Great podcast! I love the idea ‘if-then-equals-because’. These strange leaps of faith are always proclaimed as conclusive evidence when they are actually a weak hypothesis or a fabrication. I would like to add that people describe their hypothesis with a confidence and offer several hypotheses for an observation. For the string above, the devil hand sign is because it’s commonly used for framing (99% confidence), or it’s because it’s a secret symbol to a nefarious religion (1% confidence). For the latter to be given any consideration, we need much more supporting evidence. There can be multiple hypotheses to describe an observation, and the sum of the confidences should equal 100%. I agree that education on these topics helps pierce the veil of propaganda. Really enjoyed the discussion.
if/then=because is usually bounded by faith (an unknowable truth) or law (an agreed-on truth).
Bounding is a key concept, and I was using the hand sign of a cinematographer who uses his hand to visualize and communicate the “bounds” (left and right) of a camera’s point-of-view and angle.
It is a great heuristic to identify logical fallacies. Since you mentioned it on Hrvoje’s podcast, I’ve noticed it pop up everywhere! Thanks for the insights. Cheers!
once I figured it out, I realized why the army thought it was so powerful. On the Ethical Skeptic's website, he lists 3000 logical and scientific fallacies… A huge percentage of them fit the if/then=because linguistic pattern. You can spend your life, memorizing and learning the 3000 logical fallacies, or you can learn to recognize one pattern and the 14 responses… It doesn't seem like much of a choice in the end...
Phrygian pronunciation: frij + ee + uhn. I used to hear about it as the phrygian musical scale. Mostly for jazz and other world music like flamenco but also metal. Metallica's Wherever I May Roam and Megadeth's Symphony of Destruction are examples I found. White Rabbit -Jefterson Airplane, 46&2- Tool... also apparently used in rap.
Great interview. EM Burlingame can round out the overall understanding with the eternal war and the Resentfuls versus Responsibles framing. It comports with Christ’s teachings as well.
You and Hvroje have tickled my fancy, despite my long-held contention that Christianity is yet another ancient PSYOP manufactured by the same people you’re railing about here. Anyway, we’re not far apart, and shouldn’t be antagonists:
You and Peter have tickled my fancy, despite my long-held contention that Christianity is yet another ancient PSYOP manufactured by the same people you’re railing about here. Anyway, we’re not far apart, and shouldn’t be antagonists:
Great, great, great Podcast thanks @geopoliticsandempire to make me know Peter Duke!
Among many important points,
finally the issue of the Nukes Hoax is more frequently discussed.
This is very important, the very fact that you were in Kazakhstan in a "nuclear explosion site" shows that there's no intense radiation, just as in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
"Intense and century-lasting radiation" was a narrative they created way AFTER the Hiroshima conventional/fire bombing.
And it was pumped by Hollywood Sci-Fi along with both sides of Cold War Governments.
Radiation you checked in Kazakhstan site you visited could be create by any means, (even a radiotherapy creates radiation in a body), there are also stones and sites with natural radiation.
I've been exposing the nuclear hoax in my YT and social networks about three years ago, since I knew the work of Anders Björkman : My Atomic Bomb Findings.
His webpage has a old-style that can sometimes look a little bit confusing, but Everything is there. It's a treasure.
I met him personally last year, here in the South of France, where we both live. He's a great and very accessible guy. You should do a podcast with him, it would be great. Check it out!
Thanks again for your great work, Geopolitical and Empire.
This is OK but what strikes me is hearing what appears to be two smart people who are unable to model the future due to lack of knowledge or understanding of current technology. For example LLMs are not AGI. AGI will work fine in the DOGE plan or to replace IQ60 government workers doing worthless tasks. Or better yet removing these worthless red tape altogether. I would like to see ALL IQ60 people doing something other than serving me and annoying me and costing me money at every step. I'm sure Peter who as an art director realizes having an idiotic camera assistant holding your $40k dollar lens is a recipe for disaster. But somehow he cannot make the leap to government offices with the same problem. In that situation WE the people are that lens. Not sure I like to hear a Mexican host who admittedly hates the United States as per his own admission. The guest reasoning and incentive are sus on many levels. I hear under all this that you both feel NOT "in power" and that pisses you fellas off. Let's not mince words; DODGE isn't anything like Secretary of General affairs /Rosevelt was a DEMOCRAT who set up SS. There are many problems with the new Peter Thiel playhouse team. But the goals spoken by the new team is "to knock down government corruption and waste via efficiency". Your arguments give no prospective or options to deal with the Trillion debt or the huge problems with immigration, criminals, judges who don't prosecute criminals, eroding freedom of speech, grooming children with sex, the disenfranchising of the HERO in the entertainment Logos which is systemic etc. You appear to remain in the silo of left echo chamber as far as I can tell. You and your guest are just mental masturbators during this entire discussion. W
“LLMs are not AGI. AGI will work fine in the DOGE plan or to replace IQ60 government workers doing worthless tasks.”
Implies: If AGI is implemented, then it will replace low-IQ workers or support the DOGE plan because it is assumed to be fit for these roles.
“Having an idiotic camera assistant holding your $40k lens is a recipe for disaster.”
