Tag: philosophy

  • Arguments Over Opinions

    The art of the argument, always and forever.

    This is one of those where I have to start out with definitions. We’ll go with the most commonly accepted definitions and then I will refine.

    • Opinion – a view or judgement formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge.
    • Argument – a reason or set of reasons given in support of an idea, action or theory.

    There’s the old English idiom on opinions, “Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one.”

    Opinions can be viewed as the garbage that NPC’s spit out. They’re reactions based on one’s personal programming. The more a person is programmed, ergo the less self-knowledge they have, the more they tend to spew out opinions.

    It could accurately be said that White liberal women are a collection of opinions based on State and corporate programming. There is a full scale blitz on White women, through the State and Facebook/Instagram, to refashion their programming so that they will open doors to invaders and ultimately wreck their own tribe so that they no longer pose a threat to a certain outgroup. We must all live as a rabble with White men torn asunder.

    Opinions are generally effortless to elicit from NPC’s. Most people have never been validated by their parents, that is to say, had their opinion-forming process checked over for integrity and soundness. Most people are hard-up to get some kind of validation from someone with more status than them. This goes deep into childhood and remains the case for most people as they age, only they care less and less about anything because they burn out from private hedonism and turn into nihilists.

    When you encounter someone that has been “elevated” by someone much higher in status than them, you know they are an initiate in the cruelty of the elite. Opinion-forming is the work of the elite.

    You can’t get arguments out of people because most people have never been trained in logic, rhetoric, argumentation, etc.

    If a person hasn’t been trained in these things, there’s an exceedingly high chance they will not be able to display the skill set. The only people who pick up The Argument through their form of employment are entrepreneurs, people in non-employee roles. This is because entrepreneurs live or die by their wits. They have little to no institutional support to lean back on. Some people who are intelligent employees will ape entrepreneurs but are ultimately not invested in their own arguments and tend to defer to entrepreneurs when the going gets rough.


    Opinions (“this is bad” or “this is good”) are difficult to elicit from people with self-knowledge. This is for a number of reasons. One that springs to mind is that mobs tend to form around opinions. Pitchforks, torches, and all that. Mobs will attack or disregard based on a person’s opinions, which can even default to whether a random on the street is conservative-presenting or not.

    Another reason people with self-knowledge tend not to give opinions readily is because it prioritizes opinions, which can change with new evidence, and it deprioritizes The Argument. Making an argument is a complex art and if you can do it well, you appreciate just how much deferral of opinion went into the building of the methodology for you.

    Another thing with opinions is that if you’re “highly opinionated”, you tend to incept yourself further and further into an existence that is dependent upon your ability to read the tea leaves and surf power dynamics. This is why businessmen flock to major cities. This is why businessmen turn to politics when they can no longer tolerate making value appeals. They turn to securing loot for a constituency while hiding CIA/Moss*d assassination threats from that constituency.

    Opinions are highly dependent on the experience of people receiving them. This is because opinions aren’t reasoned to. They are a form of manipulation borne from programming. This is why it is supremely easy to corrupt politicians and non-productive enterprise businessmen – i.e. businessmen that aren’t involved in anything that is actually made. They didn’t have integrity to begin with, just the “profit motive” that the Communists are kind of in the ballpark mildly correct about (even though they’re much bigger pieces of shit than a somewhat spineless White dude businessman could ever be).

    Now and then you will encounter a businessman who thinks he’s a big swinging dick with philosophy but if you scratch the surface, you’ll find he’s like a poopy baby who will knife you if you reveal his poopiness to anyone. It’s kind of a trip but these guys flash money around and hey, a nucka gotta eat. And remember, dyed-in-the-wool Commies are like a thousand times worse. And they’re massing, waiting for a Democrat POTUS to give them carte blanche. And Newsom would.

    I mention businessmen with bad consciences actually because I think my material can be of use to them. I make no overtures to liberals but am always pleasantly surprised when one finds my material and can reform to some extent.

    He read Marcus Aurelius in college and Nietzsche through the Internet.

    I try to not offer opinions. I do some on X and that’s probably not a good thing, in the long run. The things I say that do well tend to blend some with the programming that Elon Musk’s handlers have decided X will put into the average American’s head. Always to get inflamed and indignant, never to organize, always to rely on the government to do something about something. No sheriffs allowed.

