The Analytical Inquisition

The Coming of Shadows

2008-11-04T08:03:00.010-05:00

Kosh: And so it begins.
.........
Emperor Turhan: How will this end?
Kosh: In fire.

Like the two quotes above from two different seasons and episodes of Babylon 5, today is a beginning. As with all beginnings it must also be an ending. Today is the culmination of the rot spawned by success. This Rot begins today to kill the very success that has sustained and nourished it. Its not an easy or comfortable thing to wake up and watch history, know that today will be historic. When we read or watch information about history we are insulated by time and perspective. We fail to see the turbulence and mayhem that those who lived through it had to go through. The Chinese know this in ways us westerners with our myopic perception fail to understand. They have a curse for whats happening now that I find applicable, "may you live in interesting times!". It doesn't get much more interesting to historians then it will today, mores the pity. I'm off to do my part in that history, futile though I at present see that effort to be. Blogging will continue on my return. which from you the readers perspective will be a new paragraph and maybe the Inquisitor will seem to start to make more sense. (November 4th, 7:00 AM EST)

and I'm back (November 4th, 7:00 PM EST)
I'm a student of history (a C+ to B- student, but still one) as well as an author of rambling and sporadic Blog postings. So I know were the roots of the "Culture War" come from. I'm sure the no one and his invisible friends that read this blog don't want a long and rambling history lesson on individualism V collectivism, and the roots of western civilized thought. suffice to say it predates Marx, let alone Lenin, Mao, and the rest by 1500 to 2000 years. But those socialist clowns did coin a handy term to name the Rot I referred to earlier. The term also has its roots in the same 1500 to 2000 year birth of the concepts of western thought but they had to put "spin" on it as they say. That term is "Dialectic" in its original meaning it it referred to a reasoned argument of point counter point.

"Pronunciation: \ˌdī-ə-ˈlek-tik\ Function: noun Etymology: Middle English dialetik, from Anglo-French dialetiqe, from Latin dialectica, from Greek dialektikē, from feminine of dialektikos of conversation, from dialektos Date: 14th century 1: logic 1a(1)2 a: discussion and reasoning by dialogue as a method of intellectual investigation ; specifically : the Socratic techniques of exposing false beliefs and eliciting truth b: the Platonic investigation of the eternal ideas"
-http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dialectic

But those wacky Socialists had better uses then its original one. In their eyes it meant that all ideas have within them the seeds of their own destruction.

"Dialectic: The word comes from the Greek word for conversation, . It has a wide variety of uses in philosophy, but in the work we will be reading it will usually refer to Hegel's use. On Hegel's understanding of dialectic, one examines a position or state of affairs and discovers within it problems and contradictions that allow one to take a new position or set up a new state of affairs that incorporates responses to those problems or contradictions. Hegel's notion of dialectic is often described as a process of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis though he did not use those terms himself and though his understanding of dialectic cannot be reduced to that triadic pattern. Hegel, like Marx who followed him in this, believed that the dialectic would come to an end in history: at some point all contradiction and inadequacy will be overcome. However, not all who think dialectically believe in such an end."
-http://jamesfaulconer.byu.edu/definitions.htm

They were right, they got to this conclusion by the wrong route, used sloppy modeling in the theorizing, misinterpreted the data they had extrapolated the whole notion from and lacked at the time any testing, empirical of otherwise. Once put into practice Socialism failed every time except (so far) Cuba and China. This is the historic truth in the saying "A broken clock is right twice a day".

In this case the ideas that are killing themselves are freedom and prosperity. Now some of that history I mentioned. There once was a powerful empire, it spanned a massive chunk of the known world and was prosperous and stable. Mainly at the expense of those unlucky enough to exist around it as it was Expansionist, interventionist and Imperialist in its ambitions. It had a first rate military, finest and largest of its day. This empire was nominally a republic with a semi regulated free market and international trade. It was the cultural, economic, military, scientific/engineering, and educational super power of its day. After centuries its expansion slowed. Its priorities shifted to domestic social issues of a nonmilitary nature. This was done so members of its ruling body could stay in office and exploit them to establish political, nepotistic, hegemonic, and hereditary dynasties. As a result of this new priority the treasuries were drained over time and central power of its government increased in an inverse proportional relationship. When a new previously unknown enemy emerged waging unconventional warfare the weakened military and paralyzation of the governments central command ensured it was toppled. Whats the name of of this empire? I'll get to that in a moment. Whats more important is the socialist meaning for Dialectic and how it explains the downfall of it.

