## Wiki philosophy

So I finally gave this topic some thought, and decided on some rules of thumb for how I want to do wiki stuff. Essentially, it’s going to be written for the brighter folks (150 IQs and up) because a lot of the inner workings of the theory aren’t accessible and don’t need to be. To understand any given assertion of the model in a timely manner you need either comprehensive familiarity with the various topics or extraordinary powers of abstract intuition, and that doesn’t appear until the 150 mark. The purpose of the wiki for lesser mortals will be merely to serve as concrete point-of-reference material.

The emphasis will be on the whole “edenism” business as a set of interconnected models, each made up of what I’m going to call “assertions”. There is going to be presentation of evidence and some rational A to B stuff involved, but I’m going to ignore any dependencies and Markov chain-type stuff and simply treat every derived “theorem” (so to speak) as a separate assertion. Each assertion will be attributed to its original author if possible.

In the early stages the focus will be on concise, pithy proofs that will appeal to people who are used to working out the details for themselves, or who have the domain knowledge to know a correct assertion when they see it. Here’s a mathematical example of such a proof, from Paul Zeitz’s excellent book.

Consider a network of finitely many balls, some of which are joined to one another by wires. We shall color the balls black and white, and call a network “integrated” if each white ball has at least as many black as white neighbors, and vice versa.

Given any network, is there a coloration that integrates it?

Paul Zeitz
The Art and Craft of Problem Solving (p. 21)

The answer is yes. Proof: call a wire “balanced” if it connects two differently colored balls, then maximize the balanced wires.

That’s it! Very concise and easy to remember, but difficult to understand in the first place. This sort of proof will be my starting point for the project, and then details can be filled in later to satisfy the anklebiters and midwits.

In a far less precise domain like anthropology or psychology we rely on the same sort of intuition to an even greater extent and less on pure deduction, and we depend far more on the intellectual honesty and humility of the interlocutor. This is an acceptable starting place because muggles were never going to believe anything “weird” to begin with, unless it were from the mouth of an authority figure. Therefore, we address ourselves to the young intellectuals who have yet been lulled to sleep by tenure, comfort, and status.

A topical example:

Texas Arcane has asserted that Cro Magnon’s appearance in Europe caused an immediate, violent genocide of Neanderthals. Proof: the spread of Cro Magnon in Europe characterizes an invasive species.

Because of the phenomenon of genius, I should be able to produce many of these at the appropriate level of abstraction, despite my inability to regularly understand such high-level proofs. For instance, I don’t understand the proof above about colored balls- I’m just quoting it. It would probably take me all day to convince myself that it works. But I regularly experience intuitions having the necessary qualities, and I trust that this will continue at a high rate for a few years at least.

As I said, later on we can do some filling in, but the concise proofs will remain as prominently featured guideposts and mnemonic tools. My purpose, at the present time, is to cover as much ground as possible in as little time as possible. This sort of organization solves the largest number of problems simultaneously as it is possible to do at present, i.e. reference material, vocabulary, apologetics, and comprehensive, condensed coverage.

Now that’s all very nice, but we need to talk about people too. Any time you make something good, people show up to wreck it, and the better it is the more people show up and the harder they will work to destroy it. That said, it would be foolish of me not to take contributions at all. So that’s tomorrow’s post.

Reminder to self: address the possible continuation of the rising trend in simple falsification from authoritative sources. For instance, we may argue “autism is a developmental disorder that preferentially targets populations with high neanderthal admixture”, but healthcare authorities are working very hard to conceal this to the point that they falsify basic forms of evidence.

Maybe do this later?
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

### 21 Responses to Wiki philosophy

1. Aeoli Pera says:

I am figuring that anyone can submit edits, but every edit must be approved by someone with keys. Eventually someone may come along who submits enough good edits that it becomes tiresome to approve them, in which case I’ll ask Koanic to give them a set of keys.

2. Aeoli Pera says:

For now, I’m going to assume that I’ll be making the entire thing myself with little in the way of assistance. The Pareto principle was correct yesterday and today, and it will probably be correct tomorrow.

3. koanic says:

Lol good job

4. Rime says:

>For instance, we may argue “autism is a developmental disorder that preferentially targets populations with high neanderthal admixture”, but healthcare authorities are working very hard to conceal this to the point that they falsify basic forms of evidence.

