Art appreciation and ramble

Again, drawing from Charles Murray.

The first, most elementary proposition is that people vary in their knowledge of any given field. That much seems beyond dispute.

The next assertion is that the nature of a person’s appreciation of a thing or event varies with the level of knowledge that a person brings to it. All of us can easily think of a range of subjects in which our own level of knowledge varies from ignorant to expert. If you know a lot about baseball, for example, you and an ignorant friend who accompanies you to the ballpark are watching different games when there is one out, runners on first and third, and the batter is ahead in the count. The things you are thinking about and looking for as the pitcher delivers the next pitch never cross your ignorant companion’s mind. Is your friend as excited by the game as you? Having as much fun? Maybe or maybe not, but that’s not the point. Your appreciation of what ids happening is objectively greater. You are better able to apprehend an underlying reality inhering in the object, and it has nothing to do with your sentiments.

-Charles Murray
Human Accomplishment

Mostly agree!

I think this can be analyzed further. I think art appreciation can be described as the highest caliber thing on the grounds that it has the highest information complexity. So there are simply more details to wrap your head around while forming a single, coherent picture of what’s happening. It’s relatively easy to comprehend every decision made by each actor in a baseball game. It’s much more difficult to understand every decision made by an artist, because there are more of them. The ability to acquire a lot of knowledge is determined by mental speed, study time, engagement level, and having a high enough mental caliber to keep the information flow laminar rather than turbulent.

On the other hand, it’s not enough to have a lot of information. It’s important to also have the information properly sorted hierarchically in your mind, and discriminated by value. Weighting each detail in this matrix correctly, and appropriately for the immediate situation, is the source of discernment and therefore predictive ability. Take the Trump election cycle for example. I did pretty well but I was wrong about the political violence this summer (there has been relatively little) because I didn’t weight social mood as the most important factor, which I should have remembered at the time. The ability to sort information hierarchically relies almost entirely on mental caliber and mental energy.

Last, there’s fluid intelligence. There’s this thing you can do sometimes that feels like a mental explosion, where an entire dynamic situation makes sense all at once and the outcome reveals itself like watching a Rubik’s cube solve itself in your mind’s eye. It’s accompanied by a feeling like pure enlightenment and wonder mixed with deja vu and a bump of cocaine. It requires fluid intelligence above the threshold necessary for the activity (higher for art, lower for baseball). This faculty probably relies more on mental speed than anything, but it requires the pre-existence of a well-organized matrix of mental models. Without the mental models, the flow state wouldn’t be possible.

Posted in Uncategorized | 8 Comments

New commenting rule (…you might be a midwit)

New rule: to comment at da blergh you must be interesting or endearing. I will not spend my patience on tolerating condescension from midwits. (The spirit of this rule may migrate to the forum soon in another form, but I’m going to consult Koanic about the changes I want to make there.)

Now then, let the hate flow through you!

If you think understanding something is the same as knowing a lot of things about it…you might be a midwit.

If somebody says “good morning” at 12:10 PM and you correct them…you might be a midwit.

If you think having a lot of citations means your opinions are correct…you might be a midwit.

If you can’t tell the difference between necessary and sufficient conditions…you might be a midwit.

If you think statistics, data, and evidence are the same thing…you might be a midwit.

If you think PhDs are a sign of high intelligence…you might be a midwit.

If you think philosophy is easier than engineering…you might be a midwit.

If you think genius is brilliance, and brilliance is just very fast mental computation…you might be a midwit.

If you believe the singularity is possible because consciousness is just emanations of electrical signals doing logic in the brain…you might be a midwit.

If you think smart people prefer to use big words…you might be a midwit.

Posted in Uncategorized | 28 Comments

Time lapse and impact in cultural accomplishments

Here’s how I’d speculatively rank the arts and sciences in terms of potential cultural impact, and how long it takes for the culture to absorb the consequences of their insights. For example, calculus was released into the wild circa 1675 in a condensed form, had the largest possible impact for a mathematical theory, and after Cauchy and Riemann 200 years later there wasn’t much left to say about it.