What made it great was its killer, as it was a victim of its own success. As life for citizens evolved upward to more prosperity and a better life for them selves and their posterity they increasingly were distanced from the harsh realities of life. Each successive generation viewing this new level of life style as a the base norm of life and worked to pass on an even better and prosperous lifestyle to the next. This is and was a good thing and made the empire a great place to be a citizen of. Its neighbors emulated it. The more affluent neighboring peoples legally immigrated from there home lands to it by purchasing citizenship to ensure their progeny would enjoy this escalating prosperity and standard of living. Poorer peoples legally immigrated by selling themselves into slavery or being conquered and forcibly enslaved. Even these slaves had a chance at a better life and freedom through various means. Conquered people would eventually assimilate into the mainstream and become functioning members of its society or even citizens. Then the decay, rot, infection, parasite started to work at killing its host. Every successive generation after a certain point became increasingly narcissistic. Their expectations for what they had been given by their antecedents as an inheritance became increasingly unrealistic while simultaneously being undervalued. The hard work of empire building was long behind them by this point. These increasingly insulated and ungrateful people saw the current prosperity as their "Right". All rights have responsibilities attached to them and require work to maintain. The politicians of the day found this growing sense of entitlement useful to exploit for building dynasties and increasing their own power. They fed this expectation and downplayed the work required to build and maintain the currant level of prosperity. They started plying them with distractions and ever new "Rights" and entitlements. This cant go on forever as the money to do this has to come from somewhere. The quick and easy way was to defund the military and divert its resources to social programs and engineering projects to maintain the illusion all was as the people expected. Again there is only so much you can rob from the military before it ceases to be an effective fighting force. There are also limits to how low the military funding can be slashed before the empires enemies notice and start to nibble it to death. Whether for vengeance or jealousy (and both were motivating factors) this nibbling eat away at the empires strength in tandem to the growing entitlements expected of its inhabitants. These factors alone would over time have killed the empire, albeit slowly. More Ambitious outside forces would intervene first. Coveting the wealth amassed in the empire and having a closer connection to the harshness of life than their more civilized adversaries, they raided it. Finding it weak and unable to mount a true resistance to them only inflamed their ambitions. They despised them as weak and saw no advantage to the superior imperial cultural, economy, military, science/engineering, and education. They perceived these as essentially worthless, and therefore did not emulate them as the empires previous enemies had. The castrated imperial military did score some victories but the writing was on the wall and the raiders/invaders eventually sacked the imperial capital. The empire survived even this for awhile before eventually expiring by suffocation under its own bloated entitlements.

what empire was this? with only slight modification the description fits any colonial power or historic empire. In this case its Rome, or is it Egypt? maybe the Greeks? the Byzantines? The Moors? matters not, soon it will be us. The former "home of the Brave Land of The FREE". the last bastion of individual freedom is choosing slavery in exchange for promised new "rights" and entitlements. "History does not repeat itself, it rhymes" -Mark Twain. This election and its results are not the cause of the ending of the great American experiment in freedom, its just the latest symptom. The final one.

Kosh: The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to vote.

we are experiencing technical difficulties, please stand by.

2008-10-19T01:05:00.002-04:00

Normal operations will commence shortly. Thank you for your patience.

Look! I have my first Psychophant and Lacky of the (hopefully) hoards to come!

2008-10-13T16:11:00.006-04:00

Welcome, (heh), to the faux saha-cuda herself, faux Sarah Palin! this is Zuzi Swift (another online pseudonym) a player and friend from an online MMORPG we jointly play called Eve Online. Where believe it or not I don't talk religion, and have to be dragged into political discussions.

