Judgment

Every judgment entails a risk.
There are the foreseen cost and benefits, and the unforeseen ones.
Mind is prone to focus on the benefits and to ignore the costs - especially spoiled modern minds.

Value-Judgment refers to the quality the mind places on the benefits, in relation to the potential costs.
An evaluation of if and why the potential costs outweigh the potential benefits.

The degree the evaluations differs from the outcome determines is failure versus its success.
This usually leads to an adjustment.
The judgment appreciates the difference between expected costs/benefits by juxtaposition it with the actual outcome and its actual costs/benefits.
It then adjust, having determined what is to blame for this discrepancy.
Accurately judging the causes of the divergence will determine the subsequent success of the adjustment.
If the cause is miscalculate the same failure will repeat, or will grow.
If the cause of the discrepancy is accurately diagnosed then an evaluation of degree of adjustment becomes crucial.
If one overestimates, or underestimates then he will once more fall short, or over-reach.
Multiple attempts will gradually result in precision.
But then the factor of time is in play, because all is in flux, and what was is no longer as it was, so the adjustment will have to be quick, otherwise the circumstances will have changed demanding a repetition of the process.  

A similar technique is used in the military when attempting to strike a target.
The target is mobile, and even if it is static it can change in relevance.
Artillery fires a first volley, and a spotter sends adjustments back, and then the artillery battery fires to kill.
This is a similar technique to what the mind uses in relation to its goal, its target.
Judgment is the adjustment evaluation when the goal is determined and judged to be worthy of a strike.
It is possible that the target is overestimated or underestimated...so the goal, the ideal and how it is evaluated is also a preliminary step of judgment, before one acts.
A wrong evaluation of the ideal results in a wasting of time and resources that, in the grand scheme of things, leads to a failed mission, which is a futile battle.
Too many such battles and the war is lost.  
So, what precedes action is an accurate evaluation of the goal, the ideal...then an accurate assessment of the terrain, the intervening time/space between you and the goal.
Meaning is essential here, because meaning refers to how the phenomenon inter-relate and this is crucial in navigating the terrain towards the target.
Finally, judgment must be flexible and precise enough to make adjustments.

When it come sot nihilists, and where would I be if I did not comment on them in one of my posts?, then the target is entirely in their mind.
It does not exist in the world, so all this is unnecessary because they can simply imagine hitting the target time and time again.
Mental masturbation.
By placing the standard inside the mind guarantees itself success, but the success is also internal because it has no external outcome.
It may avoid all the effort and struggle and risks, but the victory is also imaginary and worthless...so they must convince others of it to convert it to an external success.

Conflict is essential to judgment.
Physical conflict, competition, is more fundamental than is mental conflict and competition.
The real outweighs the ideal, the theoretical.
The consequences are more obvious and less adjustable by spin-doctoring - interpretations.

Mental conflict necessitates intellectual integrity - honesty, courage.
If this is absent in the participants then the outcome is never clear not mutually acceptable and therefore useless.

A common external to both minds standard is important.
A standard accessible through the senses, and independent from all participants.

The language used by those in mental competition, in dialogue, ought to refer to external activities and not to theoretical abstractions.
When the topic becomes so refines as to be inaccessible to the average man's sensual acuity, then the dialogue ought to begin from the sensually perceptible before it advances to the microscopic and macrosopic.
This advancement ought to remain connected to the sensual, so as to not veer off into the theoretical and fantasy.

Intelligence evolves to increase survival potentials by using a dynamic adjustment to fluctuating circumstances.
Stress cultivates both physical and mental potentials, by burning away failure from success.

Failure to adjust to failure only repeats itself....and then the blame is sought in the other, finally surrendering to other for help.

Judgment is the word given to the process of evaluating probabilities from possibilities, in relation to a foreseen outcome.
An approximation of costs/benefits, in relation to a goal, and/or an idea(l).