Implies: If someone lacks intelligence (like the assistant), then trusting them with expensive equipment leads to failure (disaster).
“Somehow he cannot make the leap to government offices with the same problem.”
Implies: If Peter recognizes issues in one context (e.g., managing assistants), then he should also see the analogous problem in government.
“In that situation WE the people are that lens.”
Implies: If government incompetence persists, then it harms the populace in the same way a careless assistant could harm a lens.
“Hearing what appears to be two smart people who are unable to model the future due to lack of knowledge or understanding of current technology.”
Implies: If they lack knowledge or understanding of technology, then they are unable to model the future.
“Your arguments give no prospective or options to deal with the Trillion debt or the huge problems with immigration, criminals, judges who don’t prosecute criminals, eroding freedom of speech, grooming children with sex, the disenfranchising of the HERO in the entertainment Logos which is systemic, etc.”
Implies: If their arguments lack these elements, then they are inadequate or irrelevant.
Presuppositions
“LLMs are not AGI.”
Presumes that the audience understands what LLMs and AGI are and that there is a significant difference between the two.
“AGI will work fine in the DOGE plan or to replace IQ60 government workers doing worthless tasks.”
Presumes that:
The DOGE plan exists and requires AGI.
IQ60 workers are currently employed in “worthless tasks.”
AGI is capable of replacing human inefficiency in government.
“Or better yet removing these worthless red tape altogether.”
Presumes that “red tape” is a universal problem that can and should be removed.
“I would like to see ALL IQ60 people doing something other than serving me and annoying me and costing me money at every step.”
Presumes that people with low IQ are:
Actively annoying and costing the author money.
Performing jobs solely for the service of others.
“Not sure I like to hear a Mexican host who admittedly hates the United States as per his own admission.”
Presumes that the host is Mexican, hates the United States, and has admitted this.
“The guest reasoning and incentive are sus on many levels.”
Presumes that the guest has hidden motives or dubious reasoning.
“You both feel NOT ‘in power’ and that pisses you fellas off.”
Presumes that:
The speakers feel disempowered.
This perceived lack of power frustrates them.
“Let’s not mince words; DODGE isn’t anything like Secretary of General affairs.”
Presumes that there is a comparison being made and that DODGE falls short.
“Roosevelt was a DEMOCRAT who set up SS.”
Presumes that the audience recognizes the historical and political implications of Roosevelt’s party affiliation and his creation of Social Security (SS).
“There are many problems with the new Peter Thiel playhouse team.”
Presumes that Peter Thiel leads a “playhouse team” and that there are identifiable problems with it.
“The goals spoken by the new team is ‘to knock down government corruption and waste via efficiency’.”
Presumes that this is the publicly stated goal of the “new team.”
“You appear to remain in the silo of left echo chamber as far as I can tell.”
Presumes:
The speakers belong to a “left echo chamber.”
Their arguments are limited or repetitive within that context.
“You and your guest are just mental masturbators during this entire discussion.”
Presumes that the discussion lacks productivity or practical application, serving only as intellectual indulgence.
These cause-effect equivalencies and presuppositions illustrate how the writer has embedded their assumptions and beliefs into the argument, often leaving them unexamined or unsupported.
By the length of this, I certainly understand your passion. Let me try to make this simple, and come from a place of love. Linguistically, there are many things that you have written in these two comments that fit the pattern of a "cause-effect complex equivalency". I try to simplify it by calling it an "if/then=because" statement or, even simpler, "if X, then Y, because Z."
It turns out, there are always 14 different ways, at least, to reframe arguments that take this form.
I do not think or believe that IQ is the issue. We are all born asking the question "why?"
As far as my commentary and presentation about the Doge and the red hats, I'm presenting evidence that there is a form of global government that hides in plain sight, and is very old. That's pretty much it. I believe that it can be traced back to Venice, Italy, but it's probably much older than that.
Once I discovered the "cause – effect complex equivalency" pattern, (thank you Mateo Morelli & Robert Dilts) it allowed me to be more discerning about my beliefs. Based on the number of times that you have presented the pattern in your comments, it is clear to me that you would benefit a lot from learning to recognize it, that would allow you to challenge your own beliefs. The entire point of critical thinking is to have the ability to challenge your own beliefs and make yourself better without depending upon others.
Go back and look at what you've written, see if you can find the pattern. If you can't, let me know and I will point one out to you, and show you the 14 different ways it can be attacked.
There are too many presuppositions in this rambling screed for me to take the time to debunk. Perhaps one day, you'll be able to share your mind-reading secrets to benefit all mankind. Peace be with you.
