Commonly Accepted DELUSIONS: FOLLIES That BIND. Will To Infanticide. Example: ABRAHAMISM.

It is common to condemn the madness of the crowds, and to be mystified by all sorts of follies, conflicts, moods and ideas inciting to mayhem, which crowds engage in, with relish (just observe any sport stadium crowd getting hysterical about their team).

But why such an inclination to collective madness? Why so little wisdom in so many moods and thoughts systems? Why so much allure to collective sentiment? Is it an accident, a coincidence, an happenstance… Or is the mayhem not a consequence of the crowd, but, instead, what creates the crowd? Is the call to mayhem a method, a system, a deep, and perverse, logic at work, hidden from a first glance? This is what we will show here: the madness of crowds does not arise from the crowd as much as the crowd from the will to madness.
There is a fascist psychology underlying the madness of crowds, to make out of many minds one. Common crime, or common thought crime, helps.

Because, quite often, there is a higher sort of wisdom, a secret plot, a perverse mechanism, a nonlinear feedback, attached to the apparent blatant lack of wisdom. An apparent lack of wisdom can hide a deeper logic. The logic often has to stay hidden, because, if revealed, it would look rather perverse, and the opposite of what the mechanism it claims to achieve appears to be. 

For millions of years, the greatest enemy of man has been other men, the men of the alienated tribe, next door. Proper ecology serving the survival of all, required to find them repulsive, to reject them, to kill them. Such is the basic reason for the evil men commit: ecology. But there is even worse: there can be too many children, and the most atrocious crimes, are the most binding:

Atrocious Delusion Binds Judaism, Christianism, & Islamism

The atrocious delusion that the boSS is more important than the life of a child is the faith which Binds Judaism, and Its Ilk: Christianism, & Islamism. Should we use the neologism “pedocidal”?

Crime binding innocence to extinguish it. Should we call Abrahamism, the “Would-be Child Killer religion“? That would distinguish it from Hinduism, Buddhism, Shintoism, Taoism, etc.


How does one recognize friend from foe? By a signal. It could be the color of a skin, the color of a badge, a flag, and other visual or auditory signal (an accent, say). However, the ultimate structure is a brain structure. They fall in two classes: ideas, and moods.

So, to recognize the friend, the one who has the signal, and the foe, the one who does not, it’s best to entertain a particularly strong signal.

One not seen in nature. That will be best, because no doubt very special.

But are not the most clever, and wisest ideas and moods, faithful reproductions of nature?


So the best way to identify a friend, and thus foe, are most stupid and most unwise ideas, and moods.

This is why Judaism, Christianism and Islamism celebrate the would-be child killer, Abraham his name, as their founder. The idea of killing one’s child is assuredly unnatural, unwise, most cruel, and grotesquely inhuman. It’s the ultimate dumb atrocity: destroying the species, starting with one’s flesh and blood.

It’s abominable. Thus it’s best to identify friend (the one who expresses intense admiration for the same despicable madness) and foe (the one who has kept common decency, readily distinguishable as alien, therefore).

What do we see here?

The madness, the insanity which binds.

Thus many delusions are the cement that does not just unite the group, but even defines it.

No doubt delusions will also help to unite those scatterbrains (schizophrenic) minds some of us suffer from.

Delusion can be the crucible of the many, and the cement of the one.

Madness in crowds and madness of the one, thus spring from a common logic of human ethology.

Are all groups defined by delusions? No, the Directly Democratic Republic can define itself without a common madness (this is why Switzerland holds together, in spite of its four official languages and several religions). By insisting on the basic ideas and moods of our common humanity.

This is why the Republic can be enough of a religion, the one that works, without delusion.

Human nature is made to make one out of many (mental fascism). That’s how lions and hyenas were fought (just as baboons still do it: by making the troop into one giant superorganism). Making one of many was also what was necessary to stay competitive on the (human meat) market: if one did not want to become dinner for the other guys, one had to stay united.

Thus humans sharing a group have a strong instinct to think all the same. In two ways: to define the group, even if it means through a delusion, and to make the group fight as one.

(The more crowded the human population, the more delusions will have to define groups; this is why nationalism grows with the crowding… the latter being relative: considering its technology then, in 1900, Germany was relatively more crowded than now; hence the rise of German fascism, which went in parallel with the explosion of the German population, 1850-1914…)

Yet, human beings are truth machines. That’s an instinct going the other way. Because herd animals think all the same, they cannot think anew. Except to stampede, somewhere., or search for the simplest things: new grass, water.