Poetry ~ 500 years
Philosophy ~ 250 years
Math ~ 200 years
Art ~ 150 years
Science ~ 100 years
Engineering ~ 50 years

Each art and science appears to have the same sort of life trajectory, very roughly like a bell curve with a peak at the midway point. New ideas in engineering (the transistor, for example) experience their heyday within about 25 years and then taper off for another 25 years until there are very few derivative innovations left to invent.

The IQ barriers to entry tend to be higher in the lower sciences, because more people can discriminate between good/bad engineering than between good/bad poetry, but I’d argue that the higher sciences require higher intelligence to maximize their potential impact. For example, Goethe > Descartes > Newton > Nietzshe (I classify him as an artist) > Darwin > Ford.

The most impactful poets in Western civilization, in my opinion, defined approximately 500-year epochs in our history: Homer, Virgil, Dante, Milton, and Goethe. They appear to have done this by defining morality and altering foundational myths for their cultures by communicating epistemological insights straight to the superego through subconscious archetypal forms. According to this theory we are approaching maximum Faust roundabout mid-21st century.

Posted in Uncategorized | 24 Comments

Feminism and dogs

I can’t help but draw parallels from dog ownership to modern humans and the nanny state.

Backstory: I’m living with my sister and brother-in-law right now. They have two little dogs that are (probably) a mix of poodle and Scottish terrier. (Both have 100% white fur too, master mutts confirmed.) They live a very sedentary lifestyle because both owners are professionals and work long days, and so they stay confined to the living room most days with walks every other day or so. My sister pampers them when she’s around and her husband is a beta male. Sad!

This correlates with a curious development regarding sexual dimorphism. The female dog has become a fat, entitled alpha female. If she doesn’t get what she wants, she’ll do this high-pitched bark like someone is stepping on her leg over and over until they give in. The problem, of course, is that it has always worked before. I’ve tried telling my sister that we don’t negotiate with terrorists, but so far she’s unwilling to go through the hassle of it. In a way, I understand. This last weekend I put the bitch outside and ignored her pleas (except for a bit of mocking through the screen door) and it did that bark nonstop for six hours in a row.

The male dog is a scrawny, clingy, Freudian hot mess of a beta. I think his goal in life is to scramble back inside his mother’s womb and curl up in the fetal position until he dies of old age. He gets extremely anxious if the other dog is on my lap and he isn’t. While the female will quickly get bored of petting and go exploring for novel stimuli, he is never more than a foot away from a human. He just follows, stares at you, and mugs for attention.

Thinking this would not do, I’ve been doing some basic training, running them a few miles per day and giving an introductory course in Pavlovian psychology. They’ve taken to running like fish to water and they’re already pulling at the leashes, where before I could keep up with the sprinting and beat them for distance easily. The bitch now understands that I’m the pack leader, even if she doesn’t like it, and that it’s against the rules of fetch to bite the other dog’s leg if he gets to the ball first. In my opinion, they are both significantly less mental, although the underlying sexual dysfunctions are probably stuck for life. The male has more confidence and the female understands she is not in charge.

Two interesting phenomena came out of this, regarding the subject in the title. First, rather than biting the male dog (while she knows I’m watching), the female will take out her frustration by mounting him and compulsively humping him. As I understand it, transgender identity issues don’t typically translate to dogs. The second interesting thing is that the beta male dog now sleeps with me, while the alpha female prefers to sleep with my sister and brother-in-law.

Posted in Uncategorized | 14 Comments

Corporate is purgatory

Only a cockroach could work in these conditions. Luckily, I AM THAT COCKROACH.


This is one of those funny-but-serious things. I don’t know who convinced women you could find life satisfaction in work but I want to hire him to sell Thalforce. (Speaking of which you might want to stock up, supplies are limited and Grimoire was released, so ITZ happening.) I don’t want to shit on my great life success—it’s just bad form for the King of Omegas to black pill his subjects. But I do want to complain a bit, so please understand this is just venting and not an indictment of MASSIVE INCLINE. Some of the details will be disinformation to make doxxing difficult, but it is not misrepresentation.