The problem Abrahamism have, forcing them to extremism, is that their ideals exist only in theory, and have the symbol/word as their only expression of an exoteric presence.
Their ideal is only a word, seeking suitability, to be given flesh and blood, a physical presence, in the world it contradicts.
for Aryans the reverse is the case.
Their symbols/words begin as Inter)activity, as physical presence, as flesh and blood.
The word is what this suitability refers to. It is its representation.
Reasoning, for the Aryan is a process upwards, towards the idea(l), gradually using the real as a support, a ladder to the towards the top.

Judgment is the evaluation of this reasoning....like evaluating the utility of a ladder by how high it can reach supporting the weight, the mass of a real man, of reality.

The Aryan can trace his steps back, because each step was taken with caution on his way up.
He can justify the reasoning he used to reach the conclusion, the judgment.
He is confident and sure of it because he's tested the step with his own mass. He can retrace his way to the judgment.

Nihilists, including the original triad of Abrahamism, cannot.
They begin with the judgment and have adopted or accepted the reasoning, and so they are unsure of the steps, fearing it cannot support their mass.
Some, also come to know that Abrahamism, from where they adopt their steps on the ladder downward, has begun with the judgment, and has attempted to build, to construct the steps towards the ground, so they realize, some do, that they are in limbo....floating above the ground because the bottom has not been reached - their theories have not been grounded, but remain floating in idealistic air, and esoteric spaces.

Humans, life, judges good from bad, desirable from undesirable, useful from useless, and it is an indifferent world that settles the superior judgment from the inferior.
A world not affected by human desires and needs, human symbols/words, human judgments.

The judgments is evaluated by the consequences of its application.
If it remains theoretical, noetic, it can be judged by the quantity and quality of its references to an indifferent world, its predictive power, and its ability to integrate the past, precedent, into a cohesive mental model that can also integrate future events, without having to resort to reinterpretation of words of history, and does not have to resort to a occult reality underlying, overlaying, what is perceivable.

Living in your head has its advantages:
-Whatever happens, is always good because even the bad goes into the washing machine of the mind and comes out clean.
-The unforeseen can be claimed as foreseen - hindsight is 20/20.
-You can do no wrong, except for some minor mistakes to prove how honest you are, or as a way of indirectly flattering yourself.
-All that you love is automatically the best - perfect, and all that you do not, and cannot, is automatically bad, and you didn't want it anyway.
-Everything validates the contraptions in your head.
When a bird sings, it is for you. When the sun rises it is because of you. When the volcano erupts it validates what you've always said, and if it does not, the same.
There is no event, no consequence that you cannot trace back to your mind.
-All can be twisted, spin-doctored, into whatever you desire.
There is no reason to change, because change happens and because all change is to your benefit because it can be interpreted in any way that flatters and worships that which is you.
world is no longer a source of challenges, a standard to be measured against, but it is your mind that challenges the world and forces it to change in accordance to its desires.  
-Language is not a tool to engage reality, but a toy to be played with. Adhering to the needs of communication only ensures that you have play-mates in your internal game of words and symbols.
Making the toy exciting, seductive, appealing to as many play-mates as possible, ensures a steady flow of players wanting to be included in your games.    
-At will you can close yourself off from what troubles you and you cannot escape using the previous methods.
Becoming blind and deaf, at will, is the mark of an authority, a king reigning in the castle of his own mind.
Close the eyes, hum a tune, numb the senses....any methods to draw up the bridge and seal the windows from the outside. now, you can safely play inside your own mind....hopefully with a few of your good friends.
-Renamig darkness light is an example of what powerful magic you can have if you live in your head.    
Anything is possible, inside there.
You can rename 'outside' inside and explore the "external" world internally.
You can name female male, or dog a cat. It does not mater because it\'s all in the magical realm of your head where you hold yourself accountable to nothing and nobody.....nobody who is not a good friend willing to play in your games. You know, fun friends, not killjoys who are only jealous of your joy and creative game-play.  
-Everything that resits can be made pliable I your mind.
If the world is too hard, it can be internalized and softened up to liquid.
Alchemist magic.