Those who search for truth will avoid the group (all the more as it is all too often defined by a delusion).

Searching for truth is more human, and a way to reach for greater survivability.

Hence the one, the philosopher, will, by necessity, fight the group. Between the delusion which define the groups and the truths, which define the philosopher, it’s a fight to death. The spirit of philosophers always won over the madness of the crowds.

Yes, delusionists, and illusionists are fit for attack, especially when they engage in mass delusion. It’s a matter of collective safety, for the world community. The reason for this is that delusions feed aggression. Delusion is entertained to create the group, the troop, with aggressive purpose in mind.

In particular, theists. Especially of the would-be child sacrifice type (Abraham his name).

As I explained, the main reason for collective delusion, just as for individual delusion is to create a system of mind (moods plus thoughts) that binds.

Thus, the fundamental reason for the collective to bind through delusion is aggression. Either real, or potential. Exclusion and alienation are aggressions. Mass delusions enable them.

Mass delusions such as various sects of Abraham (the word ‘sect’ comes from cutting: chopping heads is what sects do best).

Mass delusions are obsessive about aggression. Be it supposedly for resisting aggression (real or imagined), or committing it, in any case, making it as the big thing in life, worth deluding one’s mind, just to identify as a group, and enjoy the pleasures thereof.

Delusion such as: ’I am the Elected People, not that’s me; I prove it, by exterminating you, etc.’

When a religious group goes around, exhibiting its religious appurtenance, it exhibits its delusion. Thus, implicitly, its aggression.

And size matters. Because the size of a threat matters: when groups of predators fight each other, say lions versus hyenas, generally the side with the greatest total mass wins.

This is why French public schools forbid religious symbols of more than such and such a size, or why schools in Britain impose uniforms (and that’s even better).


Believers know they are deluded, deep down inside. That’s why they are so aggressive, when confronted to their incoherence.

In Copenhagen last week, an Islamist assassin shot at a Freedom of Expression meeting, killing and wounding, and then repeated the performance at a Synagogue, killing and wounding. In a freezing rain, 500 deluded fanatics came to the killer’s burial. Let’s hope the police and secret services took a lot of pictures.

Experience shows fanaticism makes a universe most pleasant to those who dominate it.

Experience is what gives us a ground for all our propositions. This is important, because it means, whether they know it, or not, all human beings are scientists.

This is why the notion of “believer” has been introduced. It, all by itself, is a delusion. A deliberate, collective delusion, to create the group (and then proceed with some crusade, jihad, ghetto).

“Believers” are precisely those who believe in NOT applying science, for the most important metaprinciples.

However, what they have to apply every day to function as animals, and full human beings, is based on what is called “the scientific method”, but which is simply common sense, systematized industrially.

Thus “believers” fundamentally, do not believe!

Patrice Ayme’

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

34 Responses to “Commonly Accepted DELUSIONS: FOLLIES That BIND. Will To Infanticide. Example: ABRAHAMISM.”

  1. m2smith Says:

    “Not all human beings are scientists” – There is much wisdom in this point. As we become complacent with the results of science mysticism and religious dogma propel the pendulum the other way.


  2. ianmillerblog Says:

    Patrice, If I say I am a believer, then surely I believe I am a believer, therefore I am a believer.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Surely, dear Ian, saying and believing are not the same. 😉


    • ianmillerblog Says:

      Dear Patrice, no, they are not the same, but surely you would not accuse me of deliberately misrepresenting or telling untruths? Therefore, If I say truthfully I am a believer, then I am a believer. Note the subjunctive: I am not saying I am a believer, merely if I were to say so. 🙂


      • gmax Says:

        I think one of Patrice’s points was that believers are deluded, deluding liars. They suffer from ultimate BAD FAITH. Compare with Sartre.

        Surely modern believers do not really believe Abraham was not a completely insane maniac of the worst type.

        A deluding liar surely will say whatever. ISIS says whatever. That is typical


        • ianmillerblog Says:

          Before things get out of hand, I was being a little tongue in cheek, making logic point, and certainly not defending the deluded religious extremists. I agree that Abraham would have been a maniac had he actually existed, but I rather suspect he did not. Unfortunately, whatever, religious fanaticism is an appalling blot on civilisation.