    I also will post links to songs that I like over on my public chat group on Telegram. I view this as Opinion Lite.

    The Argument means that you are displaying models for reasoning as opposed to neat end products for mass consumption. All of my favorite artists (Bach, Van Morrison, Queen, Sting, a few others) are adherents to methodologies. They are not going for “hits”. Hits get people high. But bread and butter is in songwriting. It is a love of the craft, of something well done to internal standards of excellence. This is why I don’t like noodlers on the guitar. Sure, it’s a show of virtuosity and that’s nice in brief bits, but ultimately, nothing existential is being conveyed to the listener. Existential exposition interfaces with philosophy because the strength of the story in a song lives or dies by the internal consistency of the songwriter. Musical noodlers usually don’t have consistency because of their obsession with practicing the instrument. They tend to get obsessed with substances because of their addictive nature that drove them to virtuosity. People like this are better contained in an ensemble, even as the lead man, where they learn to be reliable for others. You can hear their voices “even out” and “broaden” as they get older.

    This is why I do not put stock in youthful “flash in the pan” energy. I put stock in consistency of production and integrity of internal standards – which of course is only a proxy for the kind of discipline it takes to form an actual argument. Ultimately, I want philosophy over anything else. But I understand not everyone actually gets there – yet they still have wonderful things to offer the world.


    That was a nice jaunt, eh? If you liked it, be sure to DONATE.

    I know this Trump/Epstein/Lutnick economy is complete trash and it’s brutal for people out there, so if you don’t donate, it is what it is. I would ask that you share instead and leave a ‘like’ to boost engagement. Some fiat is better but it’s tough out there.

    This might be my last article for a week or so. We’ll see. Maybe I’ll squeeze another one in here soon. I’m going to take some personal time off, just waiting on the thing, wink wink.

  • Complaining Is A Lack Of Responsibility Taken

    “Woe is me” decries the Modern Man.

    Complainers think that complaining is a form of thinking. They’re not dissimilar from people who will add a snotty little something to a tweet of yours and then feel accomplished. The typical exchange is something like this:

    Me: America has been totally busted since 2001.

    Complainer: 2001? Try 1913, bub!

    Only they don’t say “bub”. They tend to say far nastier things.


    “I can’t do this, I can’t do that,” wails the complainer.

    One of the simplest formulas in the world is, “Person X doesn’t feel good inside, tries to infect Person Y with same said feeling.”

    Complainers typically have a gigantic backlog of negative feedback that they act out onto others. They don’t want to own the backlog, simply spew it out like bile from an upset tummy.

    Where the difference can be made is in taking responsibility for the condition of one’s own mind wherein one would resort to complaining in the face of whatever difficulty.

    It is not someone else’s job to fix you.

    It is not someone else’s job to support you (unless you’re paying for professional help).

    The world is not particularly interested in your difficulties, especially if you’re a White male.

    I don’t say these statements with a strong feeling one way or the other. This is simply an observation of how the deck is stacked. It is stacked against the consolation of everyone, particularly straight White males.


    Complainers generally have a strong Inner Critic.

    Meaning, the parent that was dominant in their life was also critical, scolding, shaming, and dominant.

    “Nobody wants to look at the devil in the mirror.”

    Complainers cannot separate from their childhood feelings of helplessness. Yes, you felt helpless as your parent tore into you and made you feel less-than.

    Complainers sort of give up rather than attempt to separate from their feelings of helplessness. They don’t want to recognize the origins of the helplessness. They want to live inside of the helplessness so they don’t ever have to grow up. Their complaints become their friends and a kind of inner community they inhabit.

    This is how you end up with Boomers who will complain about the same thing for decades while never fixing it. A lot of Millennials and so on down the line will end up like this.

    Mommy loves you, Snookums, one injection at a time.

    For some complainers, complaining was the only way they garnered sympathy, however temporary. Sometimes this is called Munchausen syndrome. And some go through Munchausen by proxy where their parent deliberately sabotaged them so that the parent could receive support and sympathy for the “problem child”.

    These are rather common experiences but the psychology medical complex attempts to seize control of the situation through their clinical labels.

    In a strange way, complainers want to drive others nuts the same way their negative parent drove them nuts. Or they want to induce in others the aggressive behavior their parents showed them. Simon The Boxer. Complainers can’t give it up because it’s all they’ve ever known.

