|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
There was a time when the gulf between the public and the media wasn’t the size of the grand canyon. Those days have long since passed and reporting occurs from a surreal manufactured world in which there is the pretense that the insane leftist ideas adopted by the media actually have any kind of play among people.
Like using race as a basis for college admissions.
If you read, listen or otherwise imbibe the media, you might think that there was a going debate on the subject, or, worse, that the majority of Americans support basing college admissions on race. Nope.
Not even close. There’s as much support for race-based college admissions as there is for pre-birth abortion, pushing LGBTQ pornography on 8-year-olds, banning cars, and other exciting leftist causes.
84% of white adults oppose colleges considering race or ethnicity when deciding which students to accept
81% of Hispanics oppose it
76% of Asians oppose it
So do 71% of blacks
Asians are not even the top non-white group to oppose racial discrimination in college admissions, Hispanics are.
Black people, on whose behalf the whole affirmative action college debate has been waged, oppose it 71% to 28% and they’re the group most favorably inclined to it.
There is no sizable constituency supportive of systemic racism in college admissions outside the media.
MSM supports Affirmative Action because it is so destructive to society. The logic is perplexing. They must not want a dysfunctional Stalinist economy, where passenger aircraft are liable to crash due to incompetent employees. There is something weird about all this. I was thinking it is about setting up some kind of Oligarchy, in line with Aristotelian theory of politics.
Aristotelian theory of politics? No.
In line with the Platonic theory of politics and the Augustinian theocracy theory of politics. Augustinian Christianity is based on Platonism. Aristotelian Christianity is a contradiction in terms but in trying to resolve the contradiction, Aquinas, opened the door to the Renaissance, the rebirth of reason.
Aristotle has his flaws in his theory of politics and they come from his teacher, Plato, who’s influence he never thoroughly shook off in every aspect of his philosophy. Give credit where credit is due and blame where blame is due.
“No matter what remnants of Platonism did exist in Aristotle’s system, his incomparable achievement lay in the fact that he defined the basic principles of a rational view of existence and of man’s consciousness: that there is only one reality, the one which man perceives—that it exists as an objective absolute (which means: independently of the consciousness, the wishes or the feelings of any perceiver)—that the task of man’s consciousness is to perceive, not to create, reality—that abstractions are man’s method of integrating his sensory material—that man’s mind is his only tool of knowledge—that A is A.” – Ayn Rand
“For Aristotle, the good life is one of personal self-fulfillment. Man should enjoy the values of this world. Using his mind to the fullest, each man should work to achieve his own happiness here on earth. And in the process he should be conscious of his own value. Pride, writes Aristotle—a rational pride in oneself and in one’s moral character—is, when it is earned, the “crown of the virtues.”
A proud man does not negate his own identity. He does not sink selflessly into the community. He is not a promising subject for the Platonic state.
Although Aristotle’s writings do include a polemic against the more extreme features of Plato’s collectivism, Aristotle himself is not a consistent advocate of political individualism. His own politics is a mixture of statist and antistatist elements. But the primary significance of Aristotle, or of any philosopher, does not lie in his politics. It lies in the fundamentals of his system: his metaphysics and epistemology.” – Leonard Peikoff
Or maybe they do want such a society once they’ve lived their lives of wealth and privilge and shuffled off this mortal coil.
Yeah, and I realized after I posted that the true oligarchs fly around in private jets, with the best crews available, while the rest of us are condemned to fly commercial airlines which are liable to crash, even the employees of the oligarchs.
There is something weird about it. And the logic is perplexing. It is not just Affirmative Action – it is everything, everywhere with greater and greater rapidity.
The only logic I can make of it sees an evil of intelligence and purpose spanning vast eras of time and bent upon destroying Christianity and the Jews. I don’t think human beings could sustain this kind of focus over thousands of years.
Christianity must be destroyed because it has spanned the entire globe with the Scriptures and the message of hope in the fulfillment of the promises to Adam and Eve and to Abraham. Jews must be destroyed because their reconciliation means nothing less than life from the dead, the consummation of all the prophecies and the ushering in of the last days (Jeremiah 31:31-34; Isaiah 59:20-21; Romans 11:15).
The secular Left is not primarily and fundamentally out to destroy modern Thomist Judaism or modern Thomist Christianity, the Left is primarily and fundamentally out to destroy individual rights, private property rights, Laissez-Faire Capitalism, and man. The Left is primarily motivated by reality-hatred, reason-hatred, and man-hatred.
In fact, if Christianity still existed in its medieval, Augustinian, form, i.e., Calvinism-Puritanism, it would be embraced and used as one more tool to crush the individual, in the same manner that the Left is using Islam as a tool to crush individualism. Augustinian Christianity yes, Thomist Christianity, no.
