Author Topic: Homo Hubris  (Read 3724 times)

Billy Kid

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 37
    • View Profile
Re: Homo Hubris
« Reply #60 on: November 11, 2022, 05:53:34 pm »
They owe us for… polluting their air and water and soil with unnecessary inventions that only serve to make life even more complex than it already is. Stupid ****.

rp

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1194
    • View Profile
Re: Homo Hubris
« Reply #61 on: November 15, 2022, 02:47:42 pm »

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7851
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Re: Homo Hubris
« Reply #62 on: November 23, 2022, 07:41:54 pm »


Homework: which bloodlines need to be eliminated first?

Billy Kid

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 37
    • View Profile
Re: Homo Hubris
« Reply #63 on: November 24, 2022, 04:36:56 pm »
I’m pretty sure this subhuman is referring to Rome as “the ancient west,” as it is typical of their kind to try and claim the Romans as their own, despite their Turanian ancestors being Rome’s greatest enemies (also please show me where Romans called themselves “Westerners”).

But compare Roman technology, such as cement and aqueducts, which made life easier and simpler for the populace, to western machinery, such as planes, nuclear power, and plastic, which have only made life more complex and dangerous for everyone. I don’t have to fear Roman cement in my drinking water, but I do have to worry about micro-plastics, chemical fertilisers and pesticides.
Agree Agree x 1 View List

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7851
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Re: Homo Hubris
« Reply #64 on: November 30, 2022, 08:39:36 pm »
Our enemy Duchesne returns again:

https://www.eurocanadians.ca/2022/11/the-50-greatest-philosophers-are-all-european-men.html

Sure, if you judge by Western standards.

Quote
It could be that the most important historical question that points to a monumental contrast between the West and the Rest is the following: why did Western civilization produce all the greatest philosophers in history?

Because Westerners have been the ones judging which philosophers are the greatest, as Duchesne himself then proceeds to explicitly tell us (while failing to see any problem with this):

Quote
This conviction that philosophy was almost entirely a Western phenomenon was held by historians of philosophy from every school of thought until recently. The neo-Kantian Wilhelm Windelband, believing that philosophy concerns the “independent and self-conscious work of intelligence which seeks knowledge methodically for its own sake,” began his two volume classic, A History of Philosophy, published in 1892, with the ancient Greeks, without mentioning a single non-Western philosopher. Windelband believed that “the history of philosophy is the process in which European humanity has embodies in scientific conceptions its views of the world and its judgments of life” (p. 9). The historicist and existentialist Julián Marías, in his Historia de la Filosofía (1941), which went through countless editions, and was translated into English, also starts with the Pre-Socratics and ends with José Ortega y Gasset (1883-1955) without a word about a non-Western thinker
...
The liberal minded Will Durant, in his popular book, The Story of Philosophy: The Lives and Opinions of the Greater Philosophers (1926), profiles only Western philosophers. In a “Preface to the Second Edition”, written in 1962, we see the first inklings of multiculturalism, however, as Durant faults his book for leaving out “Chinese and Hindu philosophy”, even though he adds that Chinese philosophers were “averse to epistemology” or to inquiries into the nature of knowledge and how it is acquired. The analytical-empiricist philosopher Bertrand Russell, in his widely known book, History of Western Philosophy (1945), which was cited as one of the books that won him the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1950, took it for granted that the history of philosophy should be about Western philosophers. Philosophy began with the Pre-Socratics because it is only then that we see speculations on the nature of things with “appeals to human reason rather than to authority, whether that of tradition or that of revelation”. Russell offered a chapter on “Mohammedan Culture and Philosophy” only to the extent that Muslims wrote commentaries on Aristotle. The Catholic philosopher, Frederick Copleston, in his magisterial work, A History of Philosophy, published in nine volumes between 1946 and 1975, began with Greece and stayed in Europe, including a volume on Russian philosophy, right to the end.

This Western-centric attitude was unquestioned until recent times. It was the typical perspective of texts for university students. Konstantin Kolenda’s Philosophy’s Journey: A Historical Introduction (1974) says that it was the ancient Greeks who “were able to think through to new, unorthodox questions.” “Mythical accounts about gods and about the world…do not necessarily concern themselves with the question of truth. Myth is something that is told and need not call for critical scrutiny, examination, justification. The idea of possibly discovering the true nature of reality behind the multiplicity of appearances and behind conflicting opinions is a most original and revolutionary idea in the intellectual history of man” (p. 5). It is not only that the ancient Greeks posed critical questions — “Is there some substance or some basic stuff out of which everything is made?” – but that their answers consisted of “reasoned” arguments. Not a single Eastern philosopher is included in Kolenda’s book.

In 1991, Norman Melchert published The Great Conversation: A Historical Introduction to Philosophy, in which he tells students that the value of philosophy is that it teaches you “to believe for good reasons”. Opinions are as good as the reasons behind them. “That’s what philosophy is”: teaching students how to think “clearly and rationally”. Every philosopher in Melchert’s “great conversation” is Western.
...
The Great Philosophers, a 1987 BBC television series presented by Bryan Magee, which was made available in a book of the same name, only discusses Western philosophers in its 15 episodes, beginning with Socrates and ending with Bertrand Russell and Ludwig Wittgenstein.