On a daily basis, 80% of my time is spent copying text out of a form field and pasting it into an Excel spreadsheet. There is nothing I’ve done in the last month that could not have been done automatically in less than a second by software written by someone who’s read the first half of a “Java for Dummies” book. But no, everything is forbidden. The software I use on a daily basis, written by a company with a 98% Indian workforce I might add, is only set up to process queries one line at a time. There are no batch jobs. My access is restricted so heavily by IT admins that I can’t perform basic job functions, and I have to go to my boss’s boss to do some of these queries for me. It sometimes takes me a week to quote prices to customers because nobody knows what they are. And that’s for relatively scarce goods! According to basic economic theory, this shouldn’t even be possible. Tentatively, I call this phenomenon “price entropy”.

This theme, information security to the point of uselessness, generalizes to every single thing I do at work. Practically speaking, there is nothing in life I can’t do, up to and including theoretical physics. There are only things that I’m not allowed to do by my conscience, by the chain of command, or by that very frustrating commandment to honor my parents.

It results from a culture of massive distrust and uncertainty throughout the company. This all stems from a seedy history, which I shall outline for general interest.

We’re a German transplant company with a global market, spun up from a garage by a 95-year-old dark genius using a ruthless theory of business that, presuming you can grok the mathematics, basically just says to target competitors and eat them one-by-one rather than competing. Business is not war and a scorched earth policy is not good for the economy, neoconservative broken window fallacies notwithstanding. So I highly respect our founder’s intellect and I expect his company will do very well in our 2nd-world nation, but he is ultimately a high-ability cancer and a real country would shut us down in a heartbeat.

The founder’s son and heir is not a genius by any stretch and is harmless on his best days. His former secretary is now the CEO of the American division of the company, wink wink nudge nudge, and she is ANYTHING but harmless. People around here, hundreds of miles from the corporate headquarters, are hesitant to say her name, much less criticize her openly. I would not be surprised if she has an honest-to-goodness network of spies. One time, a guy I know made her niece mad and HR went through his company car’s GPS records and found some data they could use to accuse him of smoking inside the car. The niece has since been promoted to the director level of something or other, which would provoke a nepotism policy violation to HR if the CEO hadn’t already filled HR entirely with her family members. If only her ability to play politics were matched by her ability to make technical decisions, we might be able to do business. But no, she calls ALL of the shots, they are ALWAYS wrong and no one will EVER tell her so or even suggest it to someone else except in hushed voices away from the cameras.

So with all this mess and inefficiency, you’d think the company would collapse because capitalism. But no, business is booming! Because of the optimism boom following Trump’s election there’s so much money flying through the air right now I wouldn’t be surprised if we’d bought a hotel or two by accident when we’d only meant to rent the lobby for a day. Meanwhile there are hundreds of us lower-middle class wage slaves doing what clerks have done for centuries, copying numbers from one account book into another by hand, one line at a time. I have an abstract cast of mind and can see how this must play out, and it’s very black pilling.

If I took any pride in my work, I’d kill myself. IF.

Posted in Uncategorized | 34 Comments

Hamlet’s Mill

It appears I’m not the only one who thinks there was a worldwide, antediluvian astrology cult of monolith builders. Discovering precession is not a trivial accomplishment, as Charles Murray explains.

Once we grant the existence of the monomyth, we have a choice between two broad explanations: Either the human psyche is such that cultures everywhere produce extraordinarily similar myths (the view propounded by psychoanalyst Carl Jung and comparative-religion scholar Mircea Eliade, and accepted as well by Campbell), or the myths had a common historic origin. The problem with a common historic origin is that it requires us to posit a means by which the myths were shared across continents, and the standard paradigm of ancient history does not allow for that.

In 1969, science historians Giorgio de Santillana of M.I.T. and Hertha von Dechend of Frankfurt’s Goethe-Universitat came down on the historical side of the debate with a book entitled Hamlet’s Mill: An Essay on Myth and the Frame of Time. At its center is the proposition that the world’s mythologies were drawn from a common historical source with a common body of astronomical knowledge that included precession of the equinox.

This book is available to read online, if you don’t feel like shelling out $75 on Amazon for a used paperback copy. I haven’t read it yet, but it’s on my list because confirmation bias.