...It all sounds very self-aggrandizing silliness. Thank you for taking the time to read my screed. I'd be happy to share anything you like. I'm sorry that my criticism sounds like mind reading. While Peter is encyclopedic smart he moves without direction or not one I can discern. So mind reading is all I can offer unless you propose a real question. Let me offer one attempt at a self-formulated question that took at least 25min of your discussions. Is Peter's point that the little Red hat offers a hidden warring to the coming authoritarianism from Musk/Trump? After all the talk is Peter’s point that freedom within boundaries isn’t real freedom? That freedom given is authoritarian and the little red hat is the waring? If these are Peter’s points why not just say that and not waste time with all the imaginary circus of Doge hats and 150 years of conspiracy? Do you guys not understand that culture assimilates modalities for meme sake? Ever hear of "rule of thumb"? If you know where it comes from and replace "rule of thumb" with Doge hats you will now see Peter slaying imaginary dragons. Imagine these worthless central planers (WEF/MEXICO/CCP/ROTHCHILDS/GATES) (who can’t change a tire) and have existed for generations to always have seen the ball (NATO). Even more far fetched; imagine that these same people saw the organization way before it existed and have been trying for half a century to install their evil world dominance plans and create such governance (NATO/WEF/etc)? The foe you are looking for is neocons and todays Neocon/democrats/Marxist who are the majority of the deep state garbage pail kids. But let me set everyones mind at ease. We can sleep better knowing these degenerates are so inept and corrupt all you have to do is wait and they always self-destruct any plan they attempt. This due to the larger universal force greater than human tyranny. Truth always wins in the end. Lies and deception need only an act of courage to tumble; but if courage is lacking just wait long enough for evil to rot from within. In short.
Do you or Peter think IQ60 people can follow such a discussion? Those in power or who seek power have somethings in common. They all accept the reality that the people they would rule are idiotic followers who are superstitious and easily scared. The average IQ also lacks courage and will stay in their sad existence until they die eating poison and living in squalor while they worship rulers who promise lies. They also know these poor lesser people cannot be improved and will reproduce at a faster rate than those who are smarter. Aristotle would realize today that we are far from the rational animal. If anything; we’re better defined as the self-destructive animal. No other animal is like us in this manner. So anyone seeking to rule large numbers of people must accept the sad and imperfect task to control the self-destructive animals by deception and often no so reasonable methods using the state and the monopoly of violence controls. When I produce/direct a film I have to think about the majority of my audience not the minority. If you are the type of person who finds happiness in a kind husbandry for the lesser people you have something broken in you. Socrates was 100% right when he said the ONLY people worthy to rule are psychological gods. Peter closes with what appears to be his point i.e to “wake up” so that THEY (the enfeeble bad blob) won’t be able to use epistemological warfare on you (if+then=because). Again you have to ask, do you think any of that has clarity for an IQ60 human? What do you do with them? Kill them? What is Peter's solution for those who cannot create or think at higher levels? I took the time to write this because your discussion exemplifies the very roots of authoritarian killers and taking into account that you live and have elected a degenerate woman communist Spaniard to rule over all of Mexico (including cartels) after killing everyone who opposed communism in Mexico in a country that is happy worshiping WEF/CPP/Bricks lol, but I digress. The idea of the German or Italian super race was born of your/Peter’s thinking. So let me close with a solution for you both modern intellectuals. I speak as a free market libertarian. There no way to central control anything. The value of the individual must be understood as the smallest minority. Therefore any action that violates the rights of an idiot IQ60 must be enforced by the philosophy of law blindly applied to any violating power broker. Think the many killed in Mexico for wanting free market. Thus freedom under rails IS those very values that support the organisms life and the pursuit of happiness. Such is the only freedom possible. Less you think you can have freedom out in space in zero gravity. W
“Peter is encyclopedic smart, but he moves without direction or not one I can discern.”
Implies: If Peter has vast knowledge but lacks discernible direction, then his intelligence is rendered ineffective.
“Freedom within boundaries isn’t real freedom.”
Implies: If freedom is constrained, then it is not true freedom.
“Freedom given is authoritarian.”
Implies: If freedom is granted by a higher authority, then it is inherently authoritarian.
“The foe you are looking for is neocons and today’s Neocon/democrats/Marxists who are the majority of the deep state garbage pail kids.”
Implies: If one is searching for the root of societal problems, then it lies with neoconservatives, Democrats, and Marxists in the “deep state.”
“We can sleep better knowing these degenerates are so inept and corrupt all you have to do is wait and they always self-destruct.”
Implies: If those in power are corrupt and incompetent, then their plans will eventually fail on their own.
“Lies and deception need only an act of courage to tumble.”
Implies: If someone acts courageously, then lies and deception can be defeated.
“If courage is lacking, just wait long enough for evil to rot from within.”
Implies: If no one acts against evil, then time alone will lead to its decay.
“The average IQ also lacks courage and will stay in their sad existence until they die eating poison and living in squalor.”
Implies: If someone has low intelligence, then they are condemned to a life of fear, poor choices, and misery.
“Anyone seeking to rule large numbers of people must accept the sad and imperfect task to control the self-destructive animals by deception.”
Implies: If someone wishes to govern the masses, then they must resort to deception to manage their destructive tendencies.
“The ONLY people worthy to rule are psychological gods.”
* Implies: If someone is not a "psychological god," then they are unfit to govern.
“Peter closes with what appears to be his point: to ‘wake up’ so that THEY won’t be able to use epistemological warfare on you.”
* Implies: If people awaken to the truth, then they can resist epistemological warfare.
“There’s no way to central control anything.”
* Implies: If central control is attempted, then it will fail due to the inherent nature of human systems.
“Freedom under rails IS those very values that support the organism’s life and the pursuit of happiness.”