          • Patrice Ayme Says:

            Yes, Ian, and my point is the very insanity is the signal that binds. Sorry if I got hot under the collar, but I really feel Abrahamism already devastated the Roman Republic, and its combination with modern weapons and means makes it worse than ever. It has to be eradicated as something people respect as most fundamental.

            Liked by 1 person

        • Patrice Ayme Says:

          Yes, GMax, right, one of my points entirely. Ian said he was joking around. I think we both did not understand that.

          That many a believer knows they lie was already obvious in Pascal’s Bet. So, although Pascal would have been outraged by my way to look at it, it’s a fact.
          Do we want to be ruled by Pascal’s imagined Dad in the Sky, or by the Search for Truth?

          Liked by 1 person

  3. gmax Says:

    There is more method in madness than previously suspected; good call!
    I am crazy about this post!


  4. jarnauga111 Says:

    February 20, 2015 • 6:30 pm

    First, pace Massimo’s admonition about playing nice, I hope he will, in the interests of fairness, allow a response to Patrice Ayme’s latest attack on all those not on the “all-theistic-religion=ISIS” express.

    “In particular, theists. Especially of the would-be child sacrifice type (Abraham his name).”

    “Mass delusions such as various sects of Abraham (the word ‘sect’ comes from cutting: chopping heads is what sects do best).”

    Hmmm. So Reform Jews, Sufis, Quakers, and to a lesser extent Hindus, Pure Land Buddhists and other theists are all anti-scientific Luddites operating under mass delusions containing the very real potential for murder, mayhem, and global campaigns of extermination/child sacrifice/head-chopping.

    Sigh. Once again, we’re back to the assertion that there’s no difference between a kindly reform rabbi, etc. and an ISIS nutter. In response, let me simply quote Asher Kay’s response to Coel on the same issue:

    “Now I know why that bible-study group tried to firebomb my house. Who would have thought that a group of elderly, upper-middle-class ladies could hurl molotovs like that?

    Thanks for the insights.” Yeah, really.

    Second, this:

    “Mr. Witt does not seem to express clearly that experience is what gives us a ground for all our propositions. This is important, because it means, whether they know it, or not, all human beings are scientists.”

    And thus apparently all humans-qua-scientists are in direct contact with Reality, with no need for interpretive frameworks


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      I never said there were no degrees of delusions. That Christians committed atrocities and exterminations by the tens of millions is a historical fact, complete with roasting children (all over the world, not just the Middle East). Read Voltaire for a heads-up.

      Even very recently Christians killed medical doctors, in the good old USA.

      Elderly people are too weak to engage in mass aggression, so to present as a fact that some of them were culprit of fire bombing is so far fetched, that anybody firmly grounded in reality would tell you, that you are hallucinating. You and Asher Kay should review what you perceive as reality: no “elderly ladies… hurled Molotov cocktails”.

      However KKK were indeed Christian fanatics, and they indeed did fire bomb. So you got the general idea, if not the age right.

      However unwittingly, you touch here on the fundamental problem I address: the degradation of a sense of reason among religious fanatics (fanatics = those from the fanum, the temple). Abrahamists tend to hallucinate. As they see that an insane maniac willing to kill his son is to be admired (Abraham his name), they find maniacal thoughts to be normal. Thus they don’t know what reality is anymore. They tend to see completely innocent people (elderly middle class ladies) “hurling Molotov cocktails”.

      Practicing insanity day in, day out, is indeed the key to potential mayhem.

      My point that all human beings are forced into the basic scientific method, just to learn to function, means, indeed, that fanatics are practicing not just their religions, but also Bad Faith (in Sartre’s sense).

      Liked by 1 person

      • John Rogers Says:

        Slightly off point, but what has always impressed me most about “religious” people (fanatical or otherwise) is how emotional their arguments are. The devoutly religious arrive at their conclusions not through discovery or reasoning, but the emotional need to fit in with “their” group against the feared “others”. Thus, the importance of concepts like heresy.

        Very nice dissection by you of how dealing with this need trumps everything else (you know, admitting reality).


        • Patrice Ayme Says:

          Thanks John! Your remark is of the essence: since ever, human beings have survived not so much as individuals (as simple GAME theory has it), but as GROUPS.

          The Greek Finance Minister, Varoufakis, pointed out something similar. Game theory assumes selfish individuals forced into collaboration (sometimes). A GENERALIZED Game theory would have GROUPS competing.