The precession of the equinox is an astronomical phenomenon caused by the earth’s wobble (the earth spins like a top that has lost a little speed). One of the results of the wobble is that, seen from the earth’s surface, the constellation against which the sun rises at the spring and fall equinoxes changes over time. At the beginning of 21C, the sun at equinox rises in front of the constellation Pisces—but only for another century or so, because, as the song says, we are at the dawning of the Age of Aquarius.

A complete cycle through all twelve constellations of the zodiac takes 25,920 years, with each “age” lasting 2,160 years. Thus the first salient fact about the precession of the equinox is that it cannot be discovered without accurate star records over a significant period of time.

So difficult only a caveman could do it. Meanwhile, we live in a far more progressive age wherein WordPress tells me I’m misspelling “procession”, which is likely an expression of my white privilege. It’s like I’m Hitler trying to discourage Katherine Johnson from being a genius astrophysicist, NOT OKAY.

It takes 72 years for the constellations to move one degree of arc—about as far along the horizon as the width of your forefinger held out at arm’s length. The standard histories hold that the Greek astronomer Hipparchus discovered precession of the equinox in about -134 [Ed: 134 BC] by comparing his star charts with ones that had been prepared a century and a half earlier.

De Santillana and von Dechend were not especially concerned with trying to date the original discovery of precession, mentioning almost in passing that the most likely date is about -5000, nor did they try to assign it to a lost civilization. Their concern was to establish their basic contention about the historical-astronomical nature of the monomyth. But, like it or not,
to demonstrate that precession was known millennia before Hipparchus and that this knowledge was disseminated throughout the world—both of which are minimal implications of Hamlet’s Mill—already means that the standard paradigm is in disarray. I will not try to ummarize the evidence in Hamlet’s Mill, but it should be emphasized that the book is not the work of sensationalists, but of exceptionally erudite scholars of the world’s mythic traditions.

Which is weird, because Wikipedia informs me that it’s a very unserious and reactionary bit of pseudoscience. You’d almost think there’s a diffuse class of people who have an overwhelming emotional urge to suppress dangerous anthropological ideas, which motivates them to form spontaneous, ad-hoc conspiracies and destroy all physical evidence of elongated skulls. Ah, but that’s crazy talk, because modern man are practically gnostic GODS compared to their retarded chimp ancestors.

Let me put it this way. Have you ever heard of Plato, Aristotle, Socrates? Morons.

Hamlet’s Mill is only one source of evidence that the advocates of an early and advanced lost civilization present on behalf of the hypothesis that precession was known much earlier than Hipparchus. some of the archaeological evidence, which includes purported astronomical and mathematical features of the design of the great ancient monuments around the world, is intriguing. But in trying to evaluate it, we are once again confronted with advocates who appear to be torturing the data until they confess. The limited point here is that the core scholarly work on the monomyth as it relates to knowledge of the precession of the equinox poses challenges to the standard paradigm that justify investigation.

-Charles Murray
Human Accomplishment

Murray is a lot more conservative in his speculations than I am, but I take it as a good sign that some rando, pointy-haired academics are obliquely tracking the exact same ideas. I don’t mind getting ahead of myself though, so here’s what I think: the Tower of Babel was both a real monolith and an allegory for the globalist Luciferian religion that was also an extremely stable anarcho-tyrranical socio-political system. It was so perfect in its production of constant evils that God actually stepped in and personally sabotaged their technological specialists (maybe with some kind of strong magnetic field?), then wiped out the remaining, atomized degenerates with a massive flood around the time of the Younger Dryas.

Since you’ve already read this far, here’s what I think the plan is for the future, as near as I can determine:

1. Secularism, to “kill God” as Nietzsche said.
2. Fascism, to set up statolatry.
3. Zodiacism, to support “Great Man” worship as national avatars.
4. Emperor worship, to set the stage for Luciferianism.
5. Luciferianism proper, and the promise that men can become gods if they follow well enough. Persecution enabled by the complete atomization of people from each other, the godhood pursuit making them supremely narcissistic. This is the diametric opposite of Jesus’ radical message of worship via service.

