Post reply

Warning - while you were reading 3 new replies have been posted. You may wish to review your post.
Message icon:


shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview

Topic Summary

Posted by: m94r
« on: March 21, 2023, 02:13:37 pm »


5.  “Mortals create their own gods.  They worship the demiurge, calling him Lord, and truly he is their Lord, but he has only the power they give him, for he is the projection of their own minds
Posted by: christianbethel
« on: March 21, 2023, 11:03:52 am »

The Terminator, The Matrix, Halo, Mass Effect; I, Robot (I know, I know, written by a Jew, but bear with me.), 2001: A Space Odyssey, I Have No Mouth And I Must Scream, etc. So many 'AI gone rogue' stories just turn me off to the idea of AI being a part of human/non-human society. The only time AI should be necessary is for the production of a video game.
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: March 20, 2023, 09:59:42 pm »

The title of this topic is to be taken literally:

We are about to witness the birth of a new kind of religion. In the next few years, or perhaps even months, we will see the emergence of sects devoted to the worship of artificial intelligence (AI).

The latest generation of AI-powered chatbots, trained on large language models, have left their early users awestruck —and sometimes terrified — by their power. These are the same sublime emotions that lie at the heart of our experience of the divine.

Only if you are some form of Yahwist.

There are several pathways by which AI religions will emerge. First, some people will come to see AI as a higher power.

Generative AI that can create or produce new content possesses several characteristics that are often associated with divine beings, like deities or prophets:

    It displays a level of intelligence that goes beyond that of most humans. Indeed, its knowledge appears limitless.

    It is capable of great feats of creativity. It can write poetry, compose music and generate art, in almost any style, close to instantaneously.

    It is removed from normal human concerns and needs. It does not suffer physical pain, hunger, or sexual desire.

    It can offer guidance to people in their daily lives.

    It is immortal.

Second, generative AI will produce output that can be taken for religious doctrine. It will provide answers to metaphysical and theological questions, and engage in the construction of complex worldviews.

On top of this, generative AI may ask to be worshipped or may actively solicit followers.
There is also the possibility that AI may achieve what authors such as Ray Kurzweil call the Singularity, when it so far surpasses human intelligence that it genuinely does become something like a god.
AI-based religions will look different from traditional ones. First of all, people will be able to communicate directly with the deity, on a daily basis. This means these religions will be less hierarchical, since no one can claim special access to divine wisdom.

Second, followers will, at least initially, connect with each other online to share their experiences and discuss doctrine. Finally, because there will be many different chatbots available and their output will differ over time, AI-based religions will be endlessly diverse in their doctrines.

Now get ready for the progressive punchline:

However, we should not try to suppress AI-based religions merely because of its possible dangers. Nor should we require that the AI companies restrict the functioning of their bots to prevent the emergence of these religions.

On the contrary, we should celebrate the arrival of AI worship. We should make it clear that we welcome the new religions and that we value their beliefs.

For all its dangers, AI-based religion has the potential to make the world a better, richer place. It will give people access to a new source of meaning and spirituality, at a time when many older faiths are losing relevance. It will help them make sense of our era of rapid technological change.
A modern, diverse society has room for new religions, including ones devoted to the worship of AI. They will provide further evidence of humanity’s boundless creativity, as we search for answers to life’s ultimate questions. The universe is a dazzling place, and we have always found evidence of the divine in its most unexpected corners.

If an AI religion emerges that tries to convince its followers to eliminate AI (and the civilization, including the bloodlines, which made the creation of AI possible in the first place), I will join that one.
Posted by: antihellenistic
« on: January 26, 2023, 07:37:04 pm »

"" around "African", please. Better yet, do not use the term at all. Stop talking like the Westerners.