I envy those who are content living in their head, and those who can find 'friends' to play in there, with them.
I must admit that I cannot do so.
I have a vivid imagination and have, on occasion, found a few nit-wits who wanted to play fantasy, but I could not be content knowing it was in my head.
like entering and living in a Star Trek 'holodeck'....I cannot find satisfaction in chemical or technological artificial realities.
I would feel ashamed and embarrassed by my addiction, and would prefer, despite myself, the real, unpredictable, unyielding world outside.
What a waste of time, of a life, to live inside your head...in noetic alternate realities, and esoteric worlds of wonder....not really challenged or confronted with tragedy, with a reality-check, with shame.
To live in your head, or in the head of another, is simply not enough, for me.
Diving into books and repeating them, is living inside an other's head.
Using words as the extent of your reality, the edge of your perceptual-event-horizon, is intentionally trapping yourself in language, entangling your mind in it....cocooning your physicality in a web of words, and then toying with them, thinking of yourself a genius god, when all you are is a child, a man-child, seeking a way back into the womb, surrounded by mother's life....her engulfing consciousness, her godliness.

An individual's judgment is mitigated by a preexisting social structure - a meme.
The meme's collective judgments are the product of its mitigation over preexisting natural order.

The individuals judgments adjust his natural genetic drives to social conventions.
The degree that they are suppressed and sublimated determines the degree to which the individual feels repressed and un-free.

The meme mitigates between individual and natural order, so as to shape a type of individual that benefits its continuance and supports its intervention upon natural order. It does so by intervening to adjust the costs/benefits for every individual choice, particularly those that are genetic, or the consequence of natural selection that preceded the memes emergence.
This is social engineering or eugenics.
After the emergence of cultures, memes, man has lived in one form of eugenics or another...some more or less intervention and in disharmonious with natural order.

Interventions accumulate, as one intervention produced collateral effects that then require interventions.
This gradually leads to memetic deterioration, and the the decline of civilizations founded on cultural (memetic) principles.
The degree the meme intervenes upon natural order determines the length of time it takes for the process to reach degeneration.
In moderns times technologies/techniques are being used to more efficiently and effectively compensate for these collateral effects, lengthening the time period before degeneration.
Utopia s described by Trans-humanism is the future state where technologies/techniques find a balance, indefinitely postponing degeneration.

A symptom of degeneration and memetic decline is sexual dysfunction, decadence and linguistic deterioration...language being the code of culture - its lifeblood.
Linguistic deterioration is the memetic version of the physical dis-ease version of leukemia...