See? Duchesne, however, does not see; instead, he genuinely thinks the above is evidence supporting his claim:

Quote
This is a remarkable statistical fact. It needs to be emphasized this is not a comparison of the West against three or two other civilizations, but a competition of the West versus the Rest. Aside from the Muslim, Chinese, and perhaps the Indian world, no other culture in the world, not the Mayas, not the Aztecs, not the Khmer Rouge Cambodians, not the Tibetans, not the Aksum civilization, not the Egyptians, not the Assyrians, not the Bantus, not the Babylonians, not the Japanese, not the Koreans, NO other culture in the world, produced any great philosopher. Let it be repeated: this is not a list based on arbitrary, idiosyncratic, purely personal, or politicized assumptions. It is based on solid, widely recognized histories of philosophies.

Widely recognized by which civilization? Duh!

Quote
    Europeans 80.5 = 80.5%
    Jews 9.5 = 9.5%
    Chinese 7 = 7%
    Muslims 3 = 3%

If we add Jews to the European list, insofar as they were all educated in Europe, then the Western score is 90 = 90%.

I agree with adding Jews to the "European" list, of course.

Quote
The fact that Indian philosophy can’t be divorced from India’s major religious traditions, or was never conceived as a separate intellectual pursuit, explains why I could not include Indian philosophers
...
Sue Hamilton, an expert in Indian philosophy, acknowledges that “what Westerners call religion and philosophy are combined in India, and that its philosophies are correctly referred to as soteriologies, or ‘system of salvation’”. The Indian philosophical tradition holds that “understanding reality has a profound effect on one’s destiny”. The attempt “to understand the nature of reality” is a “spiritual undertaking, an activity associated with a religious tradition”. The aim of Indian philosophy was to escape from consciousness, to obliterate the thinking self; and every philosopher, or every philosophical outlook, Buddhism, Hinduism, Jainism, and Sikhism, were preoccupied with the notion of reincarnation, the process of birth and rebirth, the transmigration of souls and the “release” of the soul from that process.

So systems of salvation are excluded(!) from what Westerners consider to be philosophy? That surely says more about Western values than about the quality of Indian philosophers!

Quote
Nevertheless, Sue Hamilton, as is generally the case with Westerners who study Eastern thought, misleads readers with her view that Western philosophy “tends to be concerned with detailed and technical questions about kinds of logic and linguistic analysis” – whereas Indian philosophy is a “spiritual undertaking” about “big metaphysical questions” concerning the meaning of life and how to live one’s life in order to have an effect on one’s destiny.

I would put it even more strongly than Hamilton does. Western philosophy views language as fundamentally empowering, as opposed to viewing language as fundamentally restrictive (and only something we are forced to use for communication due to decay of empathy (itself partially caused by reliance on language)). This is also why Western philosophers tend to be more anthropocentric: in worshipping language, it trivially follows that Western philosophers have a higher opinion of language-users (ie. humans) compared to non-language-users (ie. non-humans). (As I have pointed out in the past, reincarnation was a mainstream belief of ancient Greeks, yet amazingly (to non-Western eyes) the idea that humans could reincarnate as non-humans and vice versa (the most trivially obvious thing in non-Western imagination) did not occur as a possibility to them: that is how ludicrously anthropocentric they are!) Similarly, Western philosophers tend to be dismissive of Original Nobility, because, as language-worshippers, they find it hard to accept the superiority of a pre-linguistic human (ie. infant):

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/childcare-issues/msg15015/#msg15015

Continuing:

Quote
The fact is that Chinese philosophers were accustomed to express themselves in the form of aphorisms, apothegms, or allusions, and illustrations. The whole book of Lao-tzu consists of aphorisms, and most of the chapters of the Chuang-tzu are full of allusions and illustrations. This is very obvious. But even in writings such as those of Mencius and Hsun Tzu, when compared with the philosophical writings of the West, there are still too many aphorisms, allusions, and illustrations.

Why do you think this was the case FFS? Answer: they were at least trying to partially overcome the limitations of language by not using language to crudely approximate an idea, but using language merely to describe a scenario that hopefully will cause the idea to independently arise in the listener's/reader's mind!

Quote
it was Aristotle who did the most in ancient times to delineate what constitutes a proper philosophical statement about what there is and what constitutes a valid form of reasoning about why something is so. He invented formal logic, a precise language about reality, about what things can be said to be substances and the reasons why they are as they are. He showed that true philosophical statements are composed of basic categories — substance, quantity, quality, relationship, place, time — which express the various ways in which being is, and that these statements can be formulated to be subject-predicate statements. This is just a little particle of what this incredible philosopher did.

The following then comes as no surprise:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotelian_ethics#The_highest_good

Quote
Aristotle claims that a human's highest functioning must include reasoning, being good at what sets humans apart from everything else.