    This reminds me of people who grow up on “state assistance” and then end up as diabetics in the hospital on Medicaid.


    I think it helps to even know you have a strong Inner Critic, usually modeled after your mother or father.

    To stay firmly centered on that fact, even if it takes months or years to solidify.

    Not everyone’s Inner Critic will give up right away. And, eventually, Inner Critics do offer benevolent insights. But that takes a while to get to and sometimes a person’s Inner Critic will take advantage of a person’s awareness of this fact in order to jump ahead in line.

    Heckin’ based??

    A spooky one to consider is how many men are just GIVING UP. Because that’s not all it amounts to. They’re asking to be bullied by the environment. For a Strong Man to come into their life and give it meaning and shape. To march in columns in uniforms again. This potential eventuality means contemplative people such as yours truly get pushed to the fringes even further and sanity goes out of the Marketplace. Society needs its moral philosophers and honest artists if it is to go to a benevolent place. The spells that overcame men en masse in the past should be left to the past. There is much work to do.

    We live in a situation where the women, and their cats and dog babies, are all marching in a row, going nutso on abortions, consumer credit, and voting in every Taliban and Epstein they can. We already live under a whacko Godhead and it looks suspiciously a lot like Christine Lagarde:

    You can get out of complaining but it means accepting the principle that rationality can resolve all personal challenges. Some men don’t want to do this. They want to persist in a kind of personal mysticism where sorrow and defeat are inevitable.

    Is rationality a force stronger than your own personal struggles or not?

    Men who don’t like the Hidden Hand of the free market almost 100% of the time cannot overcome their personal struggles. They do not accept their smallness in the face of the collective human capital and pooled intelligence of the human species.

    What have you been through? Someone has been through it before and overcome. There are human resources out there for you to tap into and attain gains from.


    DONATE to keep this essential work going.

    Join me on Instagram!

  • Bullying People Into Having Babies

    To breed or not to breed, that is the question.

    Stefan Molyneux has this aside he’s been saying for close to two decades, “I try to not tell people what to do because if I do that, in a person’s mind I own the effects if it goes badly for them – and I don’t want that.”

    Then he says stuff like this:

    He’s not telling you you should tell people to have children, he’s just saying that if you haven’t been cajoling them into having kids, he won’t listen to you. And you want the world’s best philosopher to listen to you, right? I do cause I’m a dork like that!


    I have a fun time with this stuff. Yes, I’ve been telling people to have children for years. Yes, I practice what I preach. I made more than one baby. Maybe or maybe not in several different countries.

    I haven’t bribed anyone to have kids. That would be an interesting but probably ultimately self-defeating prospect.

    Begged? I haven’t begged anyone to have kids, yet. Anyone who’d need to be begged wouldn’t make that good of a parent, I’d say. But beautiful people are going the way of the dodo. They get paid by modeling agencies to not have babies. J*wish daycare and all that.

    Shaming someone into having children? Some people believe in shame as a legitimate social tool of persuasion. Some people believe in it so much so that they will get angrwith you if you do not shame them at some point. It’s a weird kind of fetish for some. “Treat me badly, Steve, or I will treat you even worse.” Yeesh, no thanks.

    Bullying people to have children? That’s getting into UPB-breaking territory. Bullying? As in…rape? That’s no good. How could we bully people into having children? We could verbally attack them for having pets but not children. I knew a couple like that in SLC. They were extremely weird, obese, and the moment my woman and I signaled we weren’t football-watching normies, they stopped answering their door when we’d pop by to visit. I guess it was to be expected.

    Apparently I have bullied people into having babies:

    That was from this Bitchute video nearly two and half years ago. Hard to believe I once was willing to appear on camera for longer than like 10 minutes at a time. Really? I used to do long-form videos? What for? Didn’t my body seize up?

    We should just attack whenever we see someone without a baby. Just go off, lunatic mode, and make a big scene. Why not? The whole world is on life support, anyway.

    I’m reminded of that scene in Independence Day where Jeff Goldblumstein’s character is complaining to his rabbi that we should just trash the planet so badly that the space aliens won’t want to take it over.

    That could be me but instead of kicking around some boxes at a military base in a drunken fashion, I could be kicking over grocery shelves and hollering at some unsuspecting, child-bearing age woman.

