Different Societies, Different Theories Of Knowledge. Intellectual Fascism Index

Simplicia: Different countries, different mentalities? That’s well known, and has been for a very long time. Blaise Pascal said something related, a baby version: truth forward of the Pyrennes, error beyond them. 

Tyranosopher: But that’s just comparing data points. Pascal said that ideas differ, depending on geography, not really shattering news. One can gather this in many texts of Greco-Roman antiquity, or even in Caesar’s war memoirs (Caesar had a keen eye for different ways and means, because it had dramatic military consequences). Nothing new. I will say more. How people learn, and what they want to learn differ, according to the society they live(d) in. Superiority in learning wins battles and that military supremacy is the secret of the superiority of the best of Greco-Roman antiquity (and that was mostly before the so-called “Hellenistic regimes”, that is prior to parasitic dictatorships, civilizational cancers, crowned by the Roman military monarchy, which, thanks to their increasing mental fascism imploded Greco-Roman civilization). 

Simplicia: I mentioned mentalities. A mentality is more general. 

Tyranosopher: How are mentalities  established? By one’s society and, in particular, by that society’s Theory Of Knowledge. 

Simplicia: Is a Theory Of Knowledge more important than a mentality?

Tyranosopher: Theory Of Knowledge, TOK, gives birth to civilizational mentalities. TOK drives minds, and attitudes to TOKs differ in history and geography, according to deep traditions. One can see this in China, with the apparent return of an emperor, Xi, along lines similar to the founding of, say, the Han dynasty, 22 centuries ago. 

A more Western example: if the society imposes that some particular divinity or principle decides everything, including all values. Some civilizations strongly feel that a Theory Of Knowledge is not imaginable: knowledge is clear and evident, authorities, be they political or divine, and often both at the same time, have provided what is known, and to be known and desired and how. Such a TOK will build a restricted, restrictive and restricting mentality, what I call mental fascism. Mental fascism is why in Middle Ages Europe, one couldn’t ask some questions. “God” had given everything, including all the answers, so there better not be too many questions. 

Simplicia: This is vague. Can you measure intellectual fascism?

Tyranosopher: Yes, the equivalent of the Gini coefficient exists for mental fascism. It’s even simpler.

Simplicia: Gini coefficient, what’s that?

Tyranosopher: An Italian named Gini showed a computation which, given a society, produces one number that is one measure of inequality of wealth, and one number which is a measure of inequality of income. It’s a difference of two integrals, one the strict equality law, the other the wealth (or income) distribution law one observes in practice. It’s actually very simple for anyone with a modicum of the most basic calculus.

Simplicia: Are we supposed to know calculus?

Tyranosopher: No. Computing area using an infinitesimal method was initiated by Archimedes 23 centuries ago, and then forgotten. Calculus, using Descartes’ algebraic geometry, was launched in full by Fermat before Newton’s birth. Fermat proved the basic theorem: integration and differentiation are inverse operations. Not knowing basic calculus means missing out on a major revolution of four centuries ago. But the equivalent of the Gini for mental fascism doesn’t require calculus. 

Simplicia: So how do you measure mental fascism?

Tyranosopher: You count how many axioms a mental system uses to explain the world. For example Christians and Muslims have one axiom: “God”. “God” explains everything, dog explains nothing. In truth, it’s the opposite, hahaha [1].

Simplicia: Not really, the Qur’an doesn’t just have Allaah, it also has Satan, angels, and there are even have Djinns…  

Tyranosopher: These are details. Allah himself in the Qur’an enjoins believers not to worry about His relationship with Satan and Djinn, because “these things are too difficult to understand” for simple humans. 

So I just count the fundamental axioms, and invert that number, that’s the mental fascism index. A believer who has as fundamental behavioral guidance a single axiom “God”, “Allah”, “Hitler”, or Putin, has just a fascist index of one, which is maximum. In contrast I am basically zero, no fascism.

Simplicia: How?

Tyranosopher: Well I have all the ethological axioms of humanity , the so-called “instincts”, all the axioms of science (god knows how many that is). And so on. So my mental fascism index is very low, that’s the beauty of secularism. The Politburo in Beijing is not ruling my behavior, either: that would be one axiom, the Politburo has to be obeyed. Nor do I obey or admire Biden, Macron, etc.