If you dig deeper, to the deepest level, the Left is a rebellion against reality and reason. It is a rebellion against man’s nature and the nature of reality. It is hatred of reality for being reality and hatred of man for being man.
Good comment, but Thomast Judaism? As in St. Thomas Aquinas?
Yes, Thomist-Aristotelian Judaism. The Renaissance (the rebirth of Aristotelian reason and logic) and the Age of Enlightenment did not just effect Christianity but Judaism too.
Guess what Lightbringer? You and most of your, modern, fellow Jews been Hellenized by the Renaissance, the Age of Enlightenment, Scientific Revolution, and the Industrial Revolution.
The Maccabees and the Zealots would be outraged, enraged, and stone the whole Hellenized, modern, lot of modern Jews.
Communists, socialists, leftists and many government officials want to destroy Christianity because it weakens their influence and attempts at absolute control.
I believe that you are right.
The commies and socialists have come right out and said it for over 100 years now but the leftists are even more dishonest than they are and won’t admit it, but their intent is obvious based on their actions.
The logic only comes together when you see the destruction of Christianity / western civilization and the Jews as the aim. I see an evil intelligence spanning long periods of time impossible for mortals to maintain. If the purpose is to prevent the fulfillment of the promises made to Adam and Eve and to Abraham from reaching their fulfillment, then the logic comes together quite nicely.
See Jeremiah 31:31 et. seq.; Isaiah 59:20-21; Romans 11:15
Sorry. I did not mean to post twice. There was a glitch that made me think I deleted my comment, so I re-wrote it.
I meant to address the comment I posted above to THX to you, Kynarion.
I upvoted you before I understood that. Thanks. I hope you have a wonderful 4th of July!
You too. I’m back home now and listening to people blow up their fireworks or whatever the loud booms are.
I wonder who would want to do that? //sarc//
(Maybe we can all guess.)
It’s definitely weird because the majority of fake newscasters don’t believe the pernicious “woke” nonsense they indoctrinate their foolish audiences with and don’t want to live in the type of society they promote. I think they’re as confused and dishonest as the people and movements they promote. Their bullshit cant all come from the lowlifes who run their organizations and they sure aren’t all trannies and homosexuals themselves.
I notice CNN had the most sneering snotty and giggling gay guys, like Anderson Pooper, Don Loser, Brian Goo Gobbler Stelter and who knows how many more, along with Lesbian Christine Amanispoor and some others who sure look like lesbians to me. All elitists who have no desire to live under the sociopolitical systems they espouse.
Traitors to American society and the Constitution, all.
Thought it was more along the lines of a Platonic one, as in the Republic.
You’re basically reporting the American spirit is not dead YET among Americans.
The American people by themselves cannot change the course of America’s future. Without intellectual leadership they cannot understand the nature of what is destroying them or discover the cure.
“The American spirit has not yet been destroyed, but it cannot withstand this kind of undermining indefinitely….
In the ancient world, after centuries of a gradual decline, the choice was the ideas of classical civilization or the ideas of Christianity. Men chose Christianity. The result was the Dark Ages.
In the medieval world, a thousand years later, the choice was Augustine or Aquinas. Men chose Aquinas. The result was the Renaissance.
In the Enlightenment world, four centuries later, the founders of America struggled to reaffirm the choice of their Renaissance ancestors, but they could not make it stick historically. The result was a magnificent new country, with a built-in self-destructor.
Today, in the United States, the choice is the Founding Fathers and the foundation they never had, or Kant and destruction. The result is till open.” – Leonard Peikoff, “The Ominous Parallels: The End of Freedom in America”
The choices you mention are irrational, ignorant nonsense.
You confuse knowledge with truth. Truth is logically prior to knowledge. Knowledge can help us to discover aspects of truth, but truth is never an aggregation of knowledge. It is transcendent.
The repugnance of your religion is that it confines Truth to your navel – to your own thoughts and experiences defining the parameters of your “knowledge.” Your religion is a closed system of irrational prejudices and loyalties based upon wishful thinking and false “knowledge”, which can uncover nothing but a cherished falsehood.
Americans have already had the “intellectual leadership” you mention and it brought nothing but progress towards our destruction. You are no different from the leftists who want to try Marxism again because it has never been correctly implemented.
Your vision has no transcendence. No beauty, no truth, no goodness, no unity. It is not survivable.
Do you know the essential, philosophical, difference between religion and philosophy?
Religion begins with a belief in an unperceivable, indemonstrable, supernatural, dimension which is beyond man’s rational mind to ever comprehend. Philosophy, on the other hand (rational philosophy), begins with the demonstrable, perceivable, facts of natural reality which man’s reasoning mind can comprehend. “To make SENSE of” literally means that an abstract idea can be traced back to the evidence of reality provided by man’s natural senses. “Nonsense” literally means that an idea CANNOT be traced back to the evidence of reality provided by man’s natural senses.
Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Zoroastrianism, by this essentializing definition are religions and Objectivism a philosophy based on reason, the senses, and therefore demonstrable reality.
Marxism, objectively speaking, is not technically a religion, but it is a form of supernaturalist mysticism, in other words magical thinking divorced from the facts of reality. The Marxist jettisons God out of his supernatural equation and replaces him with the supernatural, super organism, he calls Almighty Society which only a mystical dialectic can hope to comprehend.
Religion is a precursor to philosophy, an early form of philosophy, before man knew enough to discover and formulate rational philosophy.
Mysticism, in other words, magical thinking, is a precursor to formal religion. Religion and Marxism share this mystical magical thinking. Objectivism does not.
“Your vision has no transcendence. No beauty, no truth, no goodness, no unity. It is not survivable.”
By “transcendence” you almost certainly mean the “supernatural”. Supernatural transcendence necessarily implies that this world is a fallen, inferior, degrading place. And man, an innately inferior, defective, even depraved creature incapable of virtue.
Supernaturalism, supernatural transcendence, and mysticism necessarily imply a pessimism, cynicism, disgust, degradation, a rejection of man and this world. A malevolent view of the universe, of man, and man’s relation to himself, to other men, and to existence.
“Religion’s monopoly in the field of ethics has made it extremely difficult to communicate the emotional meaning and connotations of a rational view of life. Just as religion has pre-empted the field of ethics, turning morality against man, so it has usurped the highest moral concepts of our language, placing them outside this earth and beyond man’s reach. “Exaltation” is usually taken to mean an emotional state evoked by contemplating the supernatural. “Worship” means the emotional experience of loyalty and dedication to something higher than man. “Reverence” means the emotion of a sacred respect, to be experienced on one’s knees. “Sacred” means superior to and not-to-be-touched-by any concerns of man or of this earth. Etc.
But such concepts do name actual emotions, even though no supernatural dimension exists; and these emotions are experienced as uplifting or ennobling, without the self-abasement required by religious definitions. What, then, is their source or referent in reality? It is the entire emotional realm of man’s dedication to a moral ideal. Yet apart from the man-degrading aspects introduced by religion, that emotional realm is left unidentified, without concepts, words or recognition.
It is this highest level of man’s emotions that has to be redeemed from the murk of mysticism and redirected at its proper object: man.” – Ayn Rand, “Introduction to The Fountainhead”
“By ‘transcendence’ you almost certainly mean the “supernatural”. No I do not.
You could look up “the transcendentals.” They are completely absent from objectivism. You normally skip over them with the use of tautology: “The universe just is [the universe].” That kind of thing.
I found a good definition of “tautology” that uses Ayn Rand’s philosophy as a frequent example of it. Perhaps that is why you use it even though it is a common logical fallacy?
http://believingscience.blogspot.com/2016/08/todays-logical-fallacy-istautology.html
Please give me your definition of transcendence (what is being transcended and why should it be transcended) and example or examples of this transcendence, and why you believe this to be the moral ideal.
I am using the word “transcendence” to mean “of or relating to the ancient philosophy of the transcendentals” of ancient Greece: Truth, Beauty and Goodness. They are the simplest and still recognized as transcendent desires / values.
The “transcendental” of objectivism is “man’s mind” and “reason.” Man’s mind is not a transcendental, because it is not primary; but it can perceive the transcendentals with varying power and success, depending upon many factors. That alone removes it from the transcendentals.
The tautologies of Objectivism make no sense because its transcendentals – the primary things – are not primary. This causes too many contortions of logic. Man’s mind is not any of the transcendentals. Man’s mind can reason, but performing a function like reasoning is not a transcendental. Making it transcendental gives us the horrors of the enlightenment goddess of reason placed in Notre Dame with all the terrible bloodshed of “liberty, equality and fraternity.”
Objectivism does not deny that truth, beauty, and goodness exist. But they are not supernatural or exist in some other realm other apart from reality.
K. H., I am commenting here because I can’t on a deeper level. I wanted to tell you that you really hit it out of the park with your reply to THX’s next comment. He asked for your definition of transcendence and I believe that it was one of the most lucid ones I have ever seen, in both a Classical and Judeo-Christian context, and why Objectivism does not qualify as transcendence. I have not read his reply to you, but your comment was outstanding. Thanks for a good read; I have copied it and will save it, at least until I crash this particular computer (that’s my super-power).
You: “Objectivism does not deny that truth, beauty, and goodness exist. But they are not supernatural or exist in some other realm other apart from reality.”
Me: You misunderstand. Because you are an objectivist, the ONLY transcendental is “mans’ mind.” You believe the transcendentals are PRODUCTS of your mind, of reason. If this is true, then the transcendentals are NOT primary. If what you say is true, then Reason would be primary, and, further, because you define reason as “man’s mind,” that makes your mind primary.