Linguistic decline indicates a neurological problem.
It’s the first outwardly perceptible symptom of an esoteric issue.
The individual loses contact with reality and begins talking in 'tongues'.
His words are gibberish, his actions erratic.
He seems possessed by demons.
His internal turmoil is externalized as a neurosis.
Nothing he says makes sense. He users words in unconventional ways, he sees things, hears things nobody else can see or hear.
Detachment from reality is how nihilism finalizes its viral cycle.
It's the end stage of the parasite's infection. The host begins to die, from the inside out.
Like with all viruses, the infection is not perceptible at first.
The effects of a dis-ease take time to manifest as symptoms that can be perceived.
See AIDS patients.
The host, at first, appears healthy, virile, his erratic behaviour, is part of his virility, his health, his gibberish is part of his charm.
But the dis-ease slowly leaves behind internal scars. Detachment grows until healthy exuberance begins to reveal neurosis, and what was charming seems out of touch with the world around him.
The internal begins to dominate. He no longer sees and hears the external, because the inner voices drown them out.
Increasingly he turns inward, into his own head, living in the ghosts that come out in his cavernous skull.
He begins to win victories and suffer defeats... all inside his mind.
Luckily the mind always protects so the victories are more and of more substance to the small defeats.
He hears himself echoed everywhere; everything sings his name; everyone is looking at him.
He convinces himself that it is because of his grandeur, and not of his insanity.
Who can ignore an insane person in the room.... it’s more likely one can ignore the elephant than the crazies. At least it can stand still and quiet, but not the crazy one.
He cannot.
Others must be pulled into the craziness. He bumps, he leaps, he screams, he entices, forces others to look at him, to stand close to listen.
He is in an erotic frenzy, jumping and screaming.
Jumbled phrases, pronounced with conviction, he sings and thinks he hears the gods calling to him.
Ghosts whisper in his mind. The dead, admired, come to him.
He channels their spirit, embodying their essence, becoming them.
His limbs twist, his face contorts... into a smile, widening into laughter, hysterical joy... he swings around in a dance, wanting all to see how happy he is, how full, how overtaken by genius.
From the corner of his eye he catches a glimpse of himself, and stops to look, mesmerized by his own contortions. He moves closer to peer into the face of joy and falls in love with what he sees.
He stands there, immersed in the reflection of his own joyous face, tracing the lines the wrinkles of his madness; caressing his image.
He turns to see if others can see how wonderful he is... and there they all stand, open-mouthed and wide-eyed, and he thinks it is because they are admiring him.

Language is the expression of the nervous system and how it connects mind to body, the ideal to the real. It is reasonable to assume that the first symptoms of neurological distress will be displayed in language use.
Slurring, mispronouncing, misuse, misapplication of symbols/words, contrary not only to linguistic conventions but to reality itself and how words were originally attached to specific phenomena.
The nervous system becomes agitated, and the words erratic, nonsensical. The host begins to lose contact with the outside world and is engulfed in the internal.
His words express an internal, private reality only those initiated into the madness can appreciate.
There is no external focal point to reach agreement, because it is inside. The meaning hidden from view, it can only be felt and to feel it you must become a member of the trusted group, the intimate circle of trust – friendship of madness.
This is how a cult forms. We see this in cults such as Scientology.
They have their own language, their own standards, their own sacred manual and holy icon, in Hubbard. He gave them a very self-consistent, self-referential fantasy manual. He invented his own language, gave new meanings to old words and so on and so forth.
Language creates a separation distinguishing the internal reality, shared by the chosen, from the external world, where language is limited by phenomena, temporal sequences of cause/effect, experiences, precedent etc.
At most the group can seek ‘external’ validation in books, in idols in Holy Scripture, adjusting it to their specific needs,
Language can be redefined if it is not connected to an indifferent world.

We (re)act, (inter)act and then, looking back at it, we explain what we've done; we name our actions, we rename them, then we justify them, and we spin them into forms that will benefit us the most - reducing the potential costs with a twist of phrase and a 'different perspective'.

But those who we are trying to fool and convince are not the only arbiters of our actions, of the choices we've already made when we realize we've made them, and are faces with the consequences.
The world remains unaffected by spin-doctoring, perspectives, attitude, word-games.
We rally support to deal with its indifference.
We want the world, defined as humanity, to absorb the 'costs', presenting ourselves as victims of something else, or someone else, because we are a victim of our selves.
Our refusal to be held accountable only perpetuates the mistake, it does not make it disappear.

We've tried fantasizing about an absolute judge that can save us, declaring us innocent, but all it's done is offer some ephemeral comfort, at a terrible cost.
A cost we refuse to validate.
Errors in judgment perpetuate and accumulate need/suffering.
We either pay incrementally or in lump sums, we can then blame on everything and everyone else.
Are there no threatening agents out there, no minds conspiring against us?
Indeed there are.
Your misfortune is another's fortune.
But should we not to be cognizant and to take this into account whenever we act?
And, if the unforeseeable occurs, or the outcome was unsuspected, who is to blame first and foremost?
And if we remain procrastinating and indecisive with the weight of this responsibility, who is to blame then?