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/ancient-world/antropocentricism-the-most-dangerous-ideology-in-the-world/

Back to enemy article:

Quote
Europeans took seriously Zeno’s paradoxes, for they seem to suggest that one could reach a logically unacceptable conclusion on the basis of sound reasoning from apparently sound premises. They wondered whether these paradoxes revealed deficiencies in the way we reason, calling for improvements in our reasoning powers, a better system of logic and a more precise usage of language.

But did they ever suspect that reliance on language itself might be the problem? No, because the Western approach to problems caused by language is always more language, never an attempt to discard language.

Quote
the Western mind was able to develop methodologies to understand texts from different eras and different cultures, because this is the only culture that learned how to draw ontological distinctions between mind and matter, individual and society, the three parts of the soul, and so on, in the course of which this mind eventually developed particular sciences—physics, chemistry, biology, botany, sociology, economics, etc.—to explain different aspects of reality, and newly emerging properties, while also realizing that the concept of “man in general” is limited by historically determinate factors. The prior ability of ancient Greek philosophers to discover the distinctiveness of the faculty of the mind, the distinction between physis (nature) and nomos (law or custom) nurtured a transcendental outlook that allowed Western thinker to stand aback from their context and view other cultural contexts in their own terms. Therefore, it is not enough to say that all knowledge is historically situated, the expression of a particular people. If all knowledge is contextual, then all knowledge claims are equally valid. We have to ask why the West developed all the theories about how knowledge is context-bound, and why the West produced all the modern sciences.

Since when was philosophy supposed to be judged by its utility to science/knowledge? But Duchesne probably doesn't even notice his own screwup that perfectly illustrates the problem with Westerners like himself:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/truth-knowledge/

So long as Western philosophy continues to predominate in prestige, it will be almost impossible to get off the track of:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/progressive-yahwism/

which is what we are desperately trying to do.
« Last Edit: November 30, 2022, 08:56:32 pm by 90sRetroFan »

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7851
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Re: Homo Hubris
« Reply #65 on: December 01, 2022, 11:15:46 pm »
More Duchesne:

https://www.thepostil.com/the-continuous-creativity-of-western-visual-arts/

Quote
Anyone who approaches the history of visual arts from an impartial perspective—concerned only with aesthetics, creativity, and originality—can’t help but realize, as I am about to explain in this article, that Western art stands on a league of its own. Making this claim goes against the relentless promotion of immigrant multiculturalism across the West today, which necessarily comes along with the notion that the art of the diverse peoples of the world is equally good.

They are not equally good (a relativist belief). They are better:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/ancient-world/the-superiority-of-pre-colonial-aesthetics/

Western visual arts are indeed in a league of their own - in ugliness:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-right/western-civilization-is-ugly-48/

Continuing:

Quote
a most peculiar characteristic of Western art: its exhibition of a continuous proliferation of highly original artists with new artistic styles, new ways of projecting images on a flat surface, new conceptions of light, new standards of excellence, and new conceptions about nature and man—in contrast to a nonwestern world where aesthetic norms barely changed or where artists were invariably inclined to follow an established convention without breaking new aesthetic paths.

Change for the sake of novelty is frivolous at best, attention-seeking at worst, and antithetical to good art either way.

Of course Duchesne disagrees, as does his fellow Westerners on whom he relies as the judges of which art is better, which of course they will do using Western standards:

Quote
H.W. Janson’s History of Art, first published in 1962, with a sixteenth printing in 1971, which I am using, and numerous new editions thereafter, is an encyclopedic treatment of the history of art, with millions of copies sold in fifteen languages. Janson came from a Lutheran family of Baltic German stock. His criterion for choice of great art is “ORIGINALITY.” “Uniqueness, novelty, freshness” are the “yardstick of artistic greatness.”
...
This criterion underpins Janson’s magisterial book. This book has three opening chapters on “The Art of Prehistoric Man,” “Egyptian Art,” and “The Ancient Near East.” The rest of the book, with the exception of a short chapter on “Islamic Art” and a short “Postscript” with the title “The Meeting of East and West,” is entirely about Western art. These traditions really interest him insofar as they “contributed to the growth of the Western artistic tradition” (p. 569). He ignored China, Japan, and India until the end because they were not a “vital source of inspiration for Western art” except in contemporary times. New styles of art, new techniques and schools, was a uniquely Western phenomenon.

I agree that Western art involves more novelty. I merely interpret this as evidence of Western inferiority.

Quote
Arnold Hauser (1892-1978) was a Hungarian Marxist with Jewish ancestry, an admirer of bourgeois norms and sensibilities, writing at a time when students were educated without diversity and equity mandates. The Social History of Art, first published in 1951, the product of thirty years of labor, opens with eight short chapters on prehistoric, Egyptian, and Mesopotamian art, covering less than fifty pages in a four-volume book that is close to 1000 pages long. This rightfully valued book argues that art became more realistic and naturalistic as Europe became less aristocratic and hierarchical, more bourgeois, urbane and cosmopolitan. A “naturalistic style” actually prevailed through to the end of the Paleolithic Age in the way animals were depicted in a realistic way, although the art was concerned as well with the performance of magical rituals. This naturalistic attitude, which was “open to the full range of experience,” gave way in the Neolithic Age to a “narrowly geometric stylization” in which the “artist tended to shut himself off from the wealth of empirical reality.”