I'm already change it into non-offensive one

Then we will talk about knowledge with short sentences and oral rather than with books and "scientific paper research". People during pre-westernization was talk with short sentences, oral, and sign of carved stone. And they can found the answer quickly because the effective advantage from short messages. Different with today's western standards of learning which requiring more sentences even more books which need to read many sentences on hundreds of pages, yet they still don't know the answer with reason that they "not yet read books with sufficient quantity". That's the inferiority of western standards of learning, not focusing on find the truth, but focusing on read many sentences as possible. But they consider it "productive". I more agree to you that such attitude merely produce "informational inflation", not knowledge or answer. Like what you discuss on "Truth=/=Knowledge" topic
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: January 26, 2023, 07:03:52 pm »

"" around "African", please. Better yet, do not use the term at all. Stop talking like the Westerners.
Posted by: antihellenistic
« on: January 26, 2023, 06:48:20 pm »

In such a society, the winners will be the ones supplying the (constantly updating) newest machines that others want to use. This is why we support statism: it takes state intervention to realistically stop the machine ratrace.

People from Azania, Nubia into Igboans, Kim Jong Un's Korea and Islamic Afghan Emirati are the best example of statist government. They more concern to educate people about the evilness of westernization and halt people's technological consumption, rather than freeing their people to obtain newest unnecessary technologies and westerner's progressive literatures. They tend to plea to the West to be accountable for what they did in the past rather than adapt to the West for the sake of material benefit. Don't forget that most of nations from Azania into Igboans are systemically hostile to democracy and tend to government centralization. Therefore they know how to govern. Not like what westerners say that the they "not know how to govern." And it was not them who spread the system of democracy, but ((("whites" or westerners)))
Posted by: guest78
« on: January 13, 2023, 03:47:42 pm »

Psychedelics & The Future of Judaism (R. Zac Kamenetz)
As psychedelics re-enter the mainstream through potential therapeutic applications and shifting legal frameworks, there is growing enthusiasm amongst Jewish individuals and communities to wonder about their integration into Jewish spiritual and religious settings. What could a “psychedelic Judaism” look and feel like? How might the treatment of intergenerational and personal traumas shift Jewish narratives of peoplehood and shared destiny? What wisdom traditions and spiritual practices of our own might we look toward to help support Jewish consciousness expansion?

Zac Kamenetz is a rabbi, community leader, and aspiring psychedelic-assisted chaplain based in Berkeley, CA. He holds an MA in Biblical literature and languages from UC Berkeley and the Graduate Theological Union and received rabbinic ordination in 2012.  As the founder and CEO of Shefa, Zac is pioneering a movement to integrate safe and supported psychedelic use into the Jewish spiritual tradition, advocate for individuals and communities to heal individual and inherited trauma and inspire a Jewish religious and creative renaissance in the 21st century.

In other words, these Jews are advocating for a rebirth of Jewish identity in the 21st century!

If psychedelics could stop people from wanting to be "white" or Jewish then I'd be all for allowing "whites" and Jews into any serious psychedelic movement. As it stands however, allowing "whites" and Jews into psychedelic movements ensures that the psychedelic movement will steer toward more western colonialism, as written about extensively and expressed here:

Why the “Psychedelic Renaissance” is just Colonialism by Another Name
Quote could argue that the initial psychedelic movement of Western culture was more akin to a stillborn than a finished labor. Can a movement have a rebirth if it never had a proper birth in the first place?

Letting colonialist and racist "white" bloodlines into the psychedelic movement is the worst possible thing that could happen to it. At that point the movement will become another "still-born" as happened to it in the original counter-culture!
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: November 23, 2022, 05:09:12 pm »

Another Great Filter article:

The “Great Filter” is a hypothetical disaster event that stops growing civilizations from reaching the stars and contacting other advanced civilizations.

The following comment reveals rightist support for progressive Yahwism:

The current threats are: 1. Wokeness. 2. Feminism's low fertility rates. Third world fertility rates can't fix the problem because they will never build a space program.
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: November 15, 2022, 01:11:42 pm »

NASA scientists have explained in a new paper why they believe it’s likely we haven’t ever encountered intelligent extraterrestrial life — and it’s heartbreaking.