* Implies: If freedom exists, then it must align with values that sustain life and happiness.
Presuppositions
“Thank you for taking the time to read my screed.”
Presumes the writer’s text is lengthy and potentially difficult to engage with.
“Peter is encyclopedic smart but moves without direction or not one I can discern.”
Presumes Peter has vast knowledge and that direction or purpose should be discernible to an observer.
“Is Peter’s point that the little red hat offers a hidden warning to the coming authoritarianism from Musk/Trump?”
Presumes Peter’s argument has symbolic layers (e.g., “the little red hat”) tied to Musk/Trump and authoritarianism.
“Do you guys not understand that culture assimilates modalities for meme sake?”
Presumes the speakers fail to understand the role of cultural assimilation in spreading ideas (memes).
“Imagine these worthless central planners (WEF/MEXICO/CCP/ROTHSCHILDS/GATES) have existed for generations.”
Presumes these entities are part of a longstanding and coordinated central planning effort.
“The foe you are looking for is neocons and today’s Neocon/democrats/Marxists.”
Presumes the speakers are searching for a specific ideological or political enemy.
“These degenerates are so inept and corrupt all you have to do is wait and they always self-destruct.”
Presumes incompetence and corruption inevitably lead to self-destruction over time.
“Truth always wins in the end.”
Presumes an inherent universal force ensures the triumph of truth over falsehood.
“Do you or Peter think IQ60 people can follow such a discussion?”
Presumes that individuals with low IQ cannot understand complex discussions.
“The average IQ also lacks courage and will stay in their sad existence.”
* Presumes people of average intelligence are cowardly and trapped in misery.
“Socrates was 100% right when he said the ONLY people worthy to rule are psychological gods.”
* Presumes the accuracy of Socrates’ assertion and its relevance to governance today.
“The idea of the German or Italian super race was born of your/Peter’s thinking.”
* Presumes Peter’s ideas are comparable to or connected with historical fascist ideologies.
“There’s no way to central control anything.”
* Presumes central control is inherently impossible.
“The value of the individual must be understood as the smallest minority.”
* Presumes individual rights should take precedence over collective systems.
“Think of the many killed in Mexico for wanting free markets.”
* Presumes there is a historical pattern of violence against advocates of free markets in Mexico.
This analysis reveals a deeply critical perspective, heavily reliant on embedded assumptions about human nature, governance, and societal dynamics. Many arguments rely on sweeping generalizations and presuppose a shared understanding of historical, cultural, and ideological references.
Interesting way to "flood the zone" as a truther. So, what would be the motivation to enlighten us on symbology and epistemology? It's like a Jesuit revelation. I'm noticing a pattern of this very Catholic idea of "Logos" as a way to view the world and become politically "free." This is not what Logos really means. I can see how people might think its revolutionary biblical truth, but is it? I posit that the technocracy itself is a mirage and "Logos freedom" is the delusion.
Yes, I can read Greek, etc. But it's not really about claiming authority. I really like your explanations of narrative, NLP, etc. Suffice to say that Logos has been debated theologically for centuries. It's not a neat and clean concept. I'm glad you feel you have mastered it.
My thesis is that by framing λόγος as our God-given ability to use language to think, reason and communicate, that many Biblical references to Jesus, Christ (λόγος incarnate) can be interpreted in ways that indicate that the application of critical thinking, based on principles (values) e.g. Sermon on the Mount (or "Natural Law") will lead you to God/Truth. I told Ye this isn't necessarily an either/or interpretation of scriptural belief, but may be a both/and interpretation.
The idea that critical thinking leads you to God places a lot of pride in critical thinking. It is also a revived Roman Catholic / Aristotelian idea which might seem a lot more attractive than modernity/technocracy...but you are using Christ as an abstraction and a political solution. This is very much what Jesus said he definitely was not. I'm sure the recent revival of Catholicism will like your thesis. Good luck!
Finger framing: Cinematographers use their fingers to frame a shot, indicating the composition and depth of field. This gesture helps the director and actors understand the visual elements of the scene.
Saw that. I get it, but you may want to choose another hand symbol in the future, people freak out because it has a very offensive meaning to them. The doge info is very interesting, thank you.
In terms of coersion, framing is indeed everything. Thank you for posting this one free.
all podcasts are always free!
Great podcast! I love the idea ‘if-then-equals-because’. These strange leaps of faith are always proclaimed as conclusive evidence when they are actually a weak hypothesis or a fabrication. I would like to add that people describe their hypothesis with a confidence and offer several hypotheses for an observation. For the string above, the devil hand sign is because it’s commonly used for framing (99% confidence), or it’s because it’s a secret symbol to a nefarious religion (1% confidence). For the latter to be given any consideration, we need much more supporting evidence. There can be multiple hypotheses to describe an observation, and the sum of the confidences should equal 100%. I agree that education on these topics helps pierce the veil of propaganda. Really enjoyed the discussion.
if/then=because is usually bounded by faith (an unknowable truth) or law (an agreed-on truth).
Bounding is a key concept, and I was using the hand sign of a cinematographer who uses his hand to visualize and communicate the “bounds” (left and right) of a camera’s point-of-view and angle.
