“Trojan Disinformation and Controlled Opposition:
A set of data or observation which is passed to an opposition group anonymously, which appears at face value to support their contentions – however, which also contains an often subtle but irrefutable feature which will serve to falsify the set of data or observation at a later time, well after it has already gone viral inside the opposing camp. This is a Trojan Horse style of disinformation, which is sold as misinformation (innocent mistake); disinformation designed to discredit opposing voices through their credulity and lack of attention to detail.” https://theethicalskeptic.substack.com/p/disinformation-vs-misinformation-ebf
A set of data or observation which is passed to an opposition group anonymously, which appears at face value to support their contentions – however, which also contains an often subtle but irrefutable feature which will serve to falsify the set of data or observation at a later time, well after it has already gone viral inside the opposing camp. This is a Trojan Horse style of disinformation, which is sold as misinformation (innocent mistake); disinformation designed to discredit opposing voices through their credulity and lack of attention to detail.” https://theethicalskeptic.substack.com/p/disinformation-vs-misinformation-ebf
The Ethical Skeptic
Disinformation vs Misinformation – Neither Can Be Defined by ‘Intent’ (Part I of II)
The 10% lie is much more effective than the 100% one. While misinformation deals in lies, disinformation deals in facts. ‘Fact-checking’ therefore, is a favorite pretense of the disinformant
One cannot claim ignorance as an excuse for causing harm by acting on the information provided by others if the agent in question did not seek to personally verify that acting on the relevant information will not cause harm. For example, a politician who causes harm by acting on the advice of experts cannot claim that he acted in good faith in trusting the experts; he is personally liable for causing harm because he failed to verify that acting on the relevant information would not cause harm and therefore intentionally acted with indifference to the possibility of harm. Moreover, an agent who affirms and propagates unverified information does so with the intent of propagating it even if it is malicious or false information.
World as Meaning
Nature, including the inorganic physical world, is, in a sense, a manifestation of the collective unconscious, the totality of meanings that consciousness has progressively externalised as having the relational integrity of a World. Behind this process is the procedural ideal (ideal agency, or Logos) that guided its creation via the rules of discernment of possible vs impossible, real vs unreal, true vs false, in every manifestation of rational consciousness. As such, the world is meaning, every real part of which is meaningful and necessary to sustain the integrity of the whole, which in turn makes the whole existentially conditional on rational consciousness. Logos (as the principle of sense) is above and before the world, it is also in the world as the embodied rational consciousness, and it is the world as its meaningful appearance/experience. On this view it makes sense to regard the creative principle (rational consciousness subject to the laws of meaning) as valuable – we all affirm this value whenever we think and act in a particular way – but it does not follow that the creation is itself valuable, let alone supremely valuable. This would be a negation of the value of the universal source of value, while simultanously affirming this supreme value in the very act of judgement, therefore a contradiction. A contradiction cannot be real, cannot be a part of the integrity of the whole, it is intrinsically contrary to the creative principle; it is possible only in conscousness, and only as an error.
If any non-human part of nature possessed reflexive consciousness, then from the beginning of (meaningful) time it would necessarily be in reciprocal communication with us, manifesting good will or bad will, mutually understood and understanding, or it would not be in the same world. A world necessarily is a manifestation of a singular, continuous kind of consciousness that endows meaning, or it would lack integrity and therefore not be a world. Since we are not aware of interacting reflexively and meaningfully with any other rational consciousness, there cannot be any other kind of consciousness.
Nature, including the inorganic physical world, is, in a sense, a manifestation of the collective unconscious, the totality of meanings that consciousness has progressively externalised as having the relational integrity of a World. Behind this process is the procedural ideal (ideal agency, or Logos) that guided its creation via the rules of discernment of possible vs impossible, real vs unreal, true vs false, in every manifestation of rational consciousness. As such, the world is meaning, every real part of which is meaningful and necessary to sustain the integrity of the whole, which in turn makes the whole existentially conditional on rational consciousness. Logos (as the principle of sense) is above and before the world, it is also in the world as the embodied rational consciousness, and it is the world as its meaningful appearance/experience. On this view it makes sense to regard the creative principle (rational consciousness subject to the laws of meaning) as valuable – we all affirm this value whenever we think and act in a particular way – but it does not follow that the creation is itself valuable, let alone supremely valuable. This would be a negation of the value of the universal source of value, while simultanously affirming this supreme value in the very act of judgement, therefore a contradiction. A contradiction cannot be real, cannot be a part of the integrity of the whole, it is intrinsically contrary to the creative principle; it is possible only in conscousness, and only as an error.
If any non-human part of nature possessed reflexive consciousness, then from the beginning of (meaningful) time it would necessarily be in reciprocal communication with us, manifesting good will or bad will, mutually understood and understanding, or it would not be in the same world. A world necessarily is a manifestation of a singular, continuous kind of consciousness that endows meaning, or it would lack integrity and therefore not be a world. Since we are not aware of interacting reflexively and meaningfully with any other rational consciousness, there cannot be any other kind of consciousness.
Article 16 of the current Constitution of Ukraine. What a clumsy way to mandate racial supremacism. https://ccu.gov.ua/sites/default/files/constitution_2019_eng.doc
Those who assert that ethical behaviour can be improved by “medicating” people to abandon self-interest imply that ethical behaviour is contrary to self-interest, therefore harmful to self, which raises the question why would anyone want to inflict harm on every individual? This is a rhetorical question, because the implied premise is provably false; ethics must be reducible to self-interest or it would not be rational to be ethical, and therefore wrong to be ethical, and therefore unethical to be ethical, therefore nonsense. Rational individualism is the only path to ethical behaviour, which fully serves self-interest only by taking into account the interests of others and seeing oneself as a moral being among beings of the same kind. https://igorchudov.substack.com/p/should-individualism-be-medicated
Igor-Chudov
Should Individualism be Medicated Away to be Replaced by "Welfarism?"
WEF: "Moral Bioenhancement" Pills to Bring Collectivist Future
❤1
We have clearly moved beyond the rule of tradition. Nowadays, one is required forced to defend every belief, every value, every action, on fundamental principles. Those who deny fundamental principles and also deny the value of traditions are in a hopeless situation, already lost. Those who have traditions but no fundamental principles will be mere spectators, at the mercy of others. Those who have traditions and fundamental principles may be able to justify some of their traditions from fundamental principles. Those who have only fundamental principles are bound to rediscover the value of some traditions. This is not a bad situation, we had to face this challenge sooner or later, but it is definitely stressful. Let this stress motivate you to think wiser.
What could be the real purpose for advanced nations being forced to pay $$$ trillions into United Nations fund to compensate developing nations for “anthropogenic climate change”? The stated reason is obviously not true. I suspect that the money is intended for building smart cities and the social credit system in Africa, with the ultimate aim of population control. Global population growth cannot be managed without controlling human reproduction in Africa, so this would be an obvious (but extremely controversial) priority for the UN/WEF and their affiliates.
Forwarded from Michael Kowalik
No need to have MyGovID to get the Director ID. This way the Director ID is not digitally portable, but simply a number, like TFN. I would strongly advice against MyGovID for security reasons; the more digital the ID the more dangerous it becomes if hacked or misused by the authorities.
Drag Queens are males who derive pleasure from mocking womanhood in front of children.
This article is a good example of how Trojan horse disinformation works. They exploit disinformation/leaks/anecdote (https://t.iss.one/NormalParty/2187) previously planted among controlled entities who question the safety of covid vaccination to now misdirect public emotions from the suspicious (but not undeserved) deaths, of culprits who colluded in the spread of malignant disinformation, to how those deaths were interpreted. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-63719246.amp
Forwarded from Michael Kowalik
Malcolm, Please help make the fundamental laws of logic (non-contradiction, excluded middle, law of identity) and the logical fallacies stemming from violations of these laws a “cross-curriculum priority” for all students in primary and secondary schools. This is our only hope as a society. I have been suggesting this curriculum addition to the department of education and requested to join ACARA’s curriculum advisory committee but without any success.
The Greens exist only to show you how much worse things could be if you did not vote for the status quo.
Those who allege ‘stollen elections’ fail to understand that all elections are fake, although the scope of electoral deception is never greater than what it needs to be to achieve the required outcome. The illusion of fairness is part of the deception.
The irony of people who live on top of one another in concrete blocks, attracted to the most artificial, pretentious and disconnected trends, also vote “for the Environment”, blaming humanity for their own emptiness and contradictions.
If ALL the votes were for Dan Andrews (like they were for Stalin) you would start asking questions, have doubts about the integrity of the process, right? This is why not all the votes are for Dan Andrews.
Electoral Syllogism: Only human votes are valid. Those who vote for Dan Andrews are not human. Therefore, Dan Andrews did not win the election.
Forwarded from Normal (Michael Kowalik)
I expect Dan Andrews to “win” the Victorian election, precisely because this would humiliate Victorians the most. Dan’s stage persona is so exquisitely vile and morally perverse, a kafkaesque caricature of the anti-human. The populist theatre needs an emotive caricature in order to disgust, entertain, captivate, move, provoke, possibly even cure.