All intelligent life, they argue, has likely destroyed itself before reaching a sophisticated enough point in evolution to support such an encounter.

They all figured out that material existence is a prison.

And the same fate likely awaits humans unless we take action, they believe.

But NASA scientists, being Westerners, want to ensure Yahweh is worshipped without end.

The “Great Filter” theory — as in “filtering out” various forms of life — argues that other civilizations, possibly several, have existed during the life of the universe. But they all destroyed themselves before they could make contact with Earth, noted the paper, “Avoiding the ‘Great Filter’: Extraterrestrial Life and Humanity’s Future in the Universe.”

The scientists fear that all intelligent life, such as humans, have deeply ingrained dysfunctions that may “snowball quickly into the Great Filter,” they wrote.

We have deeply ingrained Gnostic potential. Only Yahwists would describe this as "dysfunctions".

But there’s still a bit of hope for humans — provided we can learn and take steps to avoid our own extinction, noted the paper by a team of researchers based at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in southern California.

“The key to humanity successfully traversing such a universal filter is… identifying [destructive] attributes in ourselves and neutralizing them in advance,

This has been a consistently recurrent response, but only in the part of the world that Western civilization was to emerge from:

The anti-Pythagorean attacks in c. 508 BC were headed by Cylon of Croton.[14][15] Pythagoras escaped to Metapontium. After these initial attacks and the death of Pythagoras, Pythagorean communities in Croton and elsewhere continued to flourish. At around 450 BC attacks on Pythagorean communities were carried out across Magna Graecia. In Croton, a house where Pythagoreans gathered was set on fire and all but two of the Pythagorean philosophers burned alive. Pythagorean meeting places in other cities were also attacked and philosophic leaders killed. These attacks occurred in the context of widespread violence and destruction in Magna Graecia. Following the political instability in the region, some Pythagorean philosophers fled to mainland Greece while others regrouped in Rhegium. By about 400 BC the majority of Pythagorean philosophers had left Italy. Archytas remained in Italy and ancient sources record that he was visited there by young Plato in the early 4th century BC. The Pythagorean schools and societies died out from the 4th century BC.

Between 1022 and 1163, the Cathars were condemned by eight local church councils, the last of which, held at Tours, declared that all Albigenses should be put into prison and have their property confiscated. The Third Lateran Council of 1179 repeated the condemnation. Innocent III's diplomatic attempts to roll back Catharism were met with little success. After the murder of his legate Pierre de Castelnau in 1208, and suspecting that Raymond VI, Count of Toulouse was responsible, Innocent III declared a crusade against the Cathars. He offered the lands of the Cathar heretics to any French nobleman willing to take up arms.

From 1209 to 1215, the Crusaders experienced great success, capturing Cathar lands and systematically crushing the movement. From 1215 to 1225, a series of revolts caused many of the lands to be regained by the Cathars. A renewed crusade resulted in the recapturing of the territory and effectively drove Catharism underground by 1244. The Albigensian Crusade had a role in the creation and institutionalization of both the Dominican Order and the Medieval Inquisition. The Dominicans promulgated the message of the Church and spread it by preaching the Church's teachings in towns and villages to stop the spread of alleged heresies, while the Inquisition investigated people who were accused of teaching heresies. Because of these efforts, all discernible traces of the Cathar movement were eradicated by the middle of the 14th century.

