational fear/ anxiety/ hatred/ bloodlust) are one in the same. Hence the accusation of 'racism' ad nauseum.

The purpose, of course, is to shut down any meaningful intelligent inquiry into an examination of what is the truth and what is false. Lest the Wizards of Oz be exposed for what they really are and the sheep be in possession of a higher meaning to their existence (in this case an identity beyond raceless, faceless, historyless, contextless, nationless, pointless consumer of the destiny forced upon them by the priest class aka slave).

'Racism' is mass superstition on a scale comparable to various mass superstitions of all the epochs of the past.

Meaningfully intelligent conversation cannot take place if two concepts have been assumed to be one in the same thing. E.g. Truth = 'The' Church and Acknowledging sociobiological realities = Irrational Fear and Hatred

The priest class knows this and does not implement this strategy on accident.

Strange how things work. One superstition exchanged for an equally, if not more, noxious religious dogma...

On the bright side humans continuously prove themselves interesting.

Doesn't matter what I think or you think or any particular group thinks anyways. Nature and the laws of Science are in charge of the destiny of humans on this planet anyways. The self appointed priest class of social engineers be damned LOLZ. Like so many bacteria in an ancient pond acting like it has a say...

 

[Seteleechete]

Re: Migrant situation in Europe

Not wanting people to immigrate because of their 'race' even if their 'race' can be seen as subjectively worse than the local one is still racism as it is discrimination by race. Though you are right in that it was wrong of me to dismiss this as a potentially legitimate reason(from some sort of utilitarian viewpoint) even though I personally don't care one way or another.

Hmm, most of the potential problems arising from this tend to disappear through integration and assimilation which isn't happening at a fast enough for some. While 'race' may have some minor effect on this the main reasons are cultural so I'll stand by that racism is a baseless argument(humans aren't that different) but admit that cultural differences isn't.

What you are doing is dehumanizing them, which is hate speech though the factors behind it must not necessarily be racist. They are people often have a conflicting culture and are presumably a net drain on your resources. As I said despite this there are legitimate humanitarian arguments for helping them if you acknowledge them as more important than the monetary/cultural(debatable) counter-arguments.

 

[DrGregoryHouse]

Re: Migrant situation in Europe

...As I said despite this there are legitimate humanitarian arguments for helping them if you acknowledge them as more important than the monetary/cultural(debatable) counter-arguments.

But what if logic demands that the host is on the cusp of being completely destroyed by the parasite and thus rendering even the parasite incapable of having a source of nourishment (leading to its extinction as well)?

Is this not unfair to the parasite? (if the parasite is indeed the primary focus due to irrational empathatic good intentions trumping logic and rationality).

That is at what point will the empathetic admit that despite the very real power of good intentions in a social context in the short run, it cannot overcome the laws of physics in the long run (second law of thermodynamics and all that)?

 

[Seteleechete]

Re: Migrant situation in Europe

But what if logic demands that the host is on the cusp of being completely destroyed by the parasite and thus rendering even the parasite incapable of having a source of nourishment?

Is this not unfair to the parasite? (if the parasite is indeed the primary focus due to irrational empathatic good intentions trumping logic and rationality).

That is at what point will the empathetic admit that despite the very real power of good intentions in a social context in the short run, it cannot overcome the laws of physics in the long run (second law of thermodynamics and all that)?

This is a silly overexageration, yes it may hurt us some but it's nowhere near enough for it to not be worth for the refugees to seek asylum, even in the long term. Europe is unlikely to implode into third world countries even with tens of millions of refugees.

 

[Fukyo]

You can consider yourself officially warned on account of obnoxious behavior in the recent stupidity/music correlation thread and continuing to go on martyring racist rants despite informal warning. By all means, you can continue to be spitefully obnoxious, but don't think the rope you're giving yourself won't be used.

 

[Seteleechete]

Also please change the title to one regarding migration I am taking the arguments I can decipher from his writing seriously.

 

[DrGregoryHouse]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPjzfGChGlE

 

[DrGregoryHouse]

You can consider yourself officially warned on account of obnoxious behavior in the recent stupidity/music correlation thread and continuing to go on martyring racist rants despite informal warning. By all means, you can continue to be spitefully obnoxious, but don't think the rope you're giving yourself won't be used.

Your generation can't say it wasn't warned. Many many times.