Thanks for coming Zuzi

I'll take all the Psychophants and Lackies I can get.

Motes, Eyes, and Corrections, Oh my!

2008-10-13T12:48:00.007-04:00

Sharp eyed (and witted) readers may note that in yesterday post I went out of my way to quote Matthew 7 1-5 (King James Version). Yet apparently did not connect it to my thesis at the end of the article. What is apparent is not always true. The synopses is the key here. To make the call for abolishing the "good works gets you into heaven somehow" meme I had to follow the steps of correction. I as a mortal man (thanks Adam, thanks Eve, good call listing to a talking animal,a serpent no less, nothing suspicious and shady there) I am imperfect and have an imperfect understanding of God's creation. Analytical thought and empirical testing are the best thing man has come up with to compensate for this handicap but they them selves are also imperfect as any creation of flawed man must be. So in order to strive for perfection we must rely on gods word as our guide. (I can see any secularist reading this going nuts about this statement, I'll get into why they are jumping to conclusions without facts in evidence in a future post, most likely tomorrow) This is hard to do because correctly assessing where we are in the journey is inherently flawed, and self objectivity virtually nonexistent. Let alone strived for by the mass majority of us and our fellow travelers on this road. I have gotten pretty good at self objectivity through lots of practice, lest any one think that's a boast it's more an acknowledgment of knowing my own faults. Case in point, I'm exceptionally greedy by nature. Those that know me outside this blog and face to face would dispute this, yet it is never the less true. It is precisely because I am aware of this fault I can work to counter that weakness and deficiency of character. This means when I chose to advocate the slaying of a publicly held erroneous and dangerous meme I had to as closely as possible follow the steps outlined in my quote of Matthew 7 1-5 (King James Version). Lest I risk being verse fours hypothetical imbecile. Only worse, as it would be in a highly public medium. One with built in feedback by those who would wish to point it out, over and over, with great zest, creativity, and zeal. I am somewhat safe in tackling this and other "controversial" subjects for two reasons: 1. I'm semi anonymous on the web, very few people know who "Inquisitor Mors" is (but very few is not "no one" obviously). 2. Even If I was not semi anonymous, at my present readership numbers I have little to fear. This second point will (hopefully) not always remain true. When that is the case I want to have already addressed how I arrived at the positions I take, and have it a matter of record. even though I can edit this stuff any time I choose, I only do so to correct legibility errors (punctuation, spelling, and similar things). I also don't depend on you, the reader taking my word for this. Eventually this page will be archived in sources beyond my ability to mask edits: Google cache and the internet wayback machine. This forces me to be as open, honest, and truthful as I can be, and to make really, REALLY, sure I have followed God's "best practices" guide. Also, as I am incapable of true self objectivity this blog will act as a "self Objectivity Accuracy Gage and Automatic Correction Mechanism". I suspect if I get more readers I wont have to ask what I'm doing wrong to find out about it. This is after all a Two way communication medium. So while I am aware I didn't completely dispassionately call for this splinter to be removed from the public's mind's eye, I feel I was close enough to get the job done. It is a splinter that badly needs to go. Allowing grieving non-Christians the hollow comfort of "he/she is in a better place" and "I'll see him/her again in the here after" is disastrous. Allowing Christians to comfortably abdicate their personal failure of responsibility in showing these people the light of God is much much worse and erodes our message and example.

On Binary Economies and massive, painful splinters in the public's collective Mind's Eye.

2008-10-12T07:31:00.015-04:00

There are some firmly held beliefs in the public perception of the world and cosmos that have no basis in fact, the bible (for those that pertain to Christianity and how it should be lived, and what is actually in that book) , reality, and or even Empirical Thought and Analytical Reasoning (some overlap, I'm a big fan of both). they could be easily dispelled by those that know better or with a modicum of research into the topics these myths pertain to. While there is a need to find the truth and dispel these myths the vast majority are too lazy and have memories too short to truly do so. They default quickly back to the easy path of least resistance and go along with every one else rather then risk being ostracized, even though everyone really wants to know the truth. This is evidenced by the sustained popularity of : Mythbusters on TV (and no, Kari Byron cute and lovable as she is could not alone account for the shows longevity and popularity), Snopes.com on the web, and The Straight Dope in news papers and on the web, among others.