The Jew dislikes Aryan art. No surprises here! The above information also fits with our model of Aryan diffusion:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/mythical-world/yandi-vs-huangdi-myth-confirmed/msg2140/#msg2140

Quote
According to William Watson, while the Northern School contains "the painters who favour clear, emphatic structure in their compositions, with the use of explicit perspective devices", the Southern School "cultivate a more intimate style of landscape bathed in cloud and mist, in which pleasing calligraphic forms tend to take the place of conventions established for the representation of rocks, trees, etc. The painter of the Southern School was interested in distant effects, but his colleague of the Northern School paid more attention to the devices of composition which achieve the illusion of recession, and at the same time more attentive to close realism of detail. ... some artists hover between the two".[3] A more philosophical distinction is that the Southern School painters "were thought to have sought the inner realities and expressed their own lofty natures" while the Northern "painted only the outward appearance of things, the worldly and decorative".[4]

Back to enemy article:

Quote
In Egyptian art, “the person of the artist himself disappeared almost entirely behind his work.” Painters and sculptors remained “anonymous”

Only Westerners, being Achilleans, find this frightening. To everyone else, it is highly respectable.

Quote
Western art is persistently creative, never rigid and traditionalist. New artistic epochs emerge (Mannerism, Baroque, Rococo, Classicism, Romanticism, Naturalism, Impressionism) in opposition to prevailing conventions with increasing acceleration from the Renaissance onwards, led by artists who purposely wanted to break away from the prejudices of their age, innovate and experiment, and demonstrate thereby their own artistic genius.

This is why we call them Homo Hubris. Art should not be about showboating.

Quote
The Story of Art, originally published in 1950, is currently in its 16th edition. Wikipedia says that “over seven million copies” of this book “have been sold, making it the best-selling art book of all time.” It “has been translated into approximately 30 languages.” Unlike Hauser, who follows a Marxist conception of progress in the arts, Gombrich, born in Vienna into an assimilated family of Jewish origin, carefully rejects the idea of progress, believing that “each gain or progress in one direction entails a loss in another, and that this subjective progress, in spite of its importance, does not correspond to an objective increase in artistic value” (p. 3).

Jewish anti-progressivism summarized: "Progress means we can't have it all! We want it all!"

Quote
The Story of Art is a history of art from the beginnings to the present. Gombrich estimates that three chapters, out of twenty five, are enough to cover the achievements of primitive and nonwestern art. His reason for doing this is simple:

Western Europe always differed profoundly from the East. In the East [artistic] styles lasted for thousands of years, and there seemed no reason why they should ever change. The West never knew this immobility. It was always restless, groping for new solutions and new ideas (p. 131).

Among European painters there was an “urge to be different,” do something new, find a new way to enhance the aesthetic effect of the work, convey something different about the world, new life experiences along with permanent aspects of human nature. Using originality and restless creativity as his central criterion, Gombrich could not but pay far less attention to an Eastern artistic tradition that remained continuously the same through the centuries.

Again, I agree with Gombrich's observations. I merely interpret them as evidence of Western inferiority. (That Gombrich interprets them as evidence of Western superiority is evidence that Jews are Westerners.)

Quote
He writes about Egypt’s “art of eternity.”

No one wanted anything different, no one asked him to be “original.” On the contrary, he was probably considered the best artist who could make his statues most like the admired monuments of the past. So it happened that in the course of three thousand years or more Egyptian art changed very little…

Why should anyone want anything different? It is much more respectable to want to live outside of time than within it. (This is why I prefer to re-watch old movies/TV shows that I watched as a child than watch new ones.)

Quote
About Chinese and Japanese art, he observes:

The standards of painting remained very high…but art became more and more like a graceful and elaborate game which has lost much of its interest as so many of its moves are known.

Gombrich has the same attitude as Musk (and the opposite of mine) towards what is boring:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/progressive-yahwism/msg13288/#msg13288

Quote
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.

Gombrich, being a Jew, obviously worships Yahweh. Duh!

Back to enemy article:

Quote
Clark’s book, as he says in the Foreword, “is made up of the scripts of a series of television programmes given in the spring of 1969.” The series, produced by the BBC under the same name as the book’s title, consisted of thirteen programmes, each fifty minutes long, singularly focused on European art from the end of the Dark Ages to the early twentieth century.
...
Civilisation is a joy to read for its high minded learning and its enthusiastic appreciation of the sublime originality of Western art in its incessant striving for new forms of aesthetic perfection. Other civilizations remained content with reenacting the perfection they had achieved in the past. The West was different:

The great, indeed the unique, merit of European Civilisation has been that it has never ceased to develop and change. It has not been based on a stationary perfection, but on ideas and inspiration

Which sounds more like what perfection is supposed to be: a) something that the attainer will never again want to depart from after attaining it; or b) something that the attainer feels the need to move on from as soon as it is attained?