Simplicia: But you obey the West imperial system masquerading as “democracy”.

Tyranosopher: Well, I have to obey the law. But frankly the present leadership system is so flawed that those taking part in it outside of Switzerland, are to be condemned verbally and vilified.

Simplicia: Somebody has to do it.

Tyranospher: What we have to do is get out of the present REPRESENTATIVE OLIGARCHY system… And get a more DIRECT DEMOCRACY. I don’t see present political leaders doing this. They are exploiting the system and fostering it, not changing it. They could try harder: Zelinskyi in Ukraine has kept the democracy and republic functioning, while at war: martial law was passed by the democratic representatives. Zelinskyi is working hard for democracy, our leaders much less so. One should push towards real people-power. 

Simplicia: But in California, the direct voting system has been corrupted by the oligarchy. See the infamous Prop 13 property tax and its misuse by corporations. 

Tyranosopher: Right, but irrelevant. Prop 13 can be fixed by another popular vote. It is just one referendum out of hundreds. In Switzerland too, not every referendum rules. There are checks and balances, and a proposition can be found unconstitutional, and there is a process of legislation. One can’t propose to make cannibalism legal; that would be blocked by the legal system and the constitution.

Simplicia: We are far from the Theory Of Knowledge and how it varies from place to place.

Tyranosopher: Not at all. Californians and Swiss, because they can vote directly on their laws, are, and have to be more cognizant, at least on the laws in their backyard. So they have to advance that particular, political and legislative, dimension of TOK.

Simplicia: And then? 

Tyranosopher: They get prosperous. Interestingly, the latest numbers, from 2021, in California and Switzerland, show a GDP per head of 93,000 dollars, roughly twice that of the leading West European nations (UK, France, Germany). Actually California now has the world’s fourth largest GDP, even bigger than Germany, a country twice the size in population. This is a direct consequence of direct democracy. 

Simplicia: Are you saying that having the best TOK is eminently practical?

Tyranosopher: The International Baccalaureate, a metric of education used by 5,000 high schools around the planet, gives a central place to the TOK, and rightly so. Civilization enables superior intelligence, in part from superior culture, and having a superior TOK is essential. All of this advancement of cognition is at the core of the human condition, and thus eminently practical. We can’t stand in place, because yesterday’s place is deteriorating, fast. Countries rife with mental fascism and inferior Theories Of Knowledge are not just heading towards gloom and doom, but also, considering the reduced size of spaceship Earth, they are a threat to the rest of the crew. A beautiful demonstration is offered by the cultural retards in the Kremlin.

Patrice Ayme

One axioms or a few, for all of one’s fundamental behavior: Mental Fascism. Many axioms: Open Mind (a product of the open society).

[1]: One would have, for a bit more precision in computing the fascist index, to introduce the notion of “effective axiomatics”, namely the axioms which most directly impact life. For example the axioms of Islam, as considered by the Ottomans, made it so that printing had to be outlawed: that was effective axiomatics, and made the Ottoman empire idiotic (I doubt that the Prophet would have outlawed printing…)

Identity Politics: A Pretext To Teach Children Tribal Fascism & Simplemindedness. Crime Too. Most Indecent Submission Sought.

Identity Politics: A Pretext To Teach Children Tribal Fascism & Simplemindedness

In “Here’s the Mind-Set That’s Tearing Us Apart”, Oct. 7, 2021, David Brooks observes that:

“The world is complicated, and our minds have limited capacity, so we create categories to help us make sense of things. We divide, say, the social world into types — hipster, evangelical, nerd, white or Black — and associate traits or characteristics with each.

These judgments involve simplifications and generalizations. But we couldn’t make sense of the blizzard of sensory data each day if we couldn’t put things, situations and people into some form of conceptual boxes. As our old friend Immanuel Kant argued, perceptions without conceptions are blind.

It becomes a serious problem when people begin to believe that these mental constructs reflect underlying realities. This is called essentialism. It is the belief that each of the groups we identify with our labels actually has an “essential” and immutable nature, rooted in biology or in the nature of reality. In the worst kind of case, it’s the belief that Hutus are essentially different from Tutsis, that Christian Germans are innately superior to Jews….