It is a great heuristic to identify logical fallacies. Since you mentioned it on Hrvoje’s podcast, I’ve noticed it pop up everywhere! Thanks for the insights. Cheers!
once I figured it out, I realized why the army thought it was so powerful. On the Ethical Skeptic's website, he lists 3000 logical and scientific fallacies… A huge percentage of them fit the if/then=because linguistic pattern. You can spend your life, memorizing and learning the 3000 logical fallacies, or you can learn to recognize one pattern and the 14 responses… It doesn't seem like much of a choice in the end...
Phrygian pronunciation: frij + ee + uhn. I used to hear about it as the phrygian musical scale. Mostly for jazz and other world music like flamenco but also metal. Metallica's Wherever I May Roam and Megadeth's Symphony of Destruction are examples I found. White Rabbit -Jefterson Airplane, 46&2- Tool... also apparently used in rap.
very interesting, I will have to ask my wife and daughter about this (one is a metalhead, and the other is a musician).
Yeah for Ye! :) Nice to see you and Peter keeping a sense of humor. Nice convo. :)
Really enjoyed this one, also very much looking forward to more on his Jesus theory.
I’ve personally believed for some time that he was trying to expose the system of control that we are currently experiencing.
Start here: https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0057%3Aentry%3Dlo%2Fgos
Hint: AI will translate it for you. h/t E. Michael Jones.
Great interview. EM Burlingame can round out the overall understanding with the eternal war and the Resentfuls versus Responsibles framing. It comports with Christ’s teachings as well.
You and Hvroje have tickled my fancy, despite my long-held contention that Christianity is yet another ancient PSYOP manufactured by the same people you’re railing about here. Anyway, we’re not far apart, and shouldn’t be antagonists:
https://biffogram.substack.com/p/throwback-to-the-future
You and Peter have tickled my fancy, despite my long-held contention that Christianity is yet another ancient PSYOP manufactured by the same people you’re railing about here. Anyway, we’re not far apart, and shouldn’t be antagonists:
https://biffogram.substack.com/p/throwback-to-the-future
Great, great, great Podcast thanks @geopoliticsandempire to make me know Peter Duke!
Among many important points,
finally the issue of the Nukes Hoax is more frequently discussed.
This is very important, the very fact that you were in Kazakhstan in a "nuclear explosion site" shows that there's no intense radiation, just as in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
"Intense and century-lasting radiation" was a narrative they created way AFTER the Hiroshima conventional/fire bombing.
And it was pumped by Hollywood Sci-Fi along with both sides of Cold War Governments.
Radiation you checked in Kazakhstan site you visited could be create by any means, (even a radiotherapy creates radiation in a body), there are also stones and sites with natural radiation.
I've been exposing the nuclear hoax in my YT and social networks about three years ago, since I knew the work of Anders Björkman : My Atomic Bomb Findings.
https://heiwaco.tripod.com/abomb2.htm
It's the reference about the subject.
His webpage has a old-style that can sometimes look a little bit confusing, but Everything is there. It's a treasure.
I met him personally last year, here in the South of France, where we both live. He's a great and very accessible guy. You should do a podcast with him, it would be great. Check it out!
Thanks again for your great work, Geopolitical and Empire.
This was great stuff! Really makes you think, that is so important.
I want to point out that I also already found supporting evidence about Hiroshima!
I have seen this on a video presentation, but he also wrote a book about it.
https://archive.org/details/Hiroshima_revisited/mode/2up
Again question everything, but still like Peter Duke said in the interview, there are logical reasons for doubt.
He also co authored this book, Catherine Austin Fitts put in a afterword.
https://doctors4covidethics.org/mrna-vaccine-toxicity/
Thanks for the tip! https://thedukereport.substack.com/p/exposing-the-real-story-of-hiroshima
Absolutely loved this guys. Keep up the great work!
I thoroughly enjoyed this conversation, thank you to both of you. The suggestions as to where to find further information were also much appreciated.
Great pod , Pete is a good guy and an outside thinker ive followed him for a few years now , his content is top drawer !
This is OK but what strikes me is hearing what appears to be two smart people who are unable to model the future due to lack of knowledge or understanding of current technology. For example LLMs are not AGI. AGI will work fine in the DOGE plan or to replace IQ60 government workers doing worthless tasks. Or better yet removing these worthless red tape altogether. I would like to see ALL IQ60 people doing something other than serving me and annoying me and costing me money at every step. I'm sure Peter who as an art director realizes having an idiotic camera assistant holding your $40k dollar lens is a recipe for disaster. But somehow he cannot make the leap to government offices with the same problem. In that situation WE the people are that lens. Not sure I like to hear a Mexican host who admittedly hates the United States as per his own admission. The guest reasoning and incentive are sus on many levels. I hear under all this that you both feel NOT "in power" and that pisses you fellas off. Let's not mince words; DODGE isn't anything like Secretary of General affairs /Rosevelt was a DEMOCRAT who set up SS. There are many problems with the new Peter Thiel playhouse team. But the goals spoken by the new team is "to knock down government corruption and waste via efficiency". Your arguments give no prospective or options to deal with the Trillion debt or the huge problems with immigration, criminals, judges who don't prosecute criminals, eroding freedom of speech, grooming children with sex, the disenfranchising of the HERO in the entertainment Logos which is systemic etc. You appear to remain in the silo of left echo chamber as far as I can tell. You and your guest are just mental masturbators during this entire discussion. W
Cause-Effect Complex Equivalencies
“LLMs are not AGI. AGI will work fine in the DOGE plan or to replace IQ60 government workers doing worthless tasks.”