Oh, I forgot we are talking to Homo Hubris.

Quote
Much of Chinese “art,” it should be said, consisted of bronze casting, ceramics, and jade carving. This “art” was highly sophisticated in technique and decoration, but I hesitate to call it art. It should be categorized as applied art, the work of highly skilled craftsmen. As H.W. Janson writes, “originality is what distinguishes art from craft.”

Sincerity is what distinguishes art from showboating.

Quote
think about Leonardo da Vinci’s remark about the indomitable desire of the “wretched pupil” to “surpass his master.” This attitude is singularly European

Yes.

Quote
a state of “permanent revolution” as artists “contested with each other over who was the most “creative.”

Do those who behave like this even deserve to be called artists?
« Last Edit: December 01, 2022, 11:29:02 pm by 90sRetroFan »

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7851
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Re: Homo Hubris
« Reply #66 on: December 04, 2022, 09:12:29 pm »
Our enemies explain how "whites" are the best at Yahwism:

https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2022/12/02/flight-is-white-aviation-is-a-creation-of-the-pale-stale-nation/

Quote

...
Dawkins pays graceful tribute to Hamilton and describes Hamilton’s “mathematical theory” showing how “an animal (or plant) that takes steps to send at least some of its offspring a long way away will spread more of its genes, in the long run, than a rival that drops all of its offspring right next door to the parent.” (p. 206) This is true, Hamilton showed, “even if ‘right next door’ is (at present) the best place in the world and ‘a long way away’ is on average worse.” That idea is only one of what Dawkins rightly calls Hamilton’s “brilliant contributions to Darwinian theory,” but it sheds light on the central theme of the book: flight in all its forms. Flights of Fancy is about the conquest of the air, whether accomplished by birds, bats, bees or Blanchard’s balloons. Jean-Pierre Blanchard (1753–1806) was a pioneering French inventor who made the “first balloon crossing of the English Channel” in 1785. En route, he and his American companion “were obliged to jettison everything in their beautiful boat-shaped car, including even their own clothes.” (p. 179)
...
one thing is very clear from the history of mankind’s conquest of the air. Flight is White and aviation is a creation of the stale pale nation. In other words, it was European Whites who invented or perfected all the amazing ways in which human beings can imitate birds and take to the air. The airplane, the helicopter, the rocket, the balloon, the glider, the jet-pack and more — all of these are the product of White ingenuity and effort. And also of White audacity. Many White men have died or been horribly injured in the quest to conquer the air, just as many White men have died or been horribly injured in the quest to conquer mountains like Everest and the Eiger.

The Whiteness of Flight

In essence, flight and mountaineering are the same quest — a Faustian quest to ascend, overcome and go beyond the boundaries imposed on mankind by nature.

Wrong! Flight is a quest to follow nature beyond the boundaries imposed on it by gravity, as you yourself quoted Hamilton explaining earlier in your own article! Gravity is not nature. Natural selection is nature.

True defiance of nature would be stopping Hamiltonism (which is an aspect of Yahwism). Which is what we are trying to do. If "whites" are the most Hamiltonist among humans, they must be the first to be prohibited from reproducing if anti-Hamiltonism is to succeed, preferably before Hamiltonism reaches the extent of enabling settlement of outer space.

Quote
There was hubris in the early attempts on the air and Nemesis often punished that hubris. But now flight is one of the safest forms of transport and human beings can cross the Atlantic with less risk than they cross a city-street. We owe all of that to White men like Jean-Pierre Blanchard and the Wright Brothers.
...
Human races are not all equal and Whites have achieved exceptional things. Aviation is one soaring example: it’s a true creation of the pale stale nation.
...
From the Montgolfier Brothers to the Moon-landings and beyond, Flight has been White.

And so has the understanding of flight in all its forms, as Dawkins’ book describes. White scientists have elucidated the physics of flight and explained how flight has evolved again and again among animals and plants.
It’s a fascinating story excellently told in Flights of Fancy by the words of Richard Dawkins and the pictures of Jana Lenzová. That’s why I enjoyed the book so much. And I couldn’t help contrasting Flights of Fancy with another book that has recently made a strong impression on me. The other book is very different in content and style.
...
Black British Lives Matter is full of similar proclamations of Black suffering and White villainy. It’s a self-righteous and self-obsessed book. That’s part of why it’s also an ugly book. Another part of its ugliness is the poor quality of its prose and its reasoning. That’s why I found it such a contrast with Flights of Fancy, which is a beautiful book, well-written, well-reasoned, and well-illustrated, and most certainly not self-obsessed. As I noted above, Whites like Richard Dawkins are interested in birds, bats, bees, balloons and lots of other things starting with “B.” Blacks, by contrast, are interested in only one thing starting with “B,” namely, Blacks. In other words, Whites are exotropic, directed towards what’s outside themselves. Blacks are endotropic, directed towards themselves and their own concerns. That’s why Whites have been inventors, innovators and explorers of the Universe. And why Blacks have been none of those things.