Being free has a price.

Good/Bad as it refers to judgment has to do with intent.
A theory if not converted to actions, is an intent not applied within world.
The intent is always good, from the actors perspective, otherwise it would not be his intent.
It is founded on his judgment of world, and his place in it.

When applied, the action results in costs and benefits - consequences.
The intent is then evaluated in relation to the consequences as being more or less realistic (its potential), and in relation to its intended outcome (projection of theory/ideal).
The mind, if it has integrity and is not using the theory to protect itself from world, will then adjust its theory, its intent, by evaluating the costs/benefits in relation to the projected intent - juxtaposing is how the mind judges, or becomes conscious, aware.

If no external will does not intervene to adjust the costs/benefits, to its own intent (manipulation), then its own intent will be similarly evaluated.


Good/Bad becomes the ethical metaphor good/evil.
In this case the actor, the mind, evaluates the consequences of its actions (choices) in relation to the judgment of a group, or an external standard, such as a sacred manuscript, or a external authority, dead or alive.
If alive the authority's judgment is the consequence. If the authority, the idol, is dead, then the interpretation of his will, while alive, is the consequence - this then returns the evaluation to the actor who judges the outcome of his applied theories in relation to his understanding of the authority's judgments.
A questionable practice when the mind is tempted to interpret the dead authority, or the sacred Scripture in any way that adjusts the cost/benefit outcome.
If the interpretation goes through a representative of this abstract authority then this mediator can manipulate the costs/benefit analysis, making the consequences a product of his intent.


In natural environments good/bad are result in cost/benefits, that if ignored or not appreciated correctly will repeat the costs/befits - natural selection.
In relation to a group, as in the case of social organisms participating in cooperative groups, as a survival enhancer, the individual's cost/benefit are mitigated by the entire group.
The group absorbs the costs and enhances the benefits, if it so chooses. The individual participating in such a unity feels the dependence as a moral imperative. It no longer judges the consequences directly, but through its effects within the group.
The costs can be decreased, absorbed within the collective, and the benefits multiplied, but if the group does not accept to mitigate then the individual faces the full costs and enjoys the full benefits - the latter will not be the case because the group would never deny itself benefits that the actions of a member of its group has produced with its choices and judgments.
It is more likely that the group will refuse to absorb, and share the costs of such actions. So authorization from the collective is always sought after.
Manipulating the collective becomes a strategy, when it judges costs/benefits using a sacred manual and a representative icon/idol.

Subjectivity becomes an inter-collective (herd) dynamic. An individual attempts to impose its interpretations of the shared Scripture and icon/idol, so that it can adjust the collective's appreciation of an individual's applied theories and the consequences of such an application.
The world beyond the collective remains unaffected.
All actions still result in the same costs/benefits but this time the collective is manipulated to adsorb more or less of the consequences.

We call the shifting collective standard of appreciation an ethical standard.
We call the vague, requiring interpretation, sacred Scripture and iconic judgment, a moral standard.

As everyone knows i do not believe in absolutes.
I consider them human fabrications referring to noetic constructs - abstractions. They have no reality, outside the mind, where they are used to represent a fluid world.
The word 'absolute' exists as does the concept, but it is linguistic and psychological, used to express certainty, conviction to emphasize.
No absolute has ever been discovered.
No indivisible, immutable, singularity. No eternal, whole, no one.
Absolutes are theoretical - or noetic, abstractions.

I judge in degrees.
There is no 0% or 100%.
0 - 100 refer to absolute nil and absolute whole, absolute negative and absolute positive.
Absolute chaos, or absolute order.
1/0 binary, dualistic thinking.
Top<>Down emoting.  They start with their abstraction as a literal, not a representation, an approximation, an interpretation.

I exist in reality....and degrees are just another way of saying dynamic, or fluid.
When I judge I give my hypothesis anything between 0%  to 100% - degree of certainty.