Implies: If AGI is implemented, then it will replace low-IQ workers or support the DOGE plan because it is assumed to be fit for these roles.
“Having an idiotic camera assistant holding your $40k lens is a recipe for disaster.”
Implies: If someone lacks intelligence (like the assistant), then trusting them with expensive equipment leads to failure (disaster).
“Somehow he cannot make the leap to government offices with the same problem.”
Implies: If Peter recognizes issues in one context (e.g., managing assistants), then he should also see the analogous problem in government.
“In that situation WE the people are that lens.”
Implies: If government incompetence persists, then it harms the populace in the same way a careless assistant could harm a lens.
“Hearing what appears to be two smart people who are unable to model the future due to lack of knowledge or understanding of current technology.”
Implies: If they lack knowledge or understanding of technology, then they are unable to model the future.
“Your arguments give no prospective or options to deal with the Trillion debt or the huge problems with immigration, criminals, judges who don’t prosecute criminals, eroding freedom of speech, grooming children with sex, the disenfranchising of the HERO in the entertainment Logos which is systemic, etc.”
Implies: If their arguments lack these elements, then they are inadequate or irrelevant.
Presuppositions
“LLMs are not AGI.”
Presumes that the audience understands what LLMs and AGI are and that there is a significant difference between the two.
“AGI will work fine in the DOGE plan or to replace IQ60 government workers doing worthless tasks.”
Presumes that:
The DOGE plan exists and requires AGI.
IQ60 workers are currently employed in “worthless tasks.”
AGI is capable of replacing human inefficiency in government.
“Or better yet removing these worthless red tape altogether.”
Presumes that “red tape” is a universal problem that can and should be removed.
“I would like to see ALL IQ60 people doing something other than serving me and annoying me and costing me money at every step.”
Presumes that people with low IQ are:
Actively annoying and costing the author money.
Performing jobs solely for the service of others.
“Not sure I like to hear a Mexican host who admittedly hates the United States as per his own admission.”
Presumes that the host is Mexican, hates the United States, and has admitted this.
“The guest reasoning and incentive are sus on many levels.”
Presumes that the guest has hidden motives or dubious reasoning.
“You both feel NOT ‘in power’ and that pisses you fellas off.”
Presumes that:
The speakers feel disempowered.
This perceived lack of power frustrates them.
“Let’s not mince words; DODGE isn’t anything like Secretary of General affairs.”
Presumes that there is a comparison being made and that DODGE falls short.
“Roosevelt was a DEMOCRAT who set up SS.”
Presumes that the audience recognizes the historical and political implications of Roosevelt’s party affiliation and his creation of Social Security (SS).
“There are many problems with the new Peter Thiel playhouse team.”
Presumes that Peter Thiel leads a “playhouse team” and that there are identifiable problems with it.
“The goals spoken by the new team is ‘to knock down government corruption and waste via efficiency’.”
Presumes that this is the publicly stated goal of the “new team.”
“You appear to remain in the silo of left echo chamber as far as I can tell.”
Presumes:
The speakers belong to a “left echo chamber.”
Their arguments are limited or repetitive within that context.
“You and your guest are just mental masturbators during this entire discussion.”
Presumes that the discussion lacks productivity or practical application, serving only as intellectual indulgence.
These cause-effect equivalencies and presuppositions illustrate how the writer has embedded their assumptions and beliefs into the argument, often leaving them unexamined or unsupported.
By the length of this, I certainly understand your passion. Let me try to make this simple, and come from a place of love. Linguistically, there are many things that you have written in these two comments that fit the pattern of a "cause-effect complex equivalency". I try to simplify it by calling it an "if/then=because" statement or, even simpler, "if X, then Y, because Z."
It turns out, there are always 14 different ways, at least, to reframe arguments that take this form.
I do not think or believe that IQ is the issue. We are all born asking the question "why?"
As far as my commentary and presentation about the Doge and the red hats, I'm presenting evidence that there is a form of global government that hides in plain sight, and is very old. That's pretty much it. I believe that it can be traced back to Venice, Italy, but it's probably much older than that.
Once I discovered the "cause – effect complex equivalency" pattern, (thank you Mateo Morelli & Robert Dilts) it allowed me to be more discerning about my beliefs. Based on the number of times that you have presented the pattern in your comments, it is clear to me that you would benefit a lot from learning to recognize it, that would allow you to challenge your own beliefs. The entire point of critical thinking is to have the ability to challenge your own beliefs and make yourself better without depending upon others.
Go back and look at what you've written, see if you can find the pattern. If you can't, let me know and I will point one out to you, and show you the 14 different ways it can be attacked.
There are too many presuppositions in this rambling screed for me to take the time to debunk. Perhaps one day, you'll be able to share your mind-reading secrets to benefit all mankind. Peace be with you.
