Where's an Environmentalist when you need one

[Montegriffo]

I agree.
I am so comfortable with moral uncertainty that I worship Satan, have Trans friends, and eat lamb-chops every chance I get.

MMMMMMMMMM immorality.

Eh. Satan has his own version of morals too. They are just inverted while enforcing the original authority and hierarchical structure (humans never out ranking angels).

The reality is that you cannot escape religiosity and the need for moral certainty. SJWs started with moral relativism and that evolved into their moral certainty that they should tolerate everything -- except the moral certainty of Christ.

Damn straight.

Fuck those hippie LaVeyan pussies. I want that blood and bone Satanism.

If you weren't so quick to renounce herbal medicine practitioners as agents of the evil Wicca and call for their death by fire, I might believe you are a Satanist.
My guess is that you are a dyslexic lover of satin.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

Eh. Satan has his own version of morals too. They are just inverted while enforcing the original authority and hierarchical structure (humans never out ranking angels).

The reality is that you cannot escape religiosity and the need for moral certainty. SJWs started with moral relativism and that evolved into their moral certainty that they should tolerate everything -- except the moral certainty of Christ.

Damn straight.

Fuck those hippie LaVeyan pussies. I want that blood and bone Satanism.

If you weren't so quick to renounce herbal medicine practitioners as agents of the evil Wicca and call for their death by fire, I might believe you are a Satanist.
My guess is that you are a dyslexic lover of satin.

You are gonna think that is real fucking funny when I am cutting out your guts, and (incidentally) drinking a weird amount of your semen (for magic, not health, reasons).

[Montegriffo]

You are gonna think that is real fucking funny when I am cutting out your guts, and (incidentally) drinking a weird amount of your semen (for magic, not health, reasons).

Your idea of a good date and mine vary widely...

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

You are gonna think that is real fucking funny when I am cutting out your guts, and (incidentally) drinking a weird amount of your semen (for magic, not health, reasons).

Your idea of a good date and mine vary widely...

As the maximum, black-magic, alpha, I am not all that concerned with what you think is a good date.

Imma get up in them guts.

[Speaker to Animals]

Damn straight.

Fuck those hippie LaVeyan pussies. I want that blood and bone Satanism.

I am serious, though. Very few people are truly amoral. They idolatorize something. You have the libertarians who make an idol out of "liberty", which in their case is actually license. You have environmentalists making an idol out "the environment". Goldman Sachs bankers make an idol out of money and profit. Feminists make an idol out of their vaginas and wombs. Hedonists make an idol out of pleasure.

There is no escaping this, I think, because religiosity and the need for moral certainty arise from humanity's group selection adaptations. This is how primitive humans could tell in group from out group.

I am serious too. Most of humanity requires moral certainty to feel safe in a chaotic world. They are, gosh, what is the current, cool, e-web slang for it... er... we would call them NPCs.
They need to regurgitate slogans and truisms to feel adequate in the abyss.

It's not really about that. It's just genetic behavior. Religiosity is an evolutionary behavior in our species. I think, personally, it stems from group selection. I think the bias towards moral thinking stems from group selection, honestly. That doesn't mean the subjects of our morals and religions are necessarily invalid or a mirage, but that our capacity to understand them evolved because, true or false, those things offered survival and reproductive advantages to the group.

Nicholas Wade argues in three books that religion evolved as a kind of test to determine in-group and out-group status. I think that was part of it, but I think our bias towards moral thinking is group selection itself, probably originating with early homo sapiens distaste for out-group culture and practices. For group selection to work, you need some mechanism to divide the clean from the unclean, so to speak, and the evolutionary behavior that did that was a dislike of foreign culture, language, customs, etc. The guttural reaction you feel to grossly immoral behavior is the modern remnant of the guttural reaction a primitive human felt in the company of foreign tribal customs and languages. To expand group selection beyond the tribe, that adaptation needs to become more sophisticated, which is where religiosity comes in.

This is why nobody really gets away from religion. They just create a religion out of something else, like new atheism became a religion, or veganism is a religion, or the social justice cult is yet another religion. It just becomes a test to determine in-group and out-group status. I think social justice cult is the most self-contradictory since it rejects group selection itself, and is thus unsustainable. The actual SJWs will eventually be exterminated by the foreigners they tolerated who do not tolerate them. Vegans can still sort of reproduce until their hormonal systems shut down, so they can go on for a little while, but the only reason they are not exterminated is civility by other tribes.

[Montegriffo]

As the maximum, black-magic, alpha, I am not all that concerned with what you think is a good date.

Imma get up in them guts.