          Thus human beings are always looking for groups, or looking for reasons to make groups, and delusions are the best cement, being so peculiar… Burning people alive is an old trick to unify through crime and atrocity, already controversially practiced in early Islam (copying Christianism) by Ali, Caliph and son in law of Muhammad. So ISIS renewed with it judiciously…


      • Massimo Pigliucci Says:

        I’m afraid this thread got sufficiently contentious, and any further discussion
        alongside similar lines would not be helpful.


        • Patrice Ayme Says:

          Dear Massimo:
          It’s not a question of being contentious, or not. It’s a question of answering contentious logic. I did not answer the “little elderly ladies hurling…” the first time I saw it pass, but now it has got a life of its own.
          No advance in philosophy was ever made, which was not contentious. Philosophers have to learn to handle what is contentious, with equanimity. That’s helpful.


  5. dominique deux Says:

    “The idea of killing one’s child is assuredly unnatural, unwise, most cruel, and grotesquely inhuman”
    Is infanticide unnatural? Predation on one’s own offspring is readily found in the animal kingdom. As well as predation on one’s parents, although this is more for arthropods.
    Is it unwise? I find it repulsive, but is that wisdom?
    Is it cruel? Well, yes. Man is a very cruel (ie, bloodthirsty) animal. Thus, irrelevant as a criterion of humanity.
    Is it inhuman? ie, beyond humanity? “Homo sum, et nil humanum a me alienum puto”, Terentius dixit: a lesson worth remembering. Abhorrent behavior may put a group beyond the Pale (Nazis, ISIS, Crusaders) but it does not expel it from the human species. Claiming the reverse is opening one’s society to more such crimes. In addition, mutual murder, cannibalism and rape among family members were common features of many mythologies, theogonies and folklores (see Cronos, Tiamat, Oedipous, Iphigeny), way before Freud shocked Vienna with his elaborations on that skeleton in our closet. You might even say that the strength of the general taboo against them is a proof, a contrario, of their prevalence in the collective psyche; there is no need to legislate or anathematize against the consumption of excreta, an habit which was lost very early in mankind’s history, back in the savannah.
    Thus, even though Abraham’s Sacrifice (not to forget Jephthah’s Daughter) clearly shows the rot at the root of Abrahamist creeds, it is business as usual in the supermarket of religions. Carthage, the Thugs or the Aztecs, not to mention my Celt forebears, took that mindset to the extreme.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      dear Dominique: I do agree with all you say. Ferocity is what we do.
      Some linguists have argued that “Frank” does not mean just “Free” but actually, that it originated in “Ferocious”.

      And there is no doubt that ferocity in war was the great superiority of the Franks. The “Furia Francese” was in full evidence when Caesar Constantine fought the Franks in Germania in the 300s (he was a teenager or so, under his father’s orders, and already feared at the Court). Then they allied, and conquered the empire…

      So perhaps I express myself in a bit too much of a short-cut.

      However, as you say, what is troubling about these religions (Abrahamism, Celts, Carthage, Aztecs, Incas…) is that the human sacrifice (something different from war) is set as a fundamental axiom. Abrahamism clearly say that if one is ordered by the boSS to kill, even one’s child, one should do. Killing, as ordered by the boSS, is then the fundamental practice.

      Although I can track some of my forebears 12 centuries (!!!), complete with armories, I do not know where they all came from… The idea was even floated by a doctor that my sister has a mark characteristic of the Mongols… (The Romans allied themselves to the Huns, and they gaily sacrificed to Mongol gods, before being defeated by the Goths at Tolosa… My ancestors, the Counts d’Ambiallet, came from the exact same area… Later, of course, the Franks harassed and defeated the Huns, then became the only Roman army, and did away with the Goths in Gallia…)


  6. robert sinclair Says:

    Patrice if you think that the terrorist attack in copenhagen was real then you are deluded. Even doubly so, preaching about the madness of crowds and being part of a group think without even being self aware, takes the breath away. Are these really your true thoughts or is this just propaganda. Maybe you are spreading it without being consience of it. Maybe you are just some others mouthpiece, either consciously or unconsciously.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      There were no bullets? There was no burial of the crazed maniac with 500 of his peers in attendance, not really excusing him?


    • gmax Says:

      Are you a TROLL, or you are really completely deluded? Maybe you work for Putin?

      ISIS recognized one of the Paris attack and put out a video on it during the attack. The other attack was ordered by Al Qaeda, Al Qaeda said.