Time always proves the Heretics and Martyrs correct.

 

[DrGregoryHouse]

Please note the creator(s) of this thread have been disingenuous. I cannot tell you why. I can speculate but I won't bother.

I did not create this thread. Yet whoever created this thread (and are manipulating the conversation "Migrant situation in Europe" thread) have made it look like I did.

This is promoting an untruth.

Very very un becoming of an INTP forum.

Socrates would not be pleased.

 

[Seteleechete]

Drgregory I can tell you(again, presumably) that you aren't warned as much for the content of your posts as the alienating, confrontational and bigoted style you write them in.

 

[DrGregoryHouse]

Drgregory I can tell you(again, presumably) that you aren't warned as much for the content of your posts as the alienating, confrontational and bigoted style you write them in.

I do not agree.

Timelessness proves that Substance > Style.

Its my experience that detractors of substance (whatever their motivations) are consistent in their overemphasis on style > substance.

If they can they will censor substance based on arguments rooted in style.

This warning of which you speak is because the substance threatens a given style (slant/ spin put on a given substance).

 

[Fukyo]

In my humble opinion there is neither style nor substance in his rants. Just a solipsistic worldview where DrGH is the only intelligent humanoid and everyone else is a drooling zombie. When overconfidence is co morbid with a lack of substance...

 

[DrGregoryHouse]

Drgregory I can tell you(again, presumably) that you aren't warned as much for the content of your posts as the alienating, confrontational and bigoted style you write them in.

How about lying about a thread having been created by a poster (such as myself)?

Does this not provide proof of at least one untruth being promulgated by the mods?

Does this not provide proof of the distinctly heretical nature of the substance of my position over style and the mods emphasis on style over substance?

I have never knowingly represented an untruth as truth.

Anything I've posted is worthy of examination for truth, of course.

Yet substance is not being allowed to be compared with substance fairly when threads and conversations are manipulated like this.

Style is ephemeral. Substance is not.

Its a waste of thought and effort to focus so acutely on matters of style.

At least to the philosopher as opposed to one engaged in social engineering of course.

 

[Seteleechete]

Firstly anyone with some sense will realize this is a split. Secondly when it comes to argumentation of any kind (including divining the truth) style is IMPORTANT. If people misrepresent what you are arguing about they will assume that is what you are arguing about. If people get hung up on your style no decent discussion will be had and unlike myself who goes to a great length to ignore alienating styles, most people are 1. more sensitive and impulsive in that regard and 2. do not have the patience to ignore and decipher it.

Furthermore style is argumentation in and of itself in that it conveys a message that is not always explicitly stated and as such is also part of the substance of the message that most people choose to not ignore. Your style suggests that you are not interested in conveying the truth as much as lord over those that you see as lower as you. This is directly substance from your message that is conveyed towards the audience and they will call you out on it. That you did not mean this in your mind is irrelevant the message will be taken as the reader NOT the writer deciphers it.

Saying style is unimportant is ignoring reality when it has clearly been shown that people do care about style and it does affect your arguments

 

[DrGregoryHouse]

My thoughts in reply in red

Firstly anyone with some sense will realize this is a splitThis requires quite the assumption. Secondly when it comes to argumentation of any kind including divining the truth style is IMPORTANT Maybe you are right because Trump LOLZ seems be using style quite effectively. If people misrepresent what you are arguing about they will assume that is what you are arguing aboutAs in creating threads out of thin air taken out of the context of another thread, assigning a title and authorship to that thread of a poster which was specifically not authorized by that poster?. If people get hung up on your style no decent discussion will be had and unlike myself who goes to a great length to ignore alienating styles most people are 1. more sensitive and impulsive in regards to it and 2. do not have the patience to ignore and decipher Ummm: is there not valor in expecting a higher order of cognition, then? Or does catering to the lowest common denominator offer more appeal (for whatever debased reason)?.

Furthermore style is argumentation in and of itself in that it conveys a message that is not always explicitly stated and as such is also part of the substance of the message that most people choose to not ignore. Your style suggests that you are not interested in conveying the truth as much as lord over those that you see as lower as youThis is not the fault of words so much as psychological projection of meaning and/or value to words which were not used. This is directly substance from your message that is conveyed towards the audience and they will call you out on it. That you did not mean this in your mind is irrelevant the message will be taken as the reader NOT the writer deciphers it.