...It all sounds very self-aggrandizing silliness. Thank you for taking the time to read my screed. I'd be happy to share anything you like. I'm sorry that my criticism sounds like mind reading. While Peter is encyclopedic smart he moves without direction or not one I can discern. So mind reading is all I can offer unless you propose a real question. Let me offer one attempt at a self-formulated question that took at least 25min of your discussions. Is Peter's point that the little Red hat offers a hidden warring to the coming authoritarianism from Musk/Trump? After all the talk is Peter’s point that freedom within boundaries isn’t real freedom? That freedom given is authoritarian and the little red hat is the waring? If these are Peter’s points why not just say that and not waste time with all the imaginary circus of Doge hats and 150 years of conspiracy? Do you guys not understand that culture assimilates modalities for meme sake? Ever hear of "rule of thumb"? If you know where it comes from and replace "rule of thumb" with Doge hats you will now see Peter slaying imaginary dragons. Imagine these worthless central planers (WEF/MEXICO/CCP/ROTHCHILDS/GATES) (who can’t change a tire) and have existed for generations to always have seen the ball (NATO). Even more far fetched; imagine that these same people saw the organization way before it existed and have been trying for half a century to install their evil world dominance plans and create such governance (NATO/WEF/etc)? The foe you are looking for is neocons and todays Neocon/democrats/Marxist who are the majority of the deep state garbage pail kids. But let me set everyones mind at ease. We can sleep better knowing these degenerates are so inept and corrupt all you have to do is wait and they always self-destruct any plan they attempt. This due to the larger universal force greater than human tyranny. Truth always wins in the end. Lies and deception need only an act of courage to tumble; but if courage is lacking just wait long enough for evil to rot from within. In short.
Do you or Peter think IQ60 people can follow such a discussion? Those in power or who seek power have somethings in common. They all accept the reality that the people they would rule are idiotic followers who are superstitious and easily scared. The average IQ also lacks courage and will stay in their sad existence until they die eating poison and living in squalor while they worship rulers who promise lies. They also know these poor lesser people cannot be improved and will reproduce at a faster rate than those who are smarter. Aristotle would realize today that we are far from the rational animal. If anything; we’re better defined as the self-destructive animal. No other animal is like us in this manner. So anyone seeking to rule large numbers of people must accept the sad and imperfect task to control the self-destructive animals by deception and often no so reasonable methods using the state and the monopoly of violence controls. When I produce/direct a film I have to think about the majority of my audience not the minority. If you are the type of person who finds happiness in a kind husbandry for the lesser people you have something broken in you. Socrates was 100% right when he said the ONLY people worthy to rule are psychological gods. Peter closes with what appears to be his point i.e to “wake up” so that THEY (the enfeeble bad blob) won’t be able to use epistemological warfare on you (if+then=because). Again you have to ask, do you think any of that has clarity for an IQ60 human? What do you do with them? Kill them? What is Peter's solution for those who cannot create or think at higher levels? I took the time to write this because your discussion exemplifies the very roots of authoritarian killers and taking into account that you live and have elected a degenerate woman communist Spaniard to rule over all of Mexico (including cartels) after killing everyone who opposed communism in Mexico in a country that is happy worshiping WEF/CPP/Bricks lol, but I digress. The idea of the German or Italian super race was born of your/Peter’s thinking. So let me close with a solution for you both modern intellectuals. I speak as a free market libertarian. There no way to central control anything. The value of the individual must be understood as the smallest minority. Therefore any action that violates the rights of an idiot IQ60 must be enforced by the philosophy of law blindly applied to any violating power broker. Think the many killed in Mexico for wanting free market. Thus freedom under rails IS those very values that support the organisms life and the pursuit of happiness. Such is the only freedom possible. Less you think you can have freedom out in space in zero gravity. W
Cause-Effect Complex Equivalencies
“Peter is encyclopedic smart, but he moves without direction or not one I can discern.”
Implies: If Peter has vast knowledge but lacks discernible direction, then his intelligence is rendered ineffective.
“Freedom within boundaries isn’t real freedom.”
Implies: If freedom is constrained, then it is not true freedom.
“Freedom given is authoritarian.”
Implies: If freedom is granted by a higher authority, then it is inherently authoritarian.
“The foe you are looking for is neocons and today’s Neocon/democrats/Marxists who are the majority of the deep state garbage pail kids.”
Implies: If one is searching for the root of societal problems, then it lies with neoconservatives, Democrats, and Marxists in the “deep state.”
“We can sleep better knowing these degenerates are so inept and corrupt all you have to do is wait and they always self-destruct.”
Implies: If those in power are corrupt and incompetent, then their plans will eventually fail on their own.
“Lies and deception need only an act of courage to tumble.”
Implies: If someone acts courageously, then lies and deception can be defeated.
“If courage is lacking, just wait long enough for evil to rot from within.”
Implies: If no one acts against evil, then time alone will lead to its decay.
“The average IQ also lacks courage and will stay in their sad existence until they die eating poison and living in squalor.”
Implies: If someone has low intelligence, then they are condemned to a life of fear, poor choices, and misery.
“Anyone seeking to rule large numbers of people must accept the sad and imperfect task to control the self-destructive animals by deception.”