Examples of exotropic "whites" interested in birds:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-right/western-civilization-sustainable-evil/msg12823/?topicseen#msg12823

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-right/western-civilization-sustainable-evil/msg12311/?topicseen#msg12311
« Last Edit: December 05, 2022, 01:07:29 am by 90sRetroFan »

guest19

  • Guest
Re: Homo Hubris
« Reply #67 on: December 05, 2022, 05:45:51 pm »
Quote
Whites are exotropic, directed towards what’s outside themselves.

Probably why there such effective karen's

antihellenistic

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 126
    • View Profile
Re: Homo Hubris
« Reply #68 on: December 05, 2022, 10:10:06 pm »
Quote
That’s why Whites have been inventors, innovators and explorers of the Universe. And why Blacks have been none of those things.

And Hitler, muslims, and other people of "non-white" communities are same like "blacks", they have been none of those things but being victim of "Whites"'s material inventions and universal explorations.

What are Hitler invention to this world? Only destroying the entire Europe and Western Civilization, but that's a good thing. We the victim of Western Civilization Barbarism never regret to praise Hitler.

Sometime destroying things is a good thing you know.

Islamic Khulafaur Rashidun and Ottoman Caliphate also not inventing anything but destroying anything in Europe, the land and people whom considered by the world of the "sources of invention and modernity", but to us the victim of colonialism that's an achievement, not a barbarism. We suffering, complaining, and try to seek revenge because you the Europeans not want to care to our plea. The only solution today is total eradication of Western Civilization and it's creatures. I'm even hesitate to consider them as "human"
« Last Edit: December 05, 2022, 10:14:21 pm by antihellenistic »

guest19

  • Guest
Re: True Left Breakthrough: Hate
« Reply #69 on: December 08, 2022, 01:46:45 pm »
There's way too many homo hubris on this planet, and that comes as no surprise considering homo hubris is the type of human that jewish/western civilizations produce

guest19

  • Guest
Re: Re: True Left Breakthrough: Hate
« Reply #70 on: December 08, 2022, 01:48:43 pm »
homo hubris in the jewish/western world, and homo slaves in the "third world"

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7851
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Re: Homo Hubris
« Reply #71 on: December 15, 2022, 06:49:48 pm »
Duchesne again:

https://www.thepostil.com/the-european-discovery-of-time/

Quote
European geologists were the first to realize that the Earth had a history, that it came to be in the course of time, and that humans could discover this history by studying the rock strata and fossils of the Earth’s crust.
...
John Whitehurst, in a daring book published in 1788, Inquiry into the Original State and Formation of the Earth (1778), argued that the geological record suggested a much older history of the Earth than the Noachian Flood. The Italian Giovanne Arduino (1714–1795) even denied the Flood and contended that the rock strata of the earth, which he classified with the names Primitive, Secondary and Tertiary, also pointed to a much older Earth.

The beginnings of the idea of an older Earth, however, is associated with Georges Louis Leclerc (the legendary Comte de Buffon), who was less a geologist than a historian of nature and encyclopédiste. Buffon hypothesized that the Earth originated from a collision of a comet and the sun, much earlier than the Biblical 6000 year account. He suggested this argument in his multivolume work, Histoire naturelle, générale et particulière (1749–1788), and in his Introduction to the History of Minerals (1774), although it was in his The Epochs of Nature (1778) that he formulated in explicit terms the idea that “the surface of the Earth has taken different forms in succession; even the heavens have changed, and all the objects in the physical world are, like those of the moral world, caught up in a continual process of successive variations”. He inferred the age of the Earth experimentally by heating a small metallic globe and measuring the rate at which it cooled, which yielded an estimate of 75,000 years old.
...
The German geologist Abraham Werner (1749-1817) thus proposed that in the beginning the Earth was covered by a primeval ocean which gradually receded to its present location, depositing by a process of crystallization and chemical precipitation almost all the rocks and minerals in the Earth’s crust over the course of about one million years. In his estimation, heat was not an important initial geological force; volcanic heat from the interior of the earth was a late and a secondary rock-forming agency after the main strata had been consolidated through slow sedimentation. In the spirit of science, Werner devised a comprehensive color scheme for the description and classification of rock strata according to their mineral content and age.
...
But soon a new perspective known as “uniformitarianism” came on the horizon thanks to the Scottish James Hutton (1726-1797), identified by some as the first student of the earth who may properly be called a geologist. In his The Theory of the Earth, or an Investigation of the Laws observable in the Composition, Dissolution, and Restoration of Land upon the Globe (1788), he provided a rigorous explanation, grounded in scientifically acceptable principles and based on the existing geological data, why the age of the Earth was indefinitely long.
...
The current geological consensus today is that the Earth’s history is a slow, gradual process punctuated by occasional natural catastrophic events.