I then adjust my judgment to the degree of error I can appreciate.
So I evaluate the error, or the divergence from the expected, when and if I apply my opinion pragmatically.
I then apply my adjustment to my first judgment.

If my first judgment was close to 100% or I accurately evaluated the degree of divergence from it, then I need not adjust, but only reapply, attempting to become more precise.
If my first judgments was way off and I failed to accurately evaluate the degree of my error, then I will repeat my error.

We have a fluid reality, and a flexible, fluid mind.
So judgment is the continuous adjustment of judgment to a changing reality, to a fluid world.
This does not mean one cannot achieve a degree of precision, because the world is not changing at a rate that would prevent life and intelligence to evolve.

Understanding helps.
Understanding is the perception of patterns in the patterns....which means that the world is fluid but it is fluid in a predictable way...at least the parts that are ordered, or are patterned.
Chaos, defined as randomness, prevents any absolute certainty.

This is why consciousness is continuous, and fluid like reality. It must constantly adjust to the world's flux.
This is , also, why nihilism is so seductive.
It negates uncertainty either with an absolute truth - placed 'outside' space/time, or it dismisses all as equally wrong.
Nihilism nullifies fluidity with a noetic absolute - an absolute truth, or an absolute negation of all truths.
Absolute ONE or absolute NIL.
The binary logic of nihilism.

An organism, like a plant, reacts to stimuli using evolved programming - it is all automatic, requiring no awareness.
It reacts automatically and unconsciously.
Higher organism have many such automated reactions to stimulation - requiring no cosnciuos, lucid, awareness.
Plant genes are part of higher organic DNA.

Conciousness evolved much later.
Causality enforces a sequence - plant conciousness precedes animal conciousness, which precedes human conciousness.
Without the restriction of causal sequence we might as well put everything in a cognitive blender and go insane.
Causality is natural order imposing itself no human needs/desires, or on human imagination dominated by need/desire.

Therefore, plant-like organic automatic reactions are part of the human organism. Most of our behaviour our activity, is automated, requiring no cosnciuos participation.
if our reaction is to a traumatic stimuli then we become aware of it after-the-fact....and the time period is determined by the quality of our mind and senses.

When we accidentally come in contact with fire, we react - automatically - and then react consciously - so our perceptions lag behind our reactions. First we pull away, and then he scream in pain.
To our ego - the lucid part of conciousness - this may be misconstrued as another will participating in our everyday activities. as if another were present 'protecting us and watching over us'.
In fact, we make most of our choices without even being aware of them. Our lucid mind gets involved when there's an important choice to be made.
It's, as if, it were all predetermined, we may say. As if all was following a predetermined path.

We make choices and then we call upon our lucid mind to justify them.

Some words, representing concepts, only apply to life and living organisms, and are entirely meaningless outside this distinction.
Words like...
love/hate - all emotions in fact....valuable/valueless and/or worthless.....evil/good.....good/bad....will....subjective/objective...true/false.....absolute....

All words referring to organic relationships with environment - cosmos - or with other organisms - triangulations between a subjective conciousness, an objective/goal/intent....and an outcome, an effect.
When applied outside such contexts the motive must be sought in the mind that is appropriating and misapplying them.
The motive is most probably to reveal but to conceal, for a reason other than clarity.

A clear statement is easily discernible and testable by all who follow the triangulation to its focal point within the real world.
Integrity and courage is essential.
All the rest will go out of their way to escape and to hide from what can never be escaped and hidden from.
Ignorance may be bliss, but it is not innocence, nor is it an escape.

Mencken, H.L. wrote:

Woman as Realpolitiker
Women in general are far too realistic to have any respect for so-called ideas. One seldom hears of them suffering and dying for any of the bogus Great Truths that men believe in.