Implies: If someone wishes to govern the masses, then they must resort to deception to manage their destructive tendencies.
“The ONLY people worthy to rule are psychological gods.”
* Implies: If someone is not a "psychological god," then they are unfit to govern.
“Peter closes with what appears to be his point: to ‘wake up’ so that THEY won’t be able to use epistemological warfare on you.”
* Implies: If people awaken to the truth, then they can resist epistemological warfare.
“There’s no way to central control anything.”
* Implies: If central control is attempted, then it will fail due to the inherent nature of human systems.
“Freedom under rails IS those very values that support the organism’s life and the pursuit of happiness.”
* Implies: If freedom exists, then it must align with values that sustain life and happiness.
Presuppositions
“Thank you for taking the time to read my screed.”
Presumes the writer’s text is lengthy and potentially difficult to engage with.
“Peter is encyclopedic smart but moves without direction or not one I can discern.”
Presumes Peter has vast knowledge and that direction or purpose should be discernible to an observer.
“Is Peter’s point that the little red hat offers a hidden warning to the coming authoritarianism from Musk/Trump?”
Presumes Peter’s argument has symbolic layers (e.g., “the little red hat”) tied to Musk/Trump and authoritarianism.
“Do you guys not understand that culture assimilates modalities for meme sake?”
Presumes the speakers fail to understand the role of cultural assimilation in spreading ideas (memes).
“Imagine these worthless central planners (WEF/MEXICO/CCP/ROTHSCHILDS/GATES) have existed for generations.”
Presumes these entities are part of a longstanding and coordinated central planning effort.
“The foe you are looking for is neocons and today’s Neocon/democrats/Marxists.”
Presumes the speakers are searching for a specific ideological or political enemy.
“These degenerates are so inept and corrupt all you have to do is wait and they always self-destruct.”
Presumes incompetence and corruption inevitably lead to self-destruction over time.
“Truth always wins in the end.”
Presumes an inherent universal force ensures the triumph of truth over falsehood.
“Do you or Peter think IQ60 people can follow such a discussion?”
Presumes that individuals with low IQ cannot understand complex discussions.
“The average IQ also lacks courage and will stay in their sad existence.”
* Presumes people of average intelligence are cowardly and trapped in misery.
“Socrates was 100% right when he said the ONLY people worthy to rule are psychological gods.”
* Presumes the accuracy of Socrates’ assertion and its relevance to governance today.
“The idea of the German or Italian super race was born of your/Peter’s thinking.”
* Presumes Peter’s ideas are comparable to or connected with historical fascist ideologies.
“There’s no way to central control anything.”
* Presumes central control is inherently impossible.
“The value of the individual must be understood as the smallest minority.”
* Presumes individual rights should take precedence over collective systems.
“Think of the many killed in Mexico for wanting free markets.”
* Presumes there is a historical pattern of violence against advocates of free markets in Mexico.
This analysis reveals a deeply critical perspective, heavily reliant on embedded assumptions about human nature, governance, and societal dynamics. Many arguments rely on sweeping generalizations and presuppose a shared understanding of historical, cultural, and ideological references.
Interesting way to "flood the zone" as a truther. So, what would be the motivation to enlighten us on symbology and epistemology? It's like a Jesuit revelation. I'm noticing a pattern of this very Catholic idea of "Logos" as a way to view the world and become politically "free." This is not what Logos really means. I can see how people might think its revolutionary biblical truth, but is it? I posit that the technocracy itself is a mirage and "Logos freedom" is the delusion.
It’s Greek. Catch up. https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.04.0057:entry%3Dlo/gos
Lol. I'm Greek. Deal with it.
does your claim to authority include an ability to speak and/or read the language and understand the 5 pages of definitions of the word λόγος?
Yes, I can read Greek, etc. But it's not really about claiming authority. I really like your explanations of narrative, NLP, etc. Suffice to say that Logos has been debated theologically for centuries. It's not a neat and clean concept. I'm glad you feel you have mastered it.
My thesis is that by framing λόγος as our God-given ability to use language to think, reason and communicate, that many Biblical references to Jesus, Christ (λόγος incarnate) can be interpreted in ways that indicate that the application of critical thinking, based on principles (values) e.g. Sermon on the Mount (or "Natural Law") will lead you to God/Truth. I told Ye this isn't necessarily an either/or interpretation of scriptural belief, but may be a both/and interpretation.
The idea that critical thinking leads you to God places a lot of pride in critical thinking. It is also a revived Roman Catholic / Aristotelian idea which might seem a lot more attractive than modernity/technocracy...but you are using Christ as an abstraction and a political solution. This is very much what Jesus said he definitely was not. I'm sure the recent revival of Catholicism will like your thesis. Good luck!
I was also wondering about the devil hand sign, thanks for bringing that up.
Finger framing: Cinematographers use their fingers to frame a shot, indicating the composition and depth of field. This gesture helps the director and actors understand the visual elements of the scene.
Saw that. I get it, but you may want to choose another hand symbol in the future, people freak out because it has a very offensive meaning to them. The doge info is very interesting, thank you.
It's gotta be unintentional, come on, lol
I sure hope so, lol.