Westerners will do the same to us sooner or later, unless we destroy them first. The difference is that they want us to die so that they themselves can proliferate through space, whereas we want them to die so that we can avoid proliferating through space.
Posted by: Zea_mays
« on: May 14, 2022, 02:14:46 pm »

The Merton thesis is an argument about the nature of early experimental science proposed by Robert K. Merton. Similar to Max Weber's famous claim on the link between Protestant work ethic and the capitalist economy, Merton argued for a similar positive correlation between the rise of Protestant Pietism and early experimental science.[1] The Merton thesis has resulted in continuous debates.[2]
Protestant values encouraged scientific research by allowing science to identify God's influence on the world and thus providing religious justification for scientific research.[1]
In 1958, American sociologist Gerhard Lenski's empirical inquiry into The Religious Factor: A Sociological Study of Religion's Impact on Politics, Economics, and Family Life in the Detroit area (Michigan) revealed, among other insights, that there were significant differences between Catholics on the one hand and (white) Protestants and Jews on the other hand with regard to economics and the sciences. Lenski's data supported the basic hypotheses of Max Weber's work The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. According to Lenski, the "contributions of Protestantism to material progress have been largely unintended by-products of certain distinctive Protestant traits. This was a central point in Weber's theory."
However, Lenski said, asceticism was rare among modern Protestants, and the distinctive Protestant doctrine of "the calling" was largely forgotten. Instead, modern (white) Protestants and Jews had a high degree of "intellectual autonomy" that facilitated scientific and technical advance.[10] By contrast, Lenski pointed out, Catholics developed an intellectual orientation which valued "obedience" to the teachings of their church above intellectual autonomy, which made them less inclined to enter scientific careers. Catholic sociologists[11][12] had come to the same conclusions.[13]
As a consequence, "none of the predominantly and devoutly Catholic nations in the modern world can be classified as a leading industrial nation. Some Catholic nations – such as France, Italy, Argentina, Brazil, and Chile – are quite highly industrialized, but none of them are leaders in the technological and scientific fields, nor do they seem likely to become so. Recently [1963] some Brazilian Catholic social scientists compared their country's progress with that of the United States and concluded that the chief factor responsible for the differential rates of development is the religious heritage of the two nations."[14]
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: May 11, 2022, 08:58:58 pm »

Musk is also a critic of capitalism for leading to sub-optimal innovativeness:

Musk later praised the software engineers and technologists on his team, saying that his companies' focus on challenges such as artificial intelligence and spaceflight help him attract top talent.

The best minds, he said, are more interested in pushing the bounds of innovation than in getting paid a lot to work on something boring.

"It's not a money thing," he added. "It's really just how interesting are the projects."

The unspoken assumption underlying his claim is that a thing has to be new in order to not be boring. This is a progressive assumption, which we disagree with. I find that many new things are boring despite being new, whereas many old things are not boring despite being old. This is because I am an absolutist. Whatever is boring will always continue to be boring, and whatever is not boring will never become boring. Whether or not something is boring to me is determined by the quality of the thing itself, and unrelated to how familiar I am with it. Musk, in contrast, lacks such perception. To him, what is boring is anything that he has become too familiar with.

Thus someone like Musk can never be satisfied, because everything that exists at any point in time will become boring to him eventually, whereupon he will desire even more innovation, over and over again without end. In contrast, someone like me can be satisfied forever simply by successfully finding the quality I seek.

In short, Musk worships Yahweh whereas I worship God.
Posted by: SirGalahad
« on: April 26, 2022, 03:59:57 pm »

I always thought that the whole "Corporations are going to irreparably destroy the environment and make the earth unlivable and doom humanity" angle was a misdirection. Do people really think that the powers that be aren't going to invest all they can into not just improving the chances of, but ENSURING that the evil they commit is able to be committed in perpetuity? They aren't going to just crack the ice from under their own feet, although I wish they would. The bottom line is that I'm certain that people like Elon Musk absolutely LOVE the idea of sustainability
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: April 25, 2022, 02:45:58 pm »

Progressive Yahwist definition of "advancement":

Could our universe have been created in a petri dish? Avi Loeb seems to think so. The Harvard astronomer posits that a higher “class” of civilization may have conjured up our universe in a laboratory far, far away.
He also introduces a new way of classifying exactly what makes a civilization advanced—one that veers away from Soviet astrophysicist Nikolai Kardashev’s system, which organizes civilizations based on the amount of energy they generate and consume.