A transcendental is primary and cannot be logically traced back to a preceding thing.
You believe in nothing beyond what your 5 senses can give to your brain – which you believe is Reason itself. Therefore, your brain / mind is the only transcendental and nothing is true, good or beautiful unless you apprehend it to be so. Never mind that something might exist that your senses have yet to feed to your brain. Do you not see the problems with your reasoning?
But even your mind has a precedent. You were not made ex nihilo, but come from your mother and father. Your brain’s data is limited to your experiences, which have precedent, limitation etc.
I could go on and stretch this argument easily to even more illogical and unreasonable lengths – but this should suggest to you some problems with your religion. If it does not, then you are not free or reasonable, but enslaved.
Another excellent thesis!
Thanks KH. Another flaw in his logic is that he assumes people are looking for intellectual leadership, whereas probably they have other desires in mind.
Yes, many of us seek intellectual independence and loathe the concept of somebody else making up our minds for us.
Perhaps you misunderstood what I meant by intellectual leadership.
Aristotle is not making up your mind for you but you use his ideas implicitly if not explicitly. That’s what I meant by intellectual leadership.
If you have a defective heart valve your heart surgeon will suggest the correct thing for you to do is have him fix it in order to go on living. He’s not forcing you to do it but he is offering you intellectual leadership.
You agree with the American Bill of Rights, do you? The Bill of Rights is not forcing you to agree with it, but the Bill does represent intellectual leadership.
I think you mean intellectual suggestions and examples, not leadership, THX.
The most irritating thing is that now he claims to be an expert on Aristotle, which happens to have been the main focus of my philosophical thinking for 60 years now.
Yes. THX is a natural totalitarian. He has no inkling that this is so, thinking himself quite the opposite. He is all about intellectual governance and the rule of man as opposed to the rule of law.
This is a false claim on your part, Kynarion Hellenis.
You think it is false because you disagree with it, but you do not counter with evidence. I have not mischaracterized your position at all, as you mischaracterize Christianity.
Here is my reasoning and evidence: Your beliefs are ultimately the rule of man and not the rule of law. If objectivists believe reason is “man’s mind” and those who do not have sufficient reason are “animals” to be treated as such, then government will uphold only what is “reasonable” and someone like you or Ayn Rand will be the standard, governing with man’s mind. People like me will be deemed insufficiently rational and will be punished / ostracized in some fashion. You spend almost ALL of your time criticizing Christianity and other religions. What do you think this says about you? About objectivism? What does it say about how society would function under one such as you?
You admire the enlightenment. You should, as it employed exactly the kind of principles and the hatred of Christianity you espouse. But it was a disaster. Do you know why?
I think the answer is here:
https://www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/two-revolutions-for-freedom
I’ve worked with my hands and back all my life but my work consisted of working with corp honchos on contracts, company and federal regs etc. Over 50 years I watched blacks get hired and elevated because of their color and everyone knew it. I believe those numbers are low.
What numbers are low? Are you disagreeing with the statement that the “vast majority” of all races wish to abolish affirmative action?
I believe a much higher number of POCs hate the very idea of AA.
I think you are right. People want to live honestly for the most part. Thank you for clarifying.
According to your cited Pew repost, only 29% of blacks disapprove., the smallest number of all groups.
Naturally. Blacks as a demographic are far and away the most racist in America. Everybody knows it but we’re all supposed to pretend it’s whitey instead.
Just as I hope this article is true – that vast majorities of all races hate affirmative action, I believe what you say is correct.
And if it is correct, it seems to contradict the notion that blacks want the disappearance of affirmative action. Maybe I am seeing this in a faulty way, but if one thinks another race is evil, or he envies another race and tells himself this race has stolen all that is good from him (and his ancestors), then how could he not want affirmative action?
What IS true, however, is this: Men cannot live with lies forever. At least that is my firmly-held conviction.
Your last sentence contains much wisdom. Have you read a lot of Solzhenitsyn?
“The Vast Majority of White, Asian, Latino and Black People Oppose College Admissions by Race.”
That’s good to know and it gives me hope. They support law enforcement, too.
Unfortunately, the overwhelming majority of students and faculty rabidly support pro black racism in admissions, even the white ones.
Yeah, they live a sheltered life, haven’t had to deal with the real world yet 🙂
Damn it! I did it again. The comment I posted above was meant as a reply to you, AA.
Anyone, with the common sense & intellectual ability to benefit from a college education, should realize that a society that plays favorites with one group over others would soon become divided & unstable, & that ignoring merit when preparing tomorrows leaders is anti-evolutionary & suicidal.
MLK Dream has been hijacked by Sharpton Jackson, NAACP, Nation of Islam BLM, and the Rioters, Looters and Arsonists now were seeing in in France the results of Open Borders and Diversity
If more people think that way, perhaps there’s still hope for the world to recover from insanity.