Or maybe this whole “Bible” thing is a mushroom trip by some whirling dervish in Greater Arabia that eats foreskins, because that just makes sense. In fact, I hear Jesus wasn’t even a real historical person, WAKE UP SHEEPLE.

Posted in Uncategorized | 20 Comments

Meanderings on “Crumb” (1994)

I watched this documentary on Jordan Peterson’s recommendation.

He says you can understand Freudian pathologies through it, and particularly serial rapists, and I think he’s right in an important way. Now, I don’t pretend to know or understand Freudian psychology, myself, except at the level you’d find on Wikipedia. But after watching this documentary you will feel (at a visceral level) that there exists a there there, and that’s at least as important as understanding or knowing anything about it. Here’s a link, but you may have to search for your own because the JewTube (((copyright))) police are on the prowl, tireless and ever diligent.

Unlike his brothers Robert Crumb grew into an extreme ectomorph. Physiognomically, he looks like a maldeveloped Nikola Tesla, and I think they would have agreed on a lot of things regarding modern culture. This is interesting because if you watch closely, the brothers appear to have agreed by mutual unspoken agreement to act out the three Freudian archetypes, where Robert is the superego, the older brother is the ego, and the younger brother is the id. In response to their childhood abuses and fixations, the id becomes a solipsistic sexual degenerate, the ego becomes a sexless, hyperverbal ascetic and then kills himself, and the superego flees the country in despair and powerless disgust and frustration.

Crumb is without doubt an artistic genius, and it’s almost a shame because the inner and external worlds he recreates are disgusting and portrayed through a lens of contempt and creeping horror. At this point, I doubt he’s even capable of misrepresenting himself to the world. You can see this contempt every time Crumb laughs at someone for saying something utterly absurd (I don’t think he ever laughs except at horrible things). He’s one of the most implausible Omega -> Sigma stories you’ll ever see, and interesting for that reason if for none other. I daresay Freud was the greatest mind the Jews ever produced. Speaking of Jews, this Crumb comic may tickle your counter-semitism (click for better but not great quality):

That’s the most concise summary of Kevin MacDonald you’ll ever see. It’s ugly, but it’s true and reality is ugly.

His character Mr. Natural interests me from an edenic perspective. I think he’s an expression of the archetypal neanderthal and the occipital lobe itself, which may be the same mental archetype as the Green Man motif in folklore.



Crumb 1976


I’ve been internally referring to my occipital bun as “the old man in back” for years. It’s a very natural way of describing the occipital’s conservatism, peripatetic obstinacy, and overwhelming sensibility. The method to its madness was perfectly described in Goethe by Jung:

Goethe, for instance, says that when he sat down, lowered his head, and vividly conjured up the image of a flower, he saw it undergoing changes of its own accord, as if entering into new combinations of form. In the halfwaking state these phenomena occur fairly often as hypnagogic hallucinations. Goethe’s automatisms differ from truly somnambulistic ones, because in his case the initial idea is conscious, and the development of the automatism keeps within the bounds laid down by the initial idea, that is to say, within the purely motor or visual area.

-Carl Jung
On the Psychology of So-Called Occult Phenomena

This mental ability is a beautiful faculty to behold if you have the good fortune to experience this dreaming facility on the conscious level. Such intuitive meditations are likely what allowed Goethe to write his Metamorphosis of Plants well ahead of its time.

Versuch die Metamorphose der Pflanzen zu erklären, known in English as Metamorphosis of Plants, was published by German poet and philosopher Johann Wolfgang von Goethe in 1790. In this work, Goethe essentially discovered the (serially) homologous nature of leaf organs in plants, from cotyledons, to photosynthetic leaves, to the petals of a flower. Although Richard Owen, the British vertebrate anatomist (and staunch opponent of Charles Darwin), is generally credited with first articulating a definition of the word “homology” (in 1843), it is clear that Goethe had already arrived at a sophisticated view of homology and transformation (within an idealist morphological perspective) more than fifty years earlier.


The Green Man motif therefore makes sense as an expression of this mental ability.

Posted in Uncategorized | 25 Comments