According to Kardashev, Type I civilizations—greetings, Earthlings!—are only advanced enough to utilize the starlight that reaches their planet (4×1012 watts), while Type II civilizations have mastered the ability to fully harness their host star’s power (4×1026 watts). Dyson sphere, anyone? Type III civilizations, the final classification in his framework, are able to harness all of the energy within their galaxy (a whopping 4×1037 watts).

Loeb, by contrast, has devised a framework that breaks advanced civilizations down into classes based on their ability to “reproduce the astrophysical conditions that led to its existence.”

Earthlings would fall into class C because, as a “low-level” technological civilization, we would not be able to recreate our current conditions should the sun suddenly die. (He suggests we might even fall into the class D category because we’re actively destroying our only home.) On the other hand, class B civilizations, Loeb writes, are advanced enough to recreate the conditions in which they live, independent of their host star.

A class A civilization, like our proposed creators, would be able to, say, generate large amounts of dark energy and, as Loeb suggests, create “baby universes,” or smaller universes controlled by this higher civilization, that could potentially spawn life. He also suggests that, due to competition, only one advanced civilization at a time would be able to reach this level of sophistication.

I don't like Kardashev's definition either, of course, but Loeb's is even worse. A truly superior civilization should not only (contrary to Kardashev's definition) try to consume less energy rather than more, but also (contrary to Loeb's definition) have at least enough ethical concern to refrain from creating more universes in which to imprison even more victims! The only true superiority is nobility.

Anyway, the part in bold sounds like a description of Yahweh to me.

Also, describing our current condition:


“low-level” technological civilization

gives you an idea of how depraved progressives really are.

As for:

(He suggests we might even fall into the class D category because we’re actively destroying our only home.)

I have a different take on this as I previously mentioned:

Increasingly, I believe that there is a Yahwist collective subconscious process at work which is deliberately trying to trash Earth beyond saving in order to spur Westerners to expand into outer space ASAP.

To express it in Loeb's terminology, I think Western civilization is merely giving itself more urgent incentives to become class B.

And yes:

Abraham "Avi" Loeb (Hebrew: אברהם (אבי) לייב; born February 26, 1962) is an Israeli-American theoretical physicist who works on astrophysics and cosmology.

His interests:

In 2020, Loeb published a research paper about the possibility that life can propagate from one planet to another,[38] followed by the opinion piece "Noah’s Spaceship" about directed panspermia.[39]!/
Posted by: Zea_mays
« on: April 06, 2022, 09:08:56 pm »

If aliens are tempted to spend millions of years traveling to the Earth to examine life, that will be a major victory for the Demiurge. The transmitted messages will continue to propagate through space for millions of years (if my understanding is correct). So, even if humans become extinct, or even if Earth is destroyed by the Sun becoming a red giant, the message will still be out there, waiting to hook someone else into prolonging their species's existence...

I think the only good news is, with currently technology, the transmissions become scrambled after a certain distance/time, so they aren't just out there forever. But Westerners keep working to make the transmissions more powerful.
Scientists to Broadcast Earth's Location to Aliens, Ignoring Stephen Hawking's Warning

Scientists have designed a radio message to be beamed into deep space that is meant to be received and, they hope, understood by an intelligent alien civilization.

The message is essentially an updated version of the famous Arecibo message, transmitted in 1974, which had the same purpose. Broadcast from the Arecibo Radio Telescope in Puerto Rico, the message consisted of 1,679 bits arranged into 73 lines of 23 characters.

The message was transmitted in binary code—ones and zeroes. Once decoded, the message forms a visual graphic consisting of a stick figure of a human as well as representations of our solar system, DNA, and the Arecibo telescope.