… Essentialists may see the world divided into Manichaean dichotomies, and history as a clash of group-versus-group power struggles — clashes that demand utter group solidarity and give life meaning.

America is awash in essentialism. As the New York University philosophy professor Kwame Anthony Appiah, who writes the Ethicist column for The Times Magazine, has noted, before World War II few thought about identities the way we do today. But now it feels that contemporary politics is almost all about identity — about which type of person is going to dominate.

At some level this is necessary. The great project of the past 70 years or so has been to right the injustices that historical essentialists imposed on groups they labeled and oppressed.

The problem comes when people replicate the mind-set they are fighting against. “

This replication is not an accident. It is a method to achieve supremacy.

People often replicate mentalities they claim to fight against, as a strategy of domination. Indeed the pulsion to appear to rebel against what one wants to reproduce is elementary Machiavellianism, with its own seduction. If you can’t beat them, join them while appearing to fight them, they will like that.

***

David Brooks published the following comment of mine:

In political fascism, a hierarchy of “leaders” orders everybody around. In intellectual fascism, a few ideas order all spirituality. “Essentialism” flows from “intellectual fascism”. Simplemindedness is what intellectual fascism brings. 

Pogrom Lviv 1941. From a film discovered by US Forces in 1945. Notice Child On the right beating the Jewish woman. This is what identity politics brings, as intended…

How does simple mindedness appear? Mental laziness is one factor. Now laziness in mental matters, as in physical matters comes from lack of exertion. So one may trace US simplemindedness to schooling where not enough mental exertion occurred early on.

My daughter, 11 year old, was informed by teachers that the primary vocation of a school was to respect my child’s “identity”… Now my child has an intensely complicated background, spanning the world genetically and culturally. The head of a school, a standard liberal, privileged middle age Politically Correct WASP blonde cannot even guess how different my child’s world is. And so it is: in places such as California, the background of most children is distant and complicated. Calling for an identity is calling for mutilating simplification.  

Why would teachers think that the  identity of a student trumps education and instruction? Giving primacy to “identity” is saying that what matters most is not education, but identification. That, per se, reinforces racism and simplemindedness, because instead of broadening minds with new concepts, one is supposed to find an ethnic box in which to fit. Instead of  boxing people into prepackaging, schools should identify ideas and concepts, teach how to breed them, create new ones, think out of boxes.

***

In general, elites in power, absent an external threat, privilege staying in power. That’s best accomplished by making people stupid, ignorant and aspiring to submission. All this classical fascist monotheism accomplished.

Christianism was created, and imposed under the penalty of death by torture, by Roman imperial fascism to justify its plutocracy with a devil in heavens, playing god, ordering people to kill their children, promising torture to death as redemption for imperfect submission. Islam put part of that on steroids… That’s called Abrahamism, and rests on the advertised willingness to kill one’s children, an old pathway of antique societies to prosperity (the fact a sheep was substituted at the last instant doesn’t matter: it is the heart that counts). A deplorable necessity 3,000 years ago has been turned into a calling, a willingness to commit the most horrific crime which binds best. 

Identity politics leads to crime, and this is why it is so appealing to the elites, as they typically end up ruling with evil means, and they need crimes that bind. Besides, the easiest way to conquest is division of the potential opposition (“Divide et impera“… Tradition attributes the origin of the motto to Philip II of Macedon, who did just that to Greece…).

Want war? Identify friend and foe. Search for identification, not union.

Patrice Ayme

Hot Dog God

God As A Dog In The Sky
Only god could know that god does not exist. But if god knows this, there is no god, and if she does not know that, she is no god either…

Perhaps the most important fact shown by the history of science is that people can believe in the most foolish things for the longest time, for no good reason whatsoever, except mental inertia or otherwise falling victim to the idle boredom minds cannot tolerate. We are most deluded creatures, deliberately so. But that’s OK, imagination should come first, and it makes our minds expand beyond anything: transhumanism, always going beyond humanism, is the definition of the genus Homo, the genius of the genus.