Autism and Aspergers are two different things that result in many of the same symptoms. Autism is caused by high mutational load, Aspergers is caused by high Neanderthal load, both are genetic in nature. This is why “autistic” whites are very different from autistic blacks. This also means you can have both autism and Aspergers (which would suck). What modern psychology is doing is conflating the two, much as they conflate narcissism, psychopathy and sociopathy. Saps are too stupid to understand that separate causes can have superficially similar outcomes. Edenists need to avoid that particular trap of modernism, you have to keep rectifying names.

Will be looking forward to your development of said wiki. You’ve got a great blog going here Mr. Pera. I ended up reading your entire corpus!

• Aeoli Pera says:

Holy shit, I feel like I should apologize. Thank you though.

>This also means you can have both autism and Aspergers (which would suck). What modern psychology is doing is conflating the two, much as they conflate narcissism, psychopathy and sociopathy.

We’re on the same page here.

>Autism is caused by high mutational load, Aspergers is caused by high Neanderthal load, both are genetic in nature.

I don’t know the specific cause of autism so I’m unable to keep up with you here, but Rdos’s work with the aspie test does strongly imply the latter.

• Edenist whackjob says:

Temple Grandin is a common example of someone with autism. But I wonder if she hasn’t been misdiagnosed.

I’ve seen that creepy but intelligent look in a lot of Thals. See RSD Tyler for instance, and several of his employees.

• Edenist whackjob says:

Eye reading is such an important thing btw. I’ve taken to always checking people’s eyes and trying to determine what their deal is. It’s creepy when you really start to SEE that they are dishonest or evil, for instance. ‘Nother thing for the already overstressed amygdala to freak out about :p You troo thals have some benefits from your face-blindness and Kantian everyone-is-human kinda thing.

The Chinese have a huge lead on us on that one, btw.

I’m particularly fascinated with what I call the regal gaze:

See some examples:

Prince Filip of Sweden: http://imgfave-herokuapp-com.global.ssl.fastly.net/image_cache/1432472091719301.jpg

My own eyes are probably this “royal puppydog” as a baseline, but I’ve started express the Hitler piercing fiery look in later years. Probably some melon power vampire stuff popping up.

• Edenist whackjob says:

Delicious condiment nickname, check your spam filter plz :)

• Rime says:

>I don’t know the specific cause of autism

http://www.nature.com/nm/journal/v21/n2/abs/nm.3792.html

The article is behind a paywall. “More and more, the genetics of ASD are pointing towards de novo mutations that are not present in the mother or father. Remarkably, even siblings with ASD do not share the same mutations.” New mutations tend to be heavily dysgenic. Autism is probably caused by dysgenic mutations in genes affecting the development/function of the brain. The brain is our most complex organ, while most dysgenic mutations simply lower IQ, when you have enough of them in a person that person ends up landing somewhere on the autism scale. Couple this with parents delaying children until mid- to late-thirties, and little wonder why autism is on the rise.

It is going to be a lot longer before geneticists link Neanderthal genes with Aspergers, but this is due to asking the wrong questions, not inability to find the link. The technology is all there, much of the data is there, but Saps are still out wandering the field kissing each others “sciencey” asses.

• Aeoli Pera says:

Essentially what this implies is that autism is just random genetic retardation, whereas Super Smartz is just the lack of random retardation. But this doesn’t address the onset- why would children be developing normally and then go backward? And why is it that autism has different symptoms in different races? Why the occasional musical prodigies with extremely specialized brains?

This theory may have part of the picture but it has poor explanatory power.

• Koanic says:

Rime’s got Reason.

5. “Texas Arcane has asserted that Cro Magnon’s appearance in Europe caused an immediate, violent genocide of Neanderthals. Proof: the spread of Cro Magnon in Europe characterizes an invasive species.”

This isn’t a proof at all.

For one thing, you would have to demonstrate that the spread of Cro-Magnon in Europe actually does characterize an invasive species. This can’t be done, because there is practically no fossil record of Cro-Magnon, and fossil dating methods are notoriously unreliable. Second, you would have to demonstrate that the presence of an invasive species implies Based on my limited knowledge of ecology, I can say that this is likely false.

If I can deconstruct your arguments so easily, you’d better pack some lube for when a person with that coveted “150 IQ” shows up.

• *Second, you would have to demonstrate that the presence of an invasive species implies an immediate and violent genocide of species that were previously present

• Aeoli Pera says:

>This isn’t a proof at all.