Common sense does not require any great intellectual feat. Simple animals exhibit a basic degree of common sense. Women feel this intuitively, just as animals may sense what is the correct – most probably accurate – course of action from what is not, without being forced to justify themselves nor having to explain how nor why. Only a man can break the physical with an idealistic leap of faith.
Has not man placed woman on a romantic pedestal demanding, of her, to live up to his expectations; has not women cautiously accepted this pedestal as a way to surpass man, seeking from her idealistic height the pragmatically highest?
Is her disrespect for males not based on this male propensity to idealize out of existence, what is always, and forever, present?
Does woman confuse the real from the ideal – to whatever degree she can appreciate the latter; does she confuse words for deeds? To whatever degree she is a representative of her nature – agency of nature – she exemplifies the harsh pragmatism of a mind that cannot waste its energies on fantasies and hypotheticals. Her body dominates as a manifestation of her past, and does not have to challenge natural order, nor any external order, to prove herself worthy.
Her status is guaranteed by her essence, only taking care not to invest it on what will diminish, rather than exalt her. Her offspring, their quantity and quality, are evidences of her judgements value, within circumstances she never doubts nor challenges but tenaciously adjusts to.

All judgments refer to juxtapositions, e.g., I with other, objective A and Objective B, etc.

All vlaue-judgments are a product of a triangulation, e.g., subject/object/Relationship.
Individual/Goal/Distance-Effort...


The individual evaluates - approximates, estimates - its objective's attainability - probability - in relation to his evaluation of himself - the product is what is called the "value" of the objective relative to the subjective.

The consequences are what determine the accuracy of the subjective estimation of its objectives. If the consequences are mostly negative, then the estimation - judgments - were mostly wrong - if they are mostly positive - as expected - then the estimations were mostly accurate.

All evaluations are approximations.
The world - reality - determines the real value of the objective, relative to the subjective, if and when the subject applies its estimations in the real world, because all subjective estimations will never be perfectly accurate - absolutely correct.
The subject's evaluation of the objective, and its estimation of its attainability, relative to its estimation of its own traits/potentials/strengths/weaknesses, determines the objective's value.

This is similar to how a predator estimates its prey's trajectory relative to itself, and the environment - world - both are moving within, determining its movement - course of actions - and their subsequent success and/or failure.
It is always a fact that the subject over-understimates all points participating in its triangulations, i.e., the objective, itself, and the distance/effort/attainability of the objective.
The truth is revealed via application - pragmatically. The actor adjusts its own estimations in real-time - correcting itself, and making its evaluations more precise.

Noumenon, Phenomenon, Relationship is the triangulation - when it remains theoretical.
Movement, action, beginning with choice, is what validates, or falsifies the theory.
If a theory cannot be validated nor falsified pragmatically then it must settle for a theoretical validation based on the quantity and quality of perceived relationships - connections - between noumenon - abstraction - and phenomenon - apparent presence.
Precedent - first and second hand - adds or subtracts certainty.

An action is based on a set of subjective judgments, concerning an objective - goal -, the actor's evaluation of himself - self knowledge - and his evaluation of his goal - its attainability, required effort/work, and of the potential positive/negative consequences.
Choice is based on subjective judgments, motivating the subject to move/act, in relation to its objective - goal.

Movement occurs within a shared world, exposing the quality of the subject's choices and the judgments these choices are based upon.

Desperate degenerates want to share all negative consequences produced by their bad choices based on erroneous judgments.
they want this to preserve their delusions that everything is subjective - meaning all is equally valid, if, and only if, it pertains to man.  
Essentially, they know - intuitively or consciously - that their convictions - their ideals - are lies.  
But they cannot abandon them, not doubt them, so they play mind-games demanding that all consequences - good and bad - be shared by all humans - collectivity, i.e., Marxism.
They want to escape their own weaknesses or inadequacies, hiding in an imagined collective parity.