    After all, it would gain me the approval of Stefan Molyneux – something which is important if I want to be considered good at philosophy by the world’s best philosopher. He’d at least listen to me, so that’s good. It would be discrediting of philosophy on my part if I wasn’t concerned with his good opinion (which I am heheh).

    “Bullying for UPB” – I like how that sounds.

    I tried to go with the whole “killing people” angle (as a joke) and some of you saluted, telling me you took me seriously. Guys, I wasn’t serious about that one. I guess you couldn’t tell.

    I mess with the lines of reality a bit. Why not? I’ve got a bit of a bad boy streak in me. Remember the time I wanted to use the government to crush Communism in America but then everyone got mad at me because everyone’s kind of Communist?

    Learned my lesson on that one.

    Now I am totally zen.

    I live so peacefully.

    I only ever encourage people anymore and quite frankly, people are still finding reasons to get mad at me for running it that way. What if I just went buck-farkin’-wild again? At least I’d get some approval that way. It’s called, “We do a little fighting for UPB.”

    Should I play a role?

    Sounds fun.


    DONATE to keep the content coming.

  • When It Cuts Like A Knife

    On the pain of heartbreak.

    As I’ve said before, we live in Heartbreak World.

    Government budgets keep expanding.

    The birth rate keeps plummeting.

    It’s a Sea Of Negativity out there.

    We all need a reprieve but none is to be had. Most social continuity ended in 2020.

    Those who have not resolved to any degree their childhood histories will be the most susceptible to Heartbreak going forward.

    The Man In Agony

    We all know a Man In Agony or two.

    One of the first songs I ever wrote contained the lyric, “Why did you leave me?” in it. I believe I was 15 or 16 when I wrote that one. It was in response to a real life event. And I studied the question as I always have with anything that feels personally pertinent.

    It took me a few years to come up with a solid answer to that teenaged question.

    The first cut is the deepest.

    Young children know when their mothers have lost that loving feeling – to quote The Righteous Brothers.

    Typically it is because the mother has rejoined the work force. She’d rather be at a job than with the baby. It’s sad but true. Women with their maternal qualities programmed out of them tend to find babies stress making and grating.

    You can hear the chorus of men going, “My mother didn’t work and yet here I am, in agony.”

    Mothers become disillusioned. Lately, they’ve been given over to smartphones and Instagram. In yesteryear, it was the television, magazines, and would you believe it – going out for social events. Mothers also drown in the squalid, half-baked opinions of their “support network”.

    Though it is painful and difficult, if a man doesn’t want to have his heart broken, he needs to revisit, however murky and opaque, his memories and felt sense of his mother’s abandonment of him. Did she do it for a job? Did she do it because she got garbage advice from her support network? Did she do it for a religion or a religious edict? Did she do it because the father was too much to stand up to? Did she do it in favor of another, more sterling sibling?

    These details matter.

    The pattern of heartbreak experienced from the The First Betrayal becomes the template for what happens in adulthood.

    Look into it.


    Lately I’ve been working on a lot of new music. It’s coming along swimmingly. Should have a single up sooner than later!

  • On Sharing The TV Remote

    Are you with someone who is mean-spirited?

    The majority of spousal conflict goes something along the lines of:

    -Bob has Preference A.

    -Jane has Preference B.

    -Both take it personally to some degree and squabble.

    Let’s do an example:

    -Bob wants to watch King Of Queens (an old-time Franssen favorite).

    -Jane wants to watch Gay’s Anatomy (objectively shitty show).

    -Both find one another’s choices repulsive (we don’t accept anti-Kevin James slander in this house!)

    What to do?

    First of all, if you’ve made it so far into marriage that your wife still thinks Gay’s Anatomy or Sabrina Carpenter or whatever the heck is entertaining and useful to her, you’ve made a major mistake. You have failed to educate your wife in good taste. You have failed to show her the meanness inherent in some programming and less abundant in other programming.

    The thing about this is that enlightening your wife requires some measure of artistic and emotional sensitivity and vulnerability on your part. If you are not a person going through meaningful suffering or a climb to the top (in terms of self-actualization), how can you expect her to invest in any art or entertainment that has even a few vestigial elements of these themes?