Again, to whom does this forum cater to then? What do they aspire to? Protoplasmic slavery of their neuronal connections or freedom to associate their neurons with other neurons of their choice?

Who is acting the priest class, in this instance, then?

 

[Jennywocky]

Please note the creator(s) of this thread have been disingenuous. I cannot tell you why. I can speculate but I won't bother.

I did not create this thread. Yet whoever created this thread (and are manipulating the conversation "Migrant situation in Europe" thread) have made it look like I did.

This is promoting an untruth.

Very very un becoming of an INTP forum.

Socrates would not be pleased.

I wasn't on the forum earlier, but do you mean this thread started out as part of some other thread and got moved here and slapped with a name you don't like?

That's actually a pretty standard way mods on any forum deal with derails or topics that deserve their own thread.

Perhaps you think the context is inaccurate, but you did make the posts/arguments so it's not nearly as "untruthful" as you claim... which kind of makes that an untruth of its own. Alas.

to whom does this forum cater to then? What do they aspire to?

I'm more curious in whom you are catering to and what you aspire to.

If you want to communicate, speak in a way that actually allow for communication, which is a two-way street. You want to talk to human beings, communicate in a way that fosters interest and a sense that invested energy is going to be rewarded in some way.

I think this is the point that was trying to be made, but I think it is such a spot of unawareness in your approach that you're having trouble understanding it in a way that you can make use of it. Your not grasping it I think is preventing people from being able to digest your words in a useful way as well as preventing you from getting your ideas across meaningfully.

 

[TBerg]

https://kenanmalik.wordpress.com/2012/06/04/what-is-wrong-with-multiculturalism-part-1/

It should be noted that the United States took in many immigrants of backwards European culture, proto-fascist, before Europe was Americanized. We still have a dominant Anglo culture. The problem is the lack of respect for the Anglo political traditions, including individualism and equality before the law. Dividing people by the politically correct identity scheme of the day is the real problem. Actual racial animus is also a problem. Tell people they will be treated the same way as everyone else, and ignore the fucking whining.

 

[DrGregoryHouse]

I'm more curious in whom you are catering to and what you aspire to.

If you are not already familiar, look up Socrates' Ideal.

If you want to communicate, speak in a way that actually allow for communication, which is a two-way street. You want to talk to human beings, communicate in a way that fosters interest and a sense that invested energy is going to be rewarded in some way.

I think this is the point that was trying to be made, but I think it is such a spot of unawareness in your approach that you're having trouble understanding it in a way that you can make use of it. Your not grasping it I think is preventing people from being able to digest your words in a useful way as well as preventing you from getting your ideas across meaningfully.

Again, too many important truths to discover and convey to bother with ephemeral matters stubbornly rooted in emotional style. Style baggage is way too irrational/ relative/ subjective/ etc to not be overly cumbersome in impeding the exciting journey towards truth.

 

[DrGregoryHouse]

I would propose the authors of the title of this thread ask me what it ought to be titled and then comply if my proposed name for this thread is within reason.

"DrGregoryHouse's loony bin" is obviously (obvious even to me) impositioning a bias against the original post (again taken out of context, but no less relevant or true so it may as well be its own thread) as well as my avatar.

Yes, even if the act of taking my original post out of context and reassigning it a name is entirely technical in nature as well as routinely carried out, as its stands the thread title is patently subjective -biased even- and unfair to the truth.

Proposed title for this thread:

Contemporary Religion of the West has become the Cult of Multiculturalism

or

Rasicm as Superstitious Red Herring

 

[Seteleechete]

"The importance(or lack of) of style in argumentation" would be more apt. If not I will make a thread about it afterwards it's often an issue here.

 

[DrGregoryHouse]

"The importance(or lack of) of style in argumentation" would be more apt. If not I will make a thread about it afterwards it's often an issue here.

Setel are you an INTP? To what degree? I realize there are plenty of non INTPs on this forum but in my experience it does attract mostly INTP posters.

If you need to make a thread to explain the important of style in argumentation (surprised by it being an issue here?), I'd suggest you aren't understanding INTPs...yet.

Females tend to aspire to emotional agreeableness though...if not to being prone to enforcing emotional agreeableness by any means necessary.