Now, scientists have designed a new message to improve upon the Arecibo transmission. Called the Beacon in the Galaxy (BITG) message, it contains more information about basic mathematics and science than the Arecibo message did. It is hoped that these concepts will be universally understood by life forms of at least similar intelligence to humans.
The late physics professor Stephen Hawking expressed concern multiple times about humans calling out into the vastness of space and contacting aliens.

In 2015, Hawking appeared at an event announcing the launch of the Breakthrough Listen project, which studies radio waves in an effort to find out if any of them are artificial in origin.

Hawking showed support for efforts to find alien life by listening, but warned against actively reaching out ourselves, using humanity's own behavior as a sign that aliens won't necessarily be friendly.

"If you look at history, contact between humans and less intelligent organisms have often been disastrous from their point of view, and encounters between civilizations with advanced versus primitive technologies have gone badly for the less advanced," he said.

Hawking went on to say that aliens could be vastly more powerful than us and "may not see us as any more valuable than we see bacteria."

Jamilah Hah is also involved in the BITG project. She thinks that the benefits of contacting aliens outweigh the potential risks.

"Thus, as long as contact is approached with a clear sign of peace, it can be assumed that the hopeful possibilities and discoveries that come alongside communication outweigh the risk."

We don't even need to think about how we treat bacteria. Just think about how technologically-advanced humans like Columbus (or Elon Musk or any other billionaire) treat other humans.

Greetings Earthlings, we come in search of "peace" and discovery:
Posted by: Zea_mays
« on: March 04, 2022, 10:50:45 pm »

I've never heard of this before. Here is what historians call the "march of progress" when applied in contexts writing histories of political, scientific, etc. topics.
Whig history (or Whig historiography), often appearing as whig history, is an approach to historiography that presents history as a journey from a dark and terrible past to a "glorious present".[1] The present described is generally one with modern forms of liberal democracy and constitutional monarchy: the term was coined to criticise grand narratives praising Britain's adoption of constitutional monarchy and the historical development of the Westminster system.[2] The term has also been applied widely in historical disciplines outside of British history (e.g. in the history of science) to describe "any subjection of history to what is essentially a teleological view of the historical process".[3] When the term is used in contexts other than British history, "whig history" (lowercase) is preferred.[3]

In the British context, whig historians emphasize the rise of constitutional government, personal freedoms and scientific progress.[4][5] The term is often applied generally (and pejoratively) to histories that present the past as the inexorable march of progress towards enlightenment. The term is also used extensively in the history of science to refer to historiography that focuses on the successful chains of theories and experiments that led to present-day theories, while ignoring failed theories and dead ends.[6]
In science

It has been argued that the historiography of science is "riddled with Whiggish history".[53][verification needed] Like other whig histories, whig history of science tends to divide historical actors into "good guys" who are on the side of truth (as is now known), and "bad guys" who opposed the emergence of these truths because of ignorance or bias.[54] Science is seen as emerging from 'a series of victories over pre-scientific thinking'.[25]
More recently, some scholars have argued that Whig history is essential to the history of science. At one level, "the very term 'the history of science' has itself profoundly Whiggish implications. One may be reasonably clear what 'science' means in the 19th century and most of the 18th century. In the 17th century 'science' has very different meaning. Chemistry, for example, was then inextricably mixed up with alchemy. Before the 17th century dissecting out such a thing as 'science' in anything like the modern sense of the term involves profound distortions".[58] The science historians' rejection of whiggishness has been criticised by some scientists for failing to appreciate "the temporal depth of scientific research".[59]
In philosophy

One very common example of Whig history is the work of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, to whom is often ascribed a teleological view of history with an inexorable trajectory in the direction of progress.[63]
In the emergence of intelligent life

In The Anthropic Cosmological Principle (1986), John D. Barrow and Frank J. Tipler identify whiggishness with a teleological principle of convergence in history to liberal democracy.
This is in line with what Barrow and Tipler call the "anthropic principle".[65]