Error is most fruitful, and everywhere, and is more than recommended, as long as it is accompanied by error correction… Overall and ultimately.

That, too, the history of science shows abundantly.

Modern science shows that immense complexity can give astounding answers: little somethings somewhere can give tremendous effects of a completely different nature, somewhere else. We don’t necessarily have the god(s) causing spectacular miracles: science and complexities can enact miracles.

We simply do not need superstition to believe in miracles anymore…We can literally have effects at a distance we can’t even know about until a potentially very distant future… (Nonlocal effects in Quantum Mechanics.)

The science of anthropology shows the weirdest, most injurious beliefs have existed forever. In all societies, at all times. This is too systemic to be accidental.

A closer examination of history shows that this is no accident. Superstitious religions are follies that bind, precisely because they enabled to mass-kill, mass-injure, or mass-terrorize multitudes. Most of the known 400+ superstitious religions have gravely injured multitudes at one point or another, they are generally how oligarchies rule… through the minds.
But, some will object, is not there any virtue in organized religions? Of course there is, like there is virtue in the whiteness in the Arctic Bear’s coat, Ursus Martitimus.

Superstitious religions are watchdogs keeping souls in line… to better serve the masters as politely as needed to optimize their earthly repose.

Now, of course, all too secular religions such as nationalism, tribalism, gangsterism achieve the same sort of ganging up effects, and are also united by crime, if no other rituals…

All of these are example of mental, or intellectual, when not outright political fascism, which all appeal to the same satisfying feeling of doing much with a restricted instruction set… So, instead of attacking directly the faith into follies that bind, one should rather attack the meta-logy behind them. For example the fact so may people make a virtue of not been “distracted” by the tangential, where the details, and thus the devil, are to be found.

Wisdom lays in the tangential, off the thoroughly beaten common paths…

Patrice Ayme

Want Genius? Get Out Of The Gilded Box Global Plutocrats Designed

A PhD in a field X means one has done studies in X, but it also means one has PLEASED A HANDFUL of senior members of the PhD GUILD… One has entered a hierarchy. When I mixed up with the best and brightest, I was struck how hierarchical it all was [1].

The fact that professional intellectuals have to aspire to belong to a guild, to please a hierarchy to get the crumbs that feed them as the pigeons they are has the following consequence: Most great mental advances of humanity are from AMATEURS, OR INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATORS, NOT GUILDERS; it’s a historical fact. The very fact that “amateurs”, people who love a subject are viewed in a pejorative way is itself pretty telling. It is basically saying that working for love is inferior to working for a stipend: the lover is inferior to the prostitute, on matter of (prostitution?) principle. The prostitution principle makes employers the ultimate adjudicators of intellectual worth. And now the ultimate adjudicators are the global plutocrats.

I agree with Nietzsche’s analysis, but I go much deeper: the universal principles the infernal trio of those lovers of each others of Socrates, Plato and Aristotle subscribed to were the universal principles of plutocracy against democracy. Plutocracy is intrinsically for mental fascism: deriving everything from a few principles which serve the owners. Socrates, heir of a small fortune, lived like a whore for wealthier than him. Plato, a gilded youth of Athens, aspired to be the Syracuse tyrant’s boyfriend, and Aristotle, a spawn of the innermost circle of the Macedonian tyrant, was the mastermind of the takeover of the world by his Macedonian students. Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, are the evil artisans of the ultimate plutocratic box. The consequences were dramatic: ARISTOTLE DESTROYED DEMOCRACY

Yes, ARISTOTLE DESTROYED DEMOCRACY, by building the box nobody was supposed to get out of [2]

It is true that individuals who, while members of the PhD GUILD do not follow the dogmas of the guild, are described as “fringe” and dangerous radicals, and lower order sorts. I was long around the highest top circles in math-physics and I noticed the very highest (Nobel, Field medal ranks) were less arrogant than the ones below them…  The very top guys (De Broglie, Feynman, Wheeler, etc.) were just the opposite, humble and frank. But very consumed by their narcissistic selves…

The intrinsic nature of genius means one is out of the box: the box is not a genius, it’s a prison: new ideas come always from the outside, not the stampeding herd. So the very definition of genius implies asocial behavior towards the GUILDS. 