This is like Christians hiding their sinfulness - their human failings, relative to their own Abrahamic ideals and morals - within God's "theoretically perfect" collectivity - escaping their personal responsibilities within the hypothetical forgiveness, forgetfulness, of the collective.
In secular nihilism "god's" mediation is eliminated - negated - leaving the collective to integrate disparity into its equalizing whole.

Disparity is equalized when weakness finds compensating strength in another - or a group.

For example, a woman's idealistic goal to be "equal to males" - despite biologically based (genetic) disparities - demands that the group provide for her the means for attaining her ideal goal, e.g., protecting her from her own biology, providing, to her, methods of eliminating the negative consequences - relative to her goal - so as to achieve it.

When she fails to evade the negative consequences - despite this mitigating equalizer - the individual always finds someone other than herself to accuse.

For example, the system sells the lie that races and sexes are physical and have no mental nor any psychological effect - explaining all mental/psychological disparities as social constructs - so when individuals fail to pragmatically experience performance parity, they do not question their own judgements, nor adopted ideals, but seek the causes for this failure in the system's motive - accusing it of failing to produce performance parity.

The underlying motive of a nihilist is to ideologically negate individual judgements - either by negating the idea of an individual, or by levelling all judgments, by casting doubt upon them - lowering certainty and trust in themselves - to necessitate a moralistic rule that forces the collective to share the consequences of bad judgements - negating disparity by sharing the negative - and positive - consequences, effectively absorbing disparity into collective parity.

Desperate Degenerates have found in the idea of nil - absence of absolutes - an effective tool to chip away at individual confidence and trust in self, to impose the only acceptable, to them, alternative of collective parity - or parity through collectivization - Marxism & Abrahamism, or Marxism as a secular adaptation of Abrahamic morality and ideology (dogma), and its world-views, which presume the absolute as their highest equalizing ideal; secularists simply change the term referring to their ideal absolute state of being, e.g., from 'god' they rename it 'humanity, or 'state', or universe, or simply call it 'one', or 'nil'.

Linked on Hyperborea by...

Kvasir wrote:

The roots of Abrahamic spirituality, birthing a variety of secular forms, a.k.a., Communism, Liberalism, all with a common source in the bottomless pits from where the power of Nil rises....

Judgement exposes quality of mind.
Choice is its expression, even the choice to not act is a choice.

Judgment is the product of sensual interpretations and evaluations - connecting data to discover meaning and to perceive patterns.
Quantity of data is the basis, but not every mind can process the equal amount at the same speed, nor can every mind perceive patterns in the data.

I.Q. = patter perception.
Sensual Acuity = perception of details.

Judgements do not create certainties they create range of possibilities and probabilities.

In all things human there are genes and memes - nature and nurture.
In all things there are patterns and random unknown factors - order and chaos.

In all thins there are truths and lies.
Like climate change, like this new vaccine conspiracy, like all conspiracies.
Wisdom is about being able to determine the degree and the importance, i.e., what is significant and what insignificant and to what degree.

Hypobole is easy.
Certainty is hyperbole.
Faith is hyperbole.
Hope is hyperbole.

Like all value judgements the mind must constantly reaffirm them either in theory or in practice.

Morality is an inherited value-judgments that has become innate, referring to actions that facilitate cooperative reproductive and survival strategies.
Ethics are amendments to these encoded actions attempting to adapt them to human social and cultural needs.
This is clear in Mosaic Commandments. A form of enhanced and accelerated adaptation, i.e., technology/technique: monogamy and ethical laws regarding adultery - human promiscuity - is a prime example.

Both theory and practice necessitates triangulation: subject, object, alignment/harmony = theoretical; subjective, objective, movement = practice.
Value judgements are not set in stone - though they can become rigid if they are not constantly reaffirmed and revalidated through the consequences they produce.

Part of the maturation process - and rites of passage - is an individual's rebellion and reaffirmation of the values it was given by its parents and tis peers.
If this is not accomplished then the mind remains stunted in a prepubescent psychology or trapped in puberty's constant rebellion towards all forms of value.