Always with the identity politics, there is no white magic or black magic there is only magic, we are all Gaia's children.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

I am serious, though. Very few people are truly amoral. They idolatorize something. You have the libertarians who make an idol out of "liberty", which in their case is actually license. You have environmentalists making an idol out "the environment". Goldman Sachs bankers make an idol out of money and profit. Feminists make an idol out of their vaginas and wombs. Hedonists make an idol out of pleasure.

There is no escaping this, I think, because religiosity and the need for moral certainty arise from humanity's group selection adaptations. This is how primitive humans could tell in group from out group.

I am serious too. Most of humanity requires moral certainty to feel safe in a chaotic world. They are, gosh, what is the current, cool, e-web slang for it... er... we would call them NPCs.
They need to regurgitate slogans and truisms to feel adequate in the abyss.

It's not really about that. It's just genetic behavior. Religiosity is an evolutionary behavior in our species. I think, personally, it stems from group selection. I think the bias towards moral thinking stems from group selection, honestly. That doesn't mean the subjects of our morals and religions are necessarily invalid or a mirage, but that our capacity to understand them evolved because, true or false, those things offered survival and reproductive advantages to the group.

Nicholas Wade argues in three books that religion evolved as a kind of test to determine in-group and out-group status. I think that was part of it, but I think our bias towards moral thinking is group selection itself, probably originating with early homo sapiens distaste for out-group culture and practices. For group selection to work, you need some mechanism to divide the clean from the unclean, so to speak, and the evolutionary behavior that did that was a dislike of foreign culture, language, customs, etc. The guttural reaction you feel to grossly immoral behavior is the modern remnant of the guttural reaction a primitive human felt in the company of foreign tribal customs and languages. To expand group selection beyond the tribe, that adaptation needs to become more sophisticated, which is where religiosity comes in.

I think we might have read some of the same shit.

What you always leave out is the benefit of liberal thinking.

Basically, when you are not concerned with protecting the tribe from infection, you can be curious, and strike out into the unknown. It is dangerous, sure, but the most adventures explorers were not concerned with the dangers of the unknown, they were confident that they could overcome any negative, beta-bullshit that came their way.

[Speaker to Animals]

I am serious too. Most of humanity requires moral certainty to feel safe in a chaotic world. They are, gosh, what is the current, cool, e-web slang for it... er... we would call them NPCs.
They need to regurgitate slogans and truisms to feel adequate in the abyss.

It's not really about that. It's just genetic behavior. Religiosity is an evolutionary behavior in our species. I think, personally, it stems from group selection. I think the bias towards moral thinking stems from group selection, honestly. That doesn't mean the subjects of our morals and religions are necessarily invalid or a mirage, but that our capacity to understand them evolved because, true or false, those things offered survival and reproductive advantages to the group.

Nicholas Wade argues in three books that religion evolved as a kind of test to determine in-group and out-group status. I think that was part of it, but I think our bias towards moral thinking is group selection itself, probably originating with early homo sapiens distaste for out-group culture and practices. For group selection to work, you need some mechanism to divide the clean from the unclean, so to speak, and the evolutionary behavior that did that was a dislike of foreign culture, language, customs, etc. The guttural reaction you feel to grossly immoral behavior is the modern remnant of the guttural reaction a primitive human felt in the company of foreign tribal customs and languages. To expand group selection beyond the tribe, that adaptation needs to become more sophisticated, which is where religiosity comes in.

I think we might have read some of the same shit.

What you always leave out is the benefit of liberal thinking.

Basically, when you are not concerned with protecting the tribe from infection, you can be curious, and strike out into the unknown. It is dangerous, sure, but the most adventures explorers were not concerned with the dangers of the unknown, they were confident that they could overcome any negative, beta-bullshit that came their way.

I would not call curiosity about other cultures "liberal". Liberals generally hate their in-group. It's an important distinction. They want to join other tribes and destroy their own. Problem is, most of us evolved beyond tribes and operate at a racial/civilizational level of in-group. But you cannot join other civilizations. You cannot become Chinese. You cannot become a black African. Sorry.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

As the maximum, black-magic, alpha, I am not all that concerned with what you think is a good date.

Imma get up in them guts.

Always with the identity politics, there is no white magic or black magic there is only magic, we are all Gaia's children.

Don't even start with that shit, unless you want me to go full blown Trumptard.

https://www.theatlantic.com/internation ... ty/574393/

[Montegriffo]

As the maximum, black-magic, alpha, I am not all that concerned with what you think is a good date.

Imma get up in them guts.

Always with the identity politics, there is no white magic or black magic there is only magic, we are all Gaia's children.

Don't even start with that shit, unless you want me to go full blown Trumptard.

https://www.theatlantic.com/internation ... ty/574393/

Looks like there could be a serious risk of a drum circle forming, best avoided at all costs.