I call these firmly held beliefs of no basis factual or otherwise (as should be evidenced by the title of this post) "splinters in the public's collective Mind's Eye". This post is on one of the most egregious as pertains to Christianity, but before I delve into the meat of the issue some other preparatory ground must be covered. For starters why do I call them "splinters in the public's collective Mind's Eye"? Two reasons: 1. I'm a geek and read an old sci-fi book long ago with a similar name ( Splinter of the Mind's Eye, by Alan Dean Foster), 2. the bible mentions splinters in eyes. Now I don't plan to make a habit of this because I want you to go read the book itself and know what is in there for yourself but I'm going to cite chapter and verse in a moment.

I can already hear other Fundamentalist Christians gnashing teeth, "you don't plan to make a habit of citing chapter and verse? what's wrong with you? we always cite chapter and verse so people know they aren't being misled! how can we trust you to not lead us astray?". To which I reply thusly, the devil knows chapter and verse, and will use them out of context to mislead you. He even quoted scripture to Jesus in the dessert, but only partially and out of context. To this Jesus quoted the rest of the context and other scripture back to him to deliver a "Holy Smackdown of Epic Win!" My point being read the whole book, then read it again, rinse repeat. The Holy spirit will give you the ability to rightly divide the book of truth or to put it in a way you may start to grasp.
"Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. "
2 Timothy 2:15 (King James Version).
there are two key points in the scripture, 1. study, research it for yourself, and do so thoroughly that you may know not only what is in the bible but what it actually means, as some things have layers of meaning that apply to more then just the literal and obvious. 2. the Word of God can be divided, and should be if done rightly. this means once you know what is actually there and what it means you can cite chapter and verse, even out of context, and still have its meaning and power. So, I encourage you to go read it and stuff. then apply that knowledge to my lesser writings and see if they hold up, If not I'm sure I'll hear about it if anyone actually reads this.

Now chapter and verse about splinters and eyes:
1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?
5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.
Matthew 7 1-5 (King James Version)
Now this and all of the following verses cover a lot of ground and are commonly misinterpreted and misunderstood (especially verse one). I'm going to break down this snippets meaning as it pertains to the topic (unnamed as yet) of the day.

1. if you must correct a brother do so in a non-judgmental, dispassionate way, do not let biases or feelings taint the correction.
2. be absolutely sure such correction is needed and untainted by emotion and bias
3. once you are sure, and only once you are sure, proceed with the correction
4. if you ignore these requirements you yourself are in need of correction
5. don't be verse 4's hypothetical imbecile, make sure you know what your talking about and followed these instructions.