Every participant in these debates was a European. The rest of the world was oblivious about this revolution in geology, as it was about Newtonian science, and the amazing revelation that the Earth’s history was very old and could be explained with the powers of the human mind.
...
After Hutton, Europeans would go on to develop techniques to date the rock strata of the Earth as well as a variety of methods to understand the Earth’s structure and evolution, including field work, rock description, geophysical techniques, chemical analysis, physical experiments, and numerical modelling.
...
I left other names from this account of the discovery of geological time, such as William Smith, who published three works from 1815 to 1817, gave geology a descriptive methodology for assigning relative ages to the various strata of the Earth, and provided the first geological map of England and Wales. After the 1830s, geology became a professional vocation with many names making important contributions and reaching ever more accurate estimations of the Earth’s age with the assistance of European physicists and chemists.

In 1896 radioactive isotopes were discovered by the French physicist Henri Becquerel showing that heat from their decay pointed to an Earth hundreds of millions of years old. Between 1903 and 1906, the renowned New Zealand physicist Ernest Rutherford (1871–1937) determined that isotopes could be used to date rocks. By the 1930s, through the efforts of Arthur Holmes, the age of the earth had expanded to about 2 billion years. In 1946, Willard Libby proposed an innovative method, radiocarbon dating, which allowed for the dating of organic materials by measuring their content of carbon-14. This method provided objective age estimates for carbon-based objects that originated from living organisms. The “radiocarbon revolution” finally allowed Europeans to reach the conclusion that the Earth was 4.54 billion years old.

The main effect of all this is make the material world feel less like a prison that we should be trying to escape from, and more like a place to stay and endlessly discover more about.
« Last Edit: December 28, 2022, 08:21:22 pm by 90sRetroFan »
Like Like x 2 View List

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7851
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Re: Homo Hubris
« Reply #72 on: December 19, 2022, 07:24:47 pm »
https://twitter.com/dr_duchesne/status/1604881634503057408

Quote
White men were the only explorers in history producing 100% of the greatest ------ which means that human nature has NO urge to explore. Only European man has.

Columbus
Da Gama
Magellan
Cortez
Cartier
Champlain
Cook
Livingston
Burton
Stanley
Scott
Shackleton
Amundsen

I agree. So which bloodlines should be eliminated first if our aim is to prevent settlement of outer space?
Agree Agree x 3 View List

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7851
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Re: Homo Hubris
« Reply #73 on: December 24, 2022, 08:06:01 pm »
https://twitter.com/dr_duchesne/status/1606831138139508736

Quote
If White men need diversity, how come they have been responsible for about 97% of all scientific ideas, and ALL the Scientific Instruments?

Ammeter
Barometer
Sextant
Voltmeter
Thermometer
Galvanometer
Hydrometer
Radar
Hygrometer
Electroscope
Microscope...

Quote
Electron Microscope
Accelerometer
Magnetograph
Telescope
Periscope
Calorimeter
Nanoscale
Telemeter
Seismograph
Cardiograph

Because the world was a better place before any of these existed?

Bonus Counterculture movie clip:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUOB-BkSMa8
« Last Edit: December 25, 2022, 09:27:21 pm by 90sRetroFan »

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7851
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Re: Homo Hubris
« Reply #74 on: December 28, 2022, 08:19:02 pm »
More Duchesne:

https://www.thepostil.com/western-cartography-a-history/

Quote
A supremely high proportion of the greatest cartographers in history—reaching 100% after 1400—were Western. The history of cartography may indeed provide a window into what the German philosopher G.W.F. Hegel (1770–1831) called the “principle of the European mind…which is confident that for it there can be no insuperable barrier and which therefore takes an interest in everything in order to become present to itself therein…to make this Other confronting him his own, to bring to view the genus, law, universal, thought, the inner rationality, in the particular forms of the world. As in the theoretical, so too in the practical, the European mind…subdues the outer world to its ends with an energy which has ensured for it the mastery of the world.”
...
the marvelous European age of discovery would begin in the fifteenth century, preceded by the world eventful travels of Marco Polo (1254-1324), which found expression in the Catalan Atlas of 1375, a synthesis of medieval mappa mundi and the travel literature of the time, showing compass-lines, and a rather accurate delineation of the Mediterranean. The fourteenth century also saw the emergence of the mariner’s compass, which made it possible to determine from the location of a ship any coastal feature, harbor or island. We should acknowledge the Islamic contribution of the cartographer al-Idrisi, who produced a large planispheric silver relief map that was original in not portraying the Indian Ocean in a landlocked way and in offering a more precise knowledge of China’s eastern coast. But Islamic geography would go no further. The first real turning point leading directly to the sixteenth century cartographic revolution was the Portuguese planned discovery and mapping, under the leadership of Henry the Navigator, in the course of the fifteenth century, of the African West coast down to the southern tip of Africa, rounding this massive continent and finally uncovering the full extent of this “Terra incognita” or “unknown land”. A mere two years after Diaz had sailed around the Cape, Henricus Martellus created his World Map of 1490, which showed both the whole of Africa generally and the specific locations of numerous places across the African west coast, detailing the step-by-step advancement of the Portuguese.
...
Once the age of discoveries intersected with the rise of modern science and the development of geodesy, which began as a surveying technique to determine with accuracy positions on Earth, which involved the invention of accurate measuring instruments and the development of new mathematical techniques, all of which happened in Europe, it stands to reason that all subsequent cartographers in history would be European. Some of the surveying tools and techniques which allowed for detailed hydrographic surveying of sea shores and islands, the topography of lands, heights of hills and mountains, included the general use of the plane table, for establishing and recording angles; the method of triangulation to determine distance of remote objects without going there; angle, distance, and elevation-measuring instruments…and John Harrison’s (1693-1776) ‘longitude’ clock, which finally solved the problem of determining longitude at sea.

It is said that the Cassini family were the first to start mapping the interior of France, with César-François Cassini (1714-84) being the most illustrious in the utilization of new surveying tools such as triangulation and establishing that the Earth was flattened at the poles, and in the production of an accurate map of France.

James Cook (1728-1779) is best known as one of the greatest explorers ever, for his three voyages between 1768 and 1779 in the Pacific Ocean, reaching the southeastern coast of Australia for the first time in history, circumnavigating New Zealand, crossing the Antarctic Circle three times, and exploring the Northwest passage all the way to the Bering Strait. He embodied the Faustian spirit of exploration in its purest form, driven solely by a will to explore without economic self-interest or missionary zeal; confessing to an ambition which “leads me not only farther than any man has been before me, but as far as I think it possible for man to go.” What many don’t know is that Cook was also one of the greatest cartographers in history. His voyages were models of reconnaissance mapping. He produced the first hydrographic surveys of the coast of Newfoundland based on precise triangulation. He discovered New Zealand and mapped its entire coastline using the sextant, which measures the angular distance between two visible objects. He surveyed and mapped South Georgia. In his search of the Northwest Passage, he mapped the coast all the way to the Bering Strait. This is a kernel of what this man accomplished.
...
There are too many great European cartographers to suppress. Francis Beaufort produced in 1792 the first map of Ireland, as the great hydrographer of his generation. He instructed map-making explorers that “the height of all headlands, isolated hills, and remarkable peaks should be trigonometrically determined…The nature of the shore, whether high cliff, low rock, or flat beach…the material of the beach, mud, sand, gravel or stones.” I won’t say anything about the men who started mapping the interior of India, and only a few words about the ones who began land surveying and mapping the United States. One has to start with Lewis and Clark, who conducted one of the most renowned journeys in history crossing the uncharted American West from August 1803 to September 1806, reporting in detail about the geography and wildlife, and producing about 140 maps of the area. They were followed by John Charles Frémont (1813-90), the first presidential Republican candidate, mapping explorer of the country between Missouri and the Rocky Mountains, Oregon and Upper California, and the “still and solitary grandeur” of the Great Salt Lake. Then there was Almon Harris Thompson, the mapper of Colorado through the Grand Canyon, southern Utah, part of Arizona—topographical maps to illustrate rivers, canyons, mountains, with a geological perspective.

Mappers of the bottom of the Ocean and the Universe

For all this, it has been estimated that in 1885 less than one-ninth of the land surface of the earth had been surveyed—which should not surprise us since the rest of the world remained asleep without much cartography other than the knowledge percolating from the West. In 1884, the West encouraged the world to adopt the Greenwich meridian dividing the Earth into the Eastern and the Western hemisphere, along an imaginary line of 0° longitude, establishing an International Date Line between one day and the next.

With the merger of the Western technologies of aviation and the camera, including aerial photogrammetry, cartography was revolutionized yet again, leading the to the rapid mapping of the globe through the 20th century. From this point on, we are no longer speaking of trailblazers as much as institutionalized cartographers assisted by scientists sitting on desks, who would go on to develop newer technologies, automation techniques, electronic distance-measuring instruments, inertial navigation systems, high resolution radars, remote sensing, and computers—revealing great geographic details at long distances. These technologies allowed radar imagery to be converted into maps of impenetrable regions like the Amazon, including geologic and seismic mapping of the earth beneath.

They also began to map the mountains, chasms, and plains beneath the oceans, with the use of deep-sea echo sounders, magnetometers, and underwater sonars. And the universe. Europeans had begun mapping the moon back in the seventeenth century, with the lunar cartographer Johannes Hevelius producing his famous Map of the Moon in 1647. Today, hundreds of teams of scientists are working with complex technologies, such as the Hubble and Spitzer Space Telescopes, mapping everything from the far reaches of the universe to the most infinitesimally small particles within it. This Faustian drive for mastery of the unknown has now produced (as of 2010), based on the ground-based telescopes of the 2MASS Redshift Survey, 3D images of 43,000 galaxies.

We all know what will happen next: they will expand into those 43000 galaxies and more. Unless we stop them here and now by eliminating their bloodlines.
« Last Edit: December 28, 2022, 08:22:23 pm by 90sRetroFan »