So even if you are 100% INTP I suppose there might be a strong female component at work here.

If you are male or something in between this would simply imply a more female approach to this aspect of communication.

 

[Seteleechete]

hahahahahhahahahahah I can't take it anymore the idiocy of your posts is just too much I am going to go party a bit see you in a few hours.

Try reading your posts in this thread and consider how others would react to them.

 

[DrGregoryHouse]

hahahahahhahahahahah I can't take it anymore the idiocy of your posts is just too much I am going to go party a bit see you in a few hours.

Try reading your posts in this thread and consider how others would react to them.

It seems you are missing the point entirely.

Still focused on your own commonly held myopic belief that style takes precedence over reality.

Not that I don't see yours and this most common erroneous fallacy.

Its just that its irrelevant when things are sorted by priority.

The fact that you are going to another party (ostensibly to socialize emotionally and engage in efforts of a stylistic focus), when I think this conversation based in logic to the exclusion of style and/or emotion is the party, illustrates my point nicely.

 

[Brontosaurie]

Setel are you an INTP? To what degree? I realize there are plenty of non INTPs on this forum but in my experience it does attract mostly INTP posters.

If you need to make a thread to explain the important of style in argumentation (surprised by it being an issue here?), I'd suggest you aren't understanding INTPs...yet.

Females tend to aspire to emotional agreeableness though...if not to being prone to enforcing emotional agreeableness by any means necessary.

So even if you are 100% INTP I suppose there might be a strong female component at work here.

If you are male or something in between this would simply imply a more female approach to this aspect of communication.

One problem: you forgot humans are not assembled manufactured robots but organisms.

(Please don't mistake this for some emotive gargel; INTP all the words and parse it through)

 

[onesteptwostep]

I'm pretty sure Europe is generally against multiculturalism now. As for America, its religious base would stifle out any radicalism that is caused by multiculturalism.

The issue is actually complex though, it really isn't 'culture' as in mannerisms, cuisine or marriage/death traditions, the proponents of this new 'anti' is much more political in nature. And when I mean political I don't mean liberalism or conservatism, the democratic or republican, I mean the very foundations in which western liberalism has given birth itself to.

Most proponents of multiculturalism don't even understand what culture is anyway. There's a mixture of forceful religious agenda, humanism and just plain nativity. The definition of what a culture is is also put into question as well..

 

[Sinny91]

The only person who has become emotional during this course is you. Implied by your increasing irrationality.

Here you are questioning the forums integrity along side paranoid accusations of thread manipulation and an attack on your 'substance'. - Re-read the thread(s), you haven't provided any substance save that of reactionary doom porn.. with overt racist overtones to boot.

You want an educated discussion on the definition of racism and it's relation to the European refugee crisis, then start speaking like you're educated.

I'm well versed in political theory and the roots of (modern) racism, why don't you start with the founders and idealogists of the European Union? I linked them on page one of the Immigration Thread.

Want to talk about how 'religion of the west has become a 'cult of multiculturalism', lets. I wrote a piece last year for university on how the UK has been 'Divided by Diversity'.

Keep your racism to yourself, and let's talk logically.

Oh I almost forgot, the 'subspecies theory' which you are professing betrays you as a racist. (IMO, which obviously holds a contested definition to that of yours).

 

[Miss spelt]

Here you are questioning the forums integrity along side paranoid accusations of thread manipulation and an attack on your 'substance'.

Uh oh...

I wonder how this will end....

 

[TBerg]

But, thinking about it more, America is also made up of the refugees and losers of proto-fascist societies. My ancestors were somewhat of refugees.

 

[Sinny91]

Each and everyone one of us will have links to refugees/migrants in one capacity or another. That's why hating the people who are such is completely irrational.

Of course, the rate at which all this is happening is having a detrimental effect on the natives of Europe, but as previously stated by myself and others, the current 'crisis' has been and is engineered by the powers that be.

All major movements are.

If anyone wishes to change the acts unfolding before our eyes we need to cut off the power supply, the policy makers, the manipulators.

To argue amongst our selves, and hate on our fellow foreign brethren who desperately need our help is the definition of being counter productive.

The Doc says he understands this concept, but clearly he doesn't.

 

[Fukyo]

This topic isn't for discussion of refugees, guys. It's dumping ground for offtopic and otherwise undesirable posts.