It is above all against what the crowd proclaims to be “natural” that the noble soul rebels.
By saying that death is natural the last stupidity has been said.
(Regarding a podcast I listened to.)
They are high achievers, knowledgeable about engineering and science. However, to claim, as Saylor did, that we still read Aristotle and that not much happened in philosophy as opposed to science is rather simplistic. One may not call it progress, but surely, over the centuries we saw authors worth reading publish their works. I like reading, I may be biased; I do not read only for information. Some even learn languages to read their favorite author in their native tongue.
They tried to answer the “big questions” and failed, as everyone does. But why continue down that path? Obviously, the only meaning that can apply to all human beings is God, living a moral life.
To say that death is natural is nonsensical, and usually said by those who are not currently in the process of dying. To quote Nicolás Gómez Dávila:
It is above all against what the crowd proclaims to be “natural” that the noble soul rebels.
By saying that death is natural the last stupidity has been said.
After all, dying on the battlefield at age eighteen begs the question of what meaning such a life could have had. Even Tolstoy asked this regarding the death of his sixteen year old brother, who died from an illness after suffering for several years.
Life expectancy in the early 1900s was thirty-two or so, then it went up drastically already in the 1950s. I do not remember the exact figures, my point remains the same: is this good for someone who suffers from certain illnesses now? Mental illness for decades? Sounds awful.
That beauty or harvesting energy is the meaning of life or part of it is ridiculous. I cannot take this seriously. Even if beauty is important, how is it meaning by itself?
Not to be too harsh here, even though this topic and their answers do upset me, but it comes across a little narcissistic to ignore suffering.
Saylor’s advice for young people also seems out of touch with reality. If AI is in the process of getting rid of us, maybe we should reconsider building such stuff in the first place. Further, not everyone is able to study a STEM field successfully, even if you have a high IQ.
At least in terms of credentials, Fridman and Saylor certainly are way above average, so their advice is pretty skewed.
Finally, I do not think that Elon Musk is anything more than a psychopathic sex-obsessed loon. He left triplets and twins for another woman he divorced twice, then had intercourse with two women at once. This does not sound like a new da Vinci, Newton, Diesel. Far from it.
Colonizing Mars does not help man in any way, it may make our situation worse. It is technically hardly feasible, as Chris Langan wrote. Further, technology has reached a stage that it may no longer be seen as neutral. It impacts our lives in negative ways as well nowadays. This cannot be denied.
After having learnt of the horrific life Matt Slick’s eldest daughter Rachel – now calling herself AellaGirl or so – lives, I watched a very short clip of her being guest on the show of the imbecile Lex Fridman.
One can only hope and pray that she leaves this wicked life and returns to Christ. As a naturally depressed person who thinks of suicide almost daily, this depressed me even more. To me it also shows how much of a curse sex really is.
The clip is about twenty seconds long – hard enough to stomach –, and Aella talks about women being sixty percent “submissive” whereas only forty percent of men report being “dominant” – it is all about decadent sexuality, of course. Apart from the fact that I don’t buy any of this anyway due to it not being representative in any way, what’s worse is that Fridman said (I quote from memory):
That’s great news! What’s wrong with men?
Here is the thing, idiot: it is bad news, extremely bad news if you had read your J. D. Unwin, author of Sex and Culture. We are going under, children are suffering especially – the weakest members of our society. More and more are growing up without a father. In Germany, around twenty percent of all children are growing up with only one parent, which, in ninety percent of cases, is their mother.
This is not great news, imbecile. I have no trouble getting shot to death if I knew I could save just one child from such a horrific fate with my life; a fate I also suffered through and which wrecked my already fragile, awful life – given that I am genetically predisposed towards mental illness.
AlleaGirl/Matt Slick’s daughter seemed to buy into the whole “loser/winner” or game nonsense. The problem I have with this is that I. it does not matter in the long run, only God does; II. even if the most deranged men have more promiscuous – i.e. decadent and disgusting – “relationships”, they do not have way more children than the rest of society, they will die and be forgotten (with or without children); III. we are suffering from dysgenics anyway; lastly IV.: I do not have much in common with most people. As far as I know, regarding IQ and women: their bell curve is narrower than for men, which means that there are even less highly intelligent women than men. Since I am not a vulgar and disgusting person – at least I try not to be –, I do not care about living like an animal, unlike most of the vermin active online who talk about women.
Therefore, I’d rather remain alone and do not care about life anyway; I live because God forces me to, and I also reject any sugar-coated theology in this regard. I. e., anything that speaks of life being beautiful, a gift and so on, which is not what the Bible teaches anyway.
I won’t comment on his ethnicity – though there is data supporting that he actually prefers his guests to be of his own –, but it’s clear he has a repugnant agenda.
Nicolás Gómez Dávila puts it into perspective for us, again:
A modern man is a man who forgets what man knows about man.
Fools believe that humanity only now knows certain important things, when there is nothing important which humanity has not known since the beginning.
Nothing makes clearer the limits of science than the scientist’s opinions about any topic that is not strictly related to his profession.
One could object to science that it easily falls into the hands of imbeciles, if religion’s case were not just as serious.