This can be seen even in individuals such as ABELARD and BURIDAN, Middle Ages super thinkers who were the equivalent of celebrity rock stars in their times… So they were very famous. Abelard led the war against Saint Bernard, the de facto Pope and a crazed advocate of the 2nd Crusade; two centuries later, Buridan, rector of the world’s most famous university, Paris, advised four kings and was loved by a queen, etc… and also had a gigantic following, including the Oresemes, Oxford computing school… They were very famous but still they rocked the boat… Both fought the power of the church in a way which required extreme courage.

An example of resistance of dogma to significant fact is Dark Matter: the evidence for it is nearly a century old, but it was denied… It is a highly significant fact, as it means, POTENTIALLY, that existing physics is 96% IRRELEVANT. As an amateur of sorts, I found an obvious (?) POTENTIAL solution: a finite Quantum Interaction (there is no Quantum Interaction if CIQ, Copenhagen Interpretation Quantum… But I am sure Newton would agree with me, because he wrote on the subject, famously about gravity).

The problem with the identification of the PhD and UNIVERSITY EMPLOYED GUILD with the top intellectual class is that universities, and “university affiliation” are that universities are all in the employ of the top plutocratic class and its agent, the GLOBAL DEEP STATE… This enables the Global Deep State to establish its worldwide mind control.

An example is so-called “French Theory” an all-encompassing philosophical theory, which has been interpreted as saying that there is nothing as a superior cultural trait. Believing in the superiority of some system of thoughts over others is… racist.

Thus, in particular, claiming that “All Lives Matter” is racist.

Wait… what? Ah, because the founding members of “French Theory”, like the ignorant and, or, biased Claude Lévi–Strauss (a French anthropologist and ethnologist founder of “French Theory”) believed that the West rose on mayhem, and, implicitly, only mayhem… This has been parroted and amplified ever since, in an avalanche of Black Lies. And Black Lies Matter!

Whereas, in truth, the West rose on… Amateur geniuses… certainly the USA, a colony of Europe, rose on much more mayhem than necessary, but that’s another story.

The Occident arose from the creative destruction of yesteryear’s obsolete spiritual prisons… The history of ideas is the history of jailbreaks.

Patrice Ayme

***

***

[1] Since then Zarathustra, or Nietzsche, following Descartes, himself echoing Montaigne and his “ivory tower”, will guess that I have entered a higher phase, where mixing would be akin to dilution: there is a time for the cave up high in the mountains, and the dialogue with the centuries…

***

[2] Abelard, then Buridan, did get out of the Aristotelian box, It was perceived to be so at the time. Peter the Venerable, abbot of all powerful Cluny (by far the largest Christian church at the time) protected Abelard from Saint Bernard. He called Abelard “our Aristotle”.

Mass DELUSIONS: FOLLIES BIND MINDS. Example: Will To Infanticide: ABRAHAMISM.

Commonly Accepted DELUSIONS BIND MINDS TOGETHER. And The Crazier The Bond, The Stronger It is: Collective Madness is Both A Crowd Creator And Crowd Control (and Often Crowd Weaponization!)

Why is madness so popular with crowds? It is common to condemn the madness of the crowds, while being 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.

The deity Jews, Muslims and Christians share, orders Abraham to kill his own child, and the devout Abraham agrees to do so. Although Abraham’s child is saved, in some other cases in the Bible, children are killed by the Bible God to punish parents.  This obedience to gore is the divine image the respected believers revere: what could be more horrible? Why are the consequences (murderous believers) surprising?

But why such an inclination to collective madness? Of what problem is collective madness the solution? 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 to make one mind out of many, and the worse the crime, the better the bond. There is no worse crime than killing children, thus no better bond. Thus Carthage practiced it.

A contrario, by rejecting human sacrifice, Rome placed the Republican values above anything.

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:

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.

DELUSION IS A SIGN THAT WE BELONG:

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?

Yes.

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).

WE ARE ALL SCIENTISTS; “BELIEVERS” KNOW THEY ARE DELUDED:

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’