now, there are other greater and lessor lessons contained within these 5 verses, some obvious, some not. but the above breakdown is needed for the "Binary Economy" portion of the title.
On Binary economies:
Lets start with a hypothetical, you have one Dollar and go to the Dollar Store. This Dollar store unlike most has anything and every thing imaginable, all for a single Dollar. Expand your mind a bit on this, a whole new life of riches with a mansion and a life of ease and plenty? price: one Dollar. world travel and a never ending vacation? price: one Dollar. any good thing price: one Dollar. so far so good right? now lets back up a bit to how you got that Dollar shall we? Your father is a good and kind man, and he loves you. You have repaid this loving father with willful disobedience. But because he loves you so much he sends your brother to bribe you a bit. He will take the blame for your actions and most of their consequences himself if you take his gift of a Dollar and try to correct you behavior. note, not end it completely and suddenly as this would be unrealistic, but strive to correct it with his, your father and your brothers help. Now comes the Binary Economy part, at this moment you have a choice, accept the gift offered and then proceed to that wonderful Dollar store, or don't and suffer your fathers righteous and deserved punishment. now there are actually at least three binary economies here in this hypothetical parable, try and spot them, hint the Dollar store is the least important of them. after you contemplate it awhile continue reading. the most important of them is this one, it doesn't matter what you've done to earn your fathers anger, the price of redemption is the same. If you got that as one of the at least three Binary Economies congratulations please continue reading, If you didn't think on it for a moment. murder six million people, accept the gift and you still get that trip to the Dollar Store. Tell your girlfriend those jeans don't make her butt look fat when they really do to avoid a fight? still disobedience, still earns fathers righteous and deserved punishment if the gift is rejected. also the fathers righteous and deserved punishment is a one size fits all proposition and is utterly horrible. So, who in their right mind refuses the brothers gift? Apparently the vast majority of the human population of our planet. I'm not going to break down this parable, at least not today. This was Jesus' way when he himself told a parable, it should provoke thought and maybe challenge some of your long held erroneous beliefs.

Lets move on to an intertwined erroneous belief of no basis factual or otherwise.
Innocence has not existed since The Garden of Eden. "But Inquisitor Mors" I mentally hear you whine "what about the children? they are innocent!". No, they are not. No child is born needing to be taught to lie, to be selfish, or do any other evil thing. On the contrary, we must instill in them all good virtues: civil, spiritual, or otherwise by training as they are not the default condition of humanity. Among Fundamentalist Christians this is called a "Carnal Nature" but is hardly ever explained to even church congregations let alone the public at large. This is fact and can be observed by any objective person that deals with kids. I will not debate it. Sigh, chapter and verse time, 23 "For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God " Romans 3:23 (King James Version). this is one of those literal interpretation times. note: "all" leaves no exceptions for age. We like to think God has some criteria for when this applies to a child as babies are incapable of understanding what's going on and seemingly unaccountable for their sins should they die. that may be. But if so its not from some innate innocence, more from a lack of mental development time. I've found no other place that says he waits until a certain age or any other mitigating circumstances. "That's harsh! you must hate children!" No, I do not but God seems to be a pretty literal minded guy. Also, the truth is most often harsh, that is why lies are easier and in an effort to avoid that harshness we do the Devils job for him by lying to ourselves.

Tying It All Together:
As I said before, all the above text is preparatory groundwork, All to get to a simple concept. That concept is Christianity's most important. To wit:

16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
John 3:16 (King James Version)

8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.
Ephesians 2:8-9(King James Version)

now, any who read this, take note.
you can in no way earn yourself into heaven, no good things you do, no mater how good or how numerous can expunge even the least of your sins in God's sight. "good people" can and do go to hell, the vast majority in fact. Now that you know this you can not truly run from it, "what has been learned cannot be unlearned" except by willful self-delusion. This public perception that has been allowed to fester that works in this world matter in heaven by those who have not accepted Christ's gift must be killed. it was started as a way to ease the suffering by loved ones when a nonsaved person died. It is no comfort and has been used by The Great Adversary to make the Broad Path to Destruction more palatable. and has sent even more to hell then anything else in modern times.

Thank you for reading this, now go use it.

I declare, and god has mandated, A Holy Inquisition!

2008-10-12T06:32:00.002-04:00

I Inquisitor Mors, on this the 12th day of the 10th month of October in The Year of Our Lord 2008, do hereby take up the task set before me by Our Most Holy Lord to wage a Holy Inquisition against the depraved forces of Idiocy and its dark master Lucifer, Lord of lies (and possibly flies, never been too sure of that translation). I will arm myself with The Sword of Truth (not the one in the fictional novels by Terry Goodkind obviously, but you know the actual one) and vanquish the Heretic, the Infidel, and the Apostate. I will cleave from them their ignorance and set them on the path to Righteousness in God's Most Holy Name, that they might be saved.

End of mission statement. also most probably end of the inquisitional shtick. Which may come back occasionally, as it amuses me.