      • Patrice Ayme Says:

        I have never banned anybody from the comments… (I view that as arrogant, offensive and cowardly.) Although I have clearly discouraged some people to comment (crazy comments will be called crazy, however politely; even crazy people don’t like to be called crazy).


  7. robert sinclair Says:

    Do you believe what you want to believe or do you search out the truth? If you have a good heart then the truth will come to you.


  8. hazxan Says:

    I find the current epidemic of belief in “invisible hands” and mystical “free markets” possibly the most dangerous belief for humans right now. After all, It’s the belief system behind much of the foreign intervention that has triggered the surge of fanatical islamists. Let alone the headlong rush to environmental catastrophe.

    Whole economies are just belief structures. Stock markets and currencies are thought creations. Money isn’t real, the value in it is what we imagine it to be. Our economic priests believe that real lives should suffer to placate the gods of imaginary money systems.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Dear Hazxan: You are entirely correct, on all points.

      Actually the American leadership pushes “god” to the People all the time. Obama mentions god in every discourse (he never did that before becoming president, even in public discourse; so he has been told to do that). So he is not just the commander in chief, but the Ayatollah in chief.

      It’s pretty transparent that this is to confer to We The People the MOOD of the Invisible Hand (of “god”)… And thus, having bonded with the invisible-hand-of-god, that mood passes naturally to the invisible-hand-of-the-market…. Which is just a screen behind which is found the all too real invisible hand of bankers, banksters, and various plutocrats.

      Whole economies are indeed belief structures. It’s the Americans who, starting in 1945, pushed Wahhabism of their friends the Saudis, onto the world. Superficially, that was to get oil.

      More generally, that was to return to the Middle Ages, because that’s best for plutocracy. That’s why “In God We Trust” appeared in the USA Congress, in 1954 (9 years after the “Great Bitter Lake”… and 20 years after the SS started to advertise that mood on their belts).

      So the present economic system is indeed a giant delusion driving towards the apocalypse. I focus on Abrahamism, because, in a way, it’s the master delusion. Making a hero, saint and founder of child killer (he was stopped at the last moment by his boSS, as represented in the drawing I picked up in some Judeo-Christian sect site…)


  9. Why God Is Evil | Patrice Ayme's Thoughts Says:

    […] my “Follies That Bind.” Where you can see the great Judeo-Christiano-Muslim hero stabbing a child. (Hey, His boSS […]


  10. To Preserve Civilization, Exterminate Fanaticism | Patrice Ayme's Thoughts Says:

    […] fascism of the worst type is the bottom line of Abrahamism. Abrahamism is an embarrassingly primitive religion. Make no mistake: sometimes, it’s optimal. It’s thanks to that crazed ideology, perfect for […]


  11. Noble? Or Opportunistic? Dylan’s Nobel | Patrice Ayme's Thoughts Says:

    […] repugnant, and it explains much of the murderous of Judeo-Christo-Islamism. My point of view is not funny, it is that of a severe critic. Yet Dylan is smarter than me here, from some angle, as he turns the whole mania into a […]


  12. Humanism Versus Buddhism | Patrice Ayme's Thoughts Says:

    […] ethology. And Buddhism contradicts human ethology, big time. Arguably, it’s way worse than Abrahamism: even the disguised cannibalism of Abrahamism is more naturally anchored in human […]


  13. Perverse Logic: Saving Multiverse With Cosmic Inflation! | Patrice Ayme's Thoughts Says:

    […] […]


  14. Patrice Ayme Says:

    [To philosophy Facebook]

    All learning is cultural, thus massive. When an element of culture is erroneous enough, it will bring nefarious consequences… which unite those who believe and participate in that mania. Indeed nothing unites better than common criminality. It is a fundamental chimp instinct. Then an entire group of chimps get together to go on the warpath, hunt, hurt or, and, kill other chimps, as a matter of territory, hence ecology.

    Examples of commonly practiced mania are scapegoatism, another the religion of Abraham, religions with human sacrifices, all sorts of racisms and tribalisms, etc. The crime is not accidental, but unifying. Crimes against truth and common sense are most… common as they present the further advantage of reducing brain work…


  15. De Brunet d'Ambiallet Says:

    They have to say they believe because they otherwise would not believe?
    That’s a very astute observation!


What do you think? Please join the debate! The simplest questions are often the deepest!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: