Desperate Degenerates

Define paranoia.

-------

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Timon wrote:

Darwin was the most evil person who ever lived. He reduced humans to the level of animals; making them nothing more than machines of blood and meat. A necessary precursor to the extermination factories of Nazi Germany and the killing fields of Cambodia and Siberia. Never has the world witnessed such abyssal horror. It was through identifying with the lower beasts that men came to act like them.

"All flesh is not the same flesh, but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fish, another of birds" (1 Corinthians 15:39).

Ha!!
He forgot about the massacre of pagans by Christians, and America's bombings over the years, or Muslim atrocities.

Whether or not you admit that the manimal exists beneath all that cultural covering does nothing to tame it.
In fact, pretending it doesn't exist makes it more influential.
Admitting it exists and understanding what it is and why, helps in its control.

The rhetoric stinks of Abrahamic brainwashing.
Darwin "evil"? Why, because he contradicted biblical creationist bullshyte, providing a more plausible, rational, explanation for life and all its forms?

This denial of the manimal because of language, is the foundation of [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.].

The mind can deceive - itself and other - the body cannot....so it must be concealed in artifices - and enhanced by art - language being an artifice and an art.
I've described the relationship between [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.].
Denying the body is the defensive symptom of this psychosis.
The body can be denied, forgotten, concealed, or numbed to oblivion...and yet, there is remains a constant reminder of the past.

One has to ask himself, is a man who is "good" - by conventional standards, i.e., Abrahamic morals - truly "good" if he remains disciplined to the ideology/dogma (meme) because of a superstitious, external threat and promise, or does he pretend to do so, under great duress and/or selfishness, expecting an eternal reward or wanting to avoid eternal punishment...or simply because he wants to belong and to be included?
Is such a man truly "good", or simply pretending not to be "evil" - including to himself?
The body betrays what the mind wants to believe is true - what the mind has convinced itself, deceived itself, to be true.
Would not a truly "good" man - whatever ethical measure you may use - not be so whether there was a reward or a punishment attached to his behaviour?
I've explored the relationship between the two different sources of memory - mind/body - and how this manifests as private (personae) and public (character) identifications, corresponding to genetics/memetics, or nature/nurture.
Would not a man, who has played a character role his entire life, reject any insinuation that this is not his true self, or his total self, going so far as to reject the very idea of a self, of identity?
Would not such a man refuse to acknowledge the appearance of his body, or its impulses, when they contradict the image he wishes to cultivate, remain true to, and be associated with?
Ideal vs. Real.
The source of this option can be traced back to those two distinct sources of memory: DNA, inherited, & experienced, further divided into first- & second-hand.

Civilization imposes upon individuals the necessity to self-repress - discipline, control and this we call cultivation, or becoming "civilized".
Here is where things become complex, precisely because of this self-repression and the fact that the mind can lie (deceive) and self-decieve, whereas the body cannot; for the deception to be effective it must remain convincing.
This results in what humans like to believe is their "complexity" - a persistent self-contradiction, resulting in failure to live-up to stated convictions
This, also, has an explanation. My own.
When said belief system (meme) is contrary to the individual's inherited impulses - to the degree that it is so - determines the probability of an individual's failure to abide by his/her own beliefs.
This is adjusted by another factor: the individual's inherited will-power, his/her potential for self-discipliune, self-control etc. and his/her proclivity towards deception (desire to deceive and his/her inherited level of gullibility; inherited desire to be deceived, or inherited inclination to be subjective, and disinclination to become objective).
These factors, on a case by case basis, is what makes humans "complex", since these factors are not obvious and they fluctuate during an individuals lifetime.

Humans can say one thing, and then contradict what they just said with an action.
This has nothing to do with the individual's complexity, but with the factors I mentioned above.
These factors and how they interact, is what is complex - though the individual himself may be simple.
He may be confused by his own behaviour, having intuitively adopted a method he cannot explain nor fully understand, but can only imitate.

The basic premises is that the mind evolved to increase an individual's survivability - reproductive potentials are part of this survivability, given that life is mortal.
The more primal mind is inclined to protect the individual from all threats - this would include awareness that exceed the levels required to survive - so deception may be part of natural selection - practiced by many species - but self-deception is limited to those with a degree of self-awarness - such as homo sapiens - that expose it to threats no other species are aware of.
This additional threat source I've identified as self-awareness - or objectivity, i.e., thinking and/or perceiving the world, including oneself, from a third-person perspective.
now most do not understand why this would be an issue - mostly those of lower IQ, or lower conscience...those closer to the manimal state - ironically, these same types are prone towards delusions of man being other than an animal - being divine, exceptional to the extent that one cannot even associate animals behaviours with human behaviours.
Irony because these same types are closest to the manimal state, precisely because they cannot or will not accept what humans are, and what culture, and language is.
Language being a culture's DNA.

From organism or superorganism.
This addition helps to confuse - intentionally or not - and to conceal - like clothing concealing bodies and their automated reactions to stimuli.

Timon wrote:

Darwin was the most evil person who ever lived.

I'm assuming that you've never met Darwin, nor have any knowledge of his behaviour to determine how "evil" he was - according to your Abrahamic ethical standards - so, it's safe to assume that your accusation is based no your moral outrage at his brainchild, Evolution Theory, and Natural Selection.
These are the "evil" theories.
From this I can draw further assumptions.
Your some sort of nihilist - if not an Abrahamic superstitious emoter, then a postmodern, crypto-Marxist.
Religious zealotry or idealistic fanaticism, rooted in deep insecurity - anxiety/fear.
Schizoid, different delusional sample type.
If not "born again" then "woke" out of your mind.

It was only a matter of time.

Try this tactic:
Someone already used it.
Find a mistake. or manufacture one - claim I made one, without disclosing what the mistake is.
Doesn't matter if it was intentional or not, what matters is an error is a sign of weakness.

Then, use it to dismiss everything I say...because if it ain't absolutely true it must be absolutely untrue.
Then, continue to believe whatever bullshyte makes you feel good, without having to justify your beliefs.
This, too, is part of the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.].

Undermine, find a flaw - real or not - so as to validate your convictions, without having to provide arguments nor evidence.
The woman on ILP uses this to great effect.
Has she trained you, or is this a woman thing?