Ridiculous Stories

Jesus is so great.  I want to just stare at His divine manliness when He is only in His wonderful True Loincloth.  Every good man should bend over and give themselves totally to Jesus, showing that they are prepared to accept His Grace by making sure to spread their ch—oh; Ists.  

Anyway, why are all human cells built so that they will die?  And all the cells making up other organisms too?  Every single one.  Why is there this built-in clock that will terminate the cell?  

We have talked about how apoptosis is a complete contradiction to the fantasy--the self-flattery; the flattery of the self--of genes being selfish.  Calling genes selfish seems true and scientific, but it is actually flattery, which is why humans like it so much.  For a human being, to call their genes “selfish” is to say “the design for me had a rough and tumble contest with the designs for lots of other things, and the design for me was so good that it won that contest.”  Humans naturally very much like this.  

Many humans did—and many still do—like the idea of “you have a super sky daddy who has a plan for your life and loves you.”  In the same way, many people like the idea of “your genes won a really tough competition and it was determined they are the best.”  These are very similar delusions, and it is quite appropriate that they are both found in the Christian Era.  

(Along with that, consider how very deeply and passionately some White people are committed to saying they are anti-racist, by which they are actually pro-racist against White people.  To act like, “I am part of a legacy of oppression,” sounds bad and like you are expressing something bad about yourself.  However, to do this is to say, “I am built of components so strong that they could have been oppressive.”  [That isn't true: White people, as a group, are so drawn to universalism that they are mortally vulnerable to philosophies of it i.e. Jesusianism.  Many of them will literally say they believe in an invisible man in the sky who gave everyone universalism.  Nothing is universal, but Whites crave that idea so much that are drawn powerfully toward even stories of it being true--just because they like universalism so much, they will believe BS if it is attached to a story about universalism.  Like some trashy slut who will suck any six dicks for a hit of meth, White people are willing to go to extremes for stories of universalism.  Imagine some teacher who works in the inner city, sure that eventually test scores will equalize between the races when enough resources get devoted and Whites stop engaging in imaginary racism.  The imaginary nonsense of universalism was disproven a year after the Usican Civil War, a generation after that again, three generations after that, and still Whites think if you show enough movies of White chicks eager to sleep with Denzel Washington universalism will happen.  Nothing is sacred; Whites are willing to offer White women for gang rape just to affirm stories of universalism.  They will destroy themselves for that empty promise of maybe getting a hit next Tuesday.  Other human groups are not so weak.]  It is in truth narcissistic and rude putting oneself forward as so strong, and more so when one pretends s/he is doing it altruistically rather than selfishly.  Expressing "I am built of strong stuff," and like many people today doing it over and over again while pretending to be being altruistic by apologizing for what you have done, is actually selfish; self-glorifying.  That flattery is why so many people so often say, "I am so tough I have wronged you."  It seems weird; one can think "Why does this idiot spend so much time saying s/he sucks?"  Really, though, people doing that are flattering themself: "I am tough stuff."  That is why so many White people talk about how bad are the things some or all White people have supposedly done--because it is a way of bragging about how tough are the genes from your group.  Many cling to that representation because they don't want to be thought of as weak/normal.  The seeming insanity of many self-demeaning White people is really their stubborn insistence that their group is mighty.  The annoying narcissists don't want to hear about how their people were actually victims who were not nearly so, or not at all, bad, because that is saying that their group was not so tough.  

To not focus on this supposed badness, or to say that any hypothetical oppression did not exist or was not significant, is viewed subconsciously by such people as an insult because it is to them like saying, “You are not built of strong enough stuff to have been so oppressive.”  That is the reason for the seemingly strange emotional passion for many causes: people don’t know it, but they are putting themselves forward as being inherently strong and do not like it when you unknowingly suggest they aren’t.  

(For an easy example, use the Amerindian story.  Think of how saying, "I'm so sorry they stole what you had" is rude braggadocio disguised as an apology.  Saying "I am guilty for being related to robbers who kicked too much ass" is self-glorifying, whereas saying "I am related to people who got robbed and raped" is different.  Very different.  Many Whites cling to their stories of "descended from victimizers" because of this.  When you try to get them to stop being rude, stop it with all the self-glorifying BS, stop bragging, they get mad and defensive and think of you as [maybe call you] a racist.)  

To be seen being against an older White male politician for being a heartless oppressor is often truly an expression that someone’s genetics are built well enough that they could have been oppressive.  Again, self-glorification, braggery, disguised as apology.  To consider that one is a member of a group that has been subjugated and used for the production of resources is viewed as an insult of that person’s genes)  

However, genes are not selfish.  They are components of the environment.  That is why they form organisms designed specifically to respirate only the components within that environment.  It is why they die, because when they die what they are doing is cycling the materials used by one body back through the environment.  Genes are parts of environments, and it is narcissism to conclude that they are parts of independent organisms trying to survive for their own sake.  

“Anthropocentric” does not just mean “shaped like a person” in the physical sense.  What it means is that things are posited which are human-centered in the physical as well as in the mental sense.  Such people tend to believe that the way they think is comprehensive and would be desired by all thinkers, much as many White people think that the way they behave and the things they want are comprehensive and desired by all people.  For example, thinking that there is an all powerful God who looks like a human (or who was literally a human, as in Jesus) is anthropocentric.  This manifestation of anthropocentrism is now very popular to recognize.  

However, far less popular to recognize is that it is similarly anthropocentric to say that things apply to reality which fit with human minds.  For example, the very popular story of a the beginning—the “genesis” or the “big bang”—that everything, Earth included, was created between 7000 and 20 billion years ago.  There was a point when 7000 years seemed very long, and now 20 billion years seems very long.  Both stories, though, are stupid.  Those stories are anthropocentric.  

Think about 20 billion years, which seems very large to most people now.  20 billion is 20,000,000,000.  7000 is, well, 7000.  Thus 7000 is less than 0.001% of 20 billion.  However, 20 billion is less than 0.001% of 763 septillion.  

Consider what those look like.  763 septillion is 763,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.  20 billion is as aforementioned 20,000,000,000.  20 billion is much less than 0.001% of 763 septillion.  Fantasies of there being a beginning can look very impressive and large when they are created, but they become less impressive and big-looking when time has passed.  See how childish and tiny 7000 appears now?  Imagine that 20 billion, in a few years, seems just as childish and tiny.  

Eventually, minds come to be that are sturdy enough to not need that big number—to not need the fantasy of a beginning.  No less than in any other dissonance is it pleasant to be constituted such as to conceive of a verse that lasts longer than whatever a popular big number is currently.  Human beings who really need the fantasy often defend it vigorously.  

Think of a human in the 13^th century C.E. feeling that he is correct for torturing someone to death because that person has denied the Christ.  The certitude of the torturer that s/he is correct is not because that person is thinking rationally, but because that person is defending something that person needs.  Something they need.  The anger, the passion, the emotion, that some people show when discussing political issues can seem confusing, but that reaction happens because those people feel like they are defending themselves.  You can think, “Oh, it’s just this talk about ______,” but you would be wrong.  To the person in question, what they are talking about is of great importance.  When someone else tries to counter a stupid media narrative that is important to that person, the defender of that stupid narrative will respond as though they are being personally attacked (insulted, not punched.  Usually).  It will seem very confusing.  One can wonder, “Why does he get so worked up about abortion/gun rights/border/taxes/social welfare/etc.?”  Because they are protecting a narrative like it is something they very much need.  That is why people will believe ridiculous stories.