    If you are not real, how can you expect your spouse to want to even attempt to become real.

    By the way, I’m not here defending King of Queens as high art, just comparing it relative to Gay’s Anatomy.

    If you genuinely don’t enjoy “adult contemporary” or anything particularly contemplative or nuanced and provocative, don’t be surprised when your spouse tries to drag you into the gutter – and perhaps enlists her “support network” in the effort.

    There’s a kind of mean bigotry that most people are engaged in these days. And if you are with someone who is mean-spirited, moved by the salacious, or prone to ghetto sentiments, why aren’t you taking responsibility for this?

    One of the cardinal sins of a man in dating is that he “takes it easy” in the early going, so as to not “scare off” the woman, and then her subsidized retardation blows up in the man’s face and suddenly he’s in a prison cell of in-laws, inanity TV bull-pucky, and her “community”. She takes you for a lummox!

    If you can’t respect the dignity of your #1 person enough to take a firm stand when they go unconscious and disassociate, you are signaling to your unconscious that you don’t take philosophy seriously. Watch your apathy grow. Watch yourself turn to mysticism, hideous and self-effacing, to cover up the crime – the crime of apathy.

    There’s more I want to say but I’m knee-deep in writing and recording music over here plus it’s someone’s special day.

    Did you enjoy this? Donate to get me cough up more.

    Sending you love and relaxation from my A Man Without A Face artist’s retreat on the Maine coastline 😉

    DONATE HERE

    Did you see my latest video on Retardmaxxin?

  • The Personality Submerged In Mysticism

    The blanket of nothingness envelops.

    I am really not a fan of mysticism.

    Mysticism is the inability to articulate an argument through reason and evidence alone.

    I have been doing philosophy since 2007. One of my early undertakings was to undo all of the mystical programming I had been put through by my upbringing. The clarity this provided me was astounding. Only until the past few years, maybe since 2022, have I realized just how much that essential early work saved me from insanity.

    The thing with mysticism is that anyone who practices it inevitably leans on it more and more as they get older.

    When you’re a young, wide-eyed pup, you take for granted your ability to grasp The Argument. You haven’t eroded your reasoning abilities, by choice, yet. As you get older, you have lived through more and more forks in the road where you either chose reason-and-evidence or mysticism.

    The more you lean into mysticism, the more you rely on it and it devours you. Then you live in this permanent kind of cope where you’re forever looking to some person out there that is proof of concept for your mysticism. A strange veneration of mystics of the past sets in, too. There’s a guilty tone to it. You lose your creativity.

    As I approach my fifth decade on the planet, I have come to appreciate how little people actually register on the plane of philosophy. Meaning, people don’t exist philosophically. By my reckoning, it amounts to maybe 2% of the people I have ever interacted with – and that’s coming from me, who has been highly specialized and fairly vocal and gregarious and active in the field of philosophy.

    Philosophy or mysticism – that’s the fundamental choice for any thinker. There is no mixing of the two. It’s impossible. Anyone telling you otherwise is lying.


    Across the West there has been a tremendous re-uptake with mysticism. You see it from just about every two-bit influencer concerned with “saving the West”. It’s mysticism up and down the line with them. Mysticism unlocks earthly power. If you want influence and influence is power, you go to mysticism. But then you live in insanity. Articulating the veracity if your insanity to you becomes more and more impossible as you age and double down.

    Few will walk the Lonesome Valley.

    There is a tremendous pride and hubris that has followed the West’s re-uptake of mysticism. And more subtly, a murderous rage that threatens to wipe everything out – from within. The incredible spite of people who turned away from reason and evidence is only contained by reason and evidence.

    I have watched so many people now in my years who have turned to mysticism and had their personalities completely enshrouded in greyness and misery. It’s a perfect 1-to-1 input. Adopt mysticism → become enshrouded.

    I cannot abide!

    I will remain free.

    I am not afraid to lose “The West”.

    If the price of keeping it is to be a slave to conformity, forget the West.

    Reason and evidence will bloom something better, anyway. It’s only a matter of time. Why fight math itself? The math is firmly with The Argument.


    You cannot claim to love me and then pepper me with non-arguments. I would like to be treated with curiosity!

    You are not my keeper.

    I banish all the gatekeepers from my midst!

    Go somewhere else.

    Time to stand up.