Archive for June, 2014

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

The Wright Perspective: On Truth

Posted June 18, 2014 By John C Wright

My latest column, with a shiny new graphic, is up at EveryJoe.

http://www.everyjoe.com/2014/06/18/politics/leftists-think-truth-is-not-true/

It is crucial to the worldview and self esteem of the Left that they regard themselves, despite all evidence to the contrary, as being morally and intellectually superior to their honorable opposition on the Right. A century long nightmare of the mass deaths, wars, broken lives, mass thefts, mass addiction to lying propaganda, and spiritual chaos spread by this political neurosis makes the act of total mental dishonesty needed to maintain this stance of presumptive intellectual superiority both difficult and comical to maintain, yet by heroic effort the Left manages to do so.

It is because they sacrifice everything else on this altar. Their self esteem, or, to call it by its right name, the Sin of Pride, absorbs all their attention and overthrows all other scruples, hesitations and sentiments. They are desperate to maintain their illusory and inflated self-image. Because they are desperate, they are shameless.

The prime evidence of their shamelessness is in the attitude, present in all writings of the Left that venture into philosophical areas, of disdain and dismissal toward the truth. I do not mean that they are untruthful. They are, but that is a side effect. I mean that on a fundamental and philosophical level, there is no place in their worldview for the concept that truth is objective.

In the bleary and psychedelic and flaccid mental world of the Left, truth is a matter of consensus, like the rules of grammar, or a matter of personal preference, like your taste in ice cream.

For them, truth is not true.

Read the rest here: http://www.everyjoe.com/2014/06/18/politics/leftists-think-truth-is-not-true/

Read the remainder of this entry »

3 Comments so far. Join the Conversation
Filed in Musings, Only Posting a Link

A Letter from Catholic Vote

Posted June 16, 2014 By John C Wright

I heard about this outrage as I was driving home from my dayjob, and found this letter in my inbox. I pass it along without comment, since rage no doubt would make any comments untoward.

For those of you unfamiliar with the Church Christ Himself founded, it is hierarchical after the fashion of the Jewish priesthood, so that it is not an acceptable practice to instruct one’s own bishops and leaders as to their conduction on matter of the Catholic faith. Indeed, in a civilized society, it would be grounds for scourging:

Dear CV Friend,

Nancy Pelosi has done it again.

In news this morning, Pelosi is demanding that her Catholic
bishop not attend the March for Marriage this Thursday in
Washington, DC!

In a letter to Archbishop Cordileone, Pelosi described the March
for Marriage as “venom masquerading as virtue.”

Wow.

This is the same Nancy Pelosi who never wants her bishop to tell
her anything.

Thankfully, San Francisco’s Archbishop won’t be intimidated by
powerful politicians like Nancy Pelosi. Archbishop Cordileone
understands that marriage isn’t about hate or discrimination, or
any of the phony claims made by Pelosi and her anti-marriage
allies.

The defense of marriage is about a simple idea: preserving the
time-honored institution that has served healthy human cultures
for millennia.

So we came up with a simple idea…

Let’s send Nancy Pelosi a message: Let’s tell Nancy Pelosi that
her letter motivated us to cover the costs of several bus loads
of marchers. Then we will send a letter to Pelosi telling her
what her letter to Archbishop Cordileone inspired!

Can you chip in $5 or $10 to help CV sponsor buses this week for
the March for Marriage?

Donate here: https://www.catholicvote.org/donate/

Just $5 from a big group of CV members will help us sponsor
several buses full of marchers.

Please tell all your friends to chip in too. The more the
merrier!

Brian

P.S. I hope to alert the National Organization for Marriage of
our contribution in support of the March for Marriage by
tomorrow. Please help us today with a tax-deductible gift to the
CatholicVote.org Education Fund.
www.catholicvote.org/c3donate?=T2B

66 Comments so far. Join the Conversation
Filed in Announcement

My Material Contribution to Materialism

Posted June 15, 2014 By John C Wright

Having met three and four and five avowed members of that subspecies, no doubt closely related to mankind, called Reductionist Materialists, Homo Sapiens Reductio Automata, I am exasperated beyond measure that none of them can frame a proper argument to defend, or even explain his views.

My patience, albeit legendary, has finally burst all bounds of reason. Fortunately, this time, patience bursts these bounds inward into the very interior of reason.

In a spirit then of noblest military courtesy to fallen foes, and, in this case, foe unable to mount steed and couch lance, allow me to instruct the Materialist how to frame his argument.

First and foremost, one should define one’s terms.

Read the remainder of this entry »

58 Comments so far. Join the Conversation
  • sator posted on June 25, 2014
    But then logical consistency by what canon? I don't think you can trust any external canon of Logic if everything…
  • John Hutchins posted on June 25, 2014
    On that topic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UemhCsaeGgc Especially the part: "Everything that can happen does happen" after just saying that the "laws of…
  • sator posted on June 25, 2014
    Oh my God... Uncle Screwtape wasnt jocking when he talked about the materialist magician. Perfect magical thinking + panphisicalism. A…
Filed in Reasonings

Sci Phi (Science Fiction and Philosophy) A Transhuman Chat!

Posted June 14, 2014 By John C Wright

The first interview on TRANSHUMAN AND SUBHUMAN for the sci phi show is up
at

http://sciphishow.com/sps415/

I wince that I mentioned Scarlett O’Hara as an example of a strong female character who does not physically beat anyone up, when, in fact, the scene where she shoots a Yankee soldier in the face with a pistol is the best one in the movie. Sigh.

I do like that the engineers at Sci Phi cleared up my voice to make me sound more human. In the interests of full disclosure, you should be informed of what my voice REALLY sounds like. This following is from my now famous speech given when I resigned from the science fiction writer’s guild:

21 Comments so far. Join the Conversation
Filed in Announcement

Strength, Weakness, Meekness

Posted June 6, 2014 By John C Wright

Patrick Richardson pens a spirited defense of manhood in an article well worth reading:

http://www.miamiok.com/commentary/article_585ba993-8b79-5db3-92b7-bccb3c1114c4.html

I agree with what he says but say he does not say enough. Feminism is not merely the enemy of masculinity but also the foe femininity, because it is the foe of romance. Mr. Richardson is right to regret the loss of chivalry, but he does not say where it is to be found and regained.

There is only one place chivalry can be found: in the Cathedral, whence it came in times gone by. Anyone who looks into the matter will soon discover that one cannot have chivalry without Christianity just as one cannot have Romance without Rome.

All pagan societies worship and revere strength.

And, by all means, let us include among the worshipers of raw strength those postchristians like Karl Marx who borrow Christian ideals without the only metaphysical foundations which can possibly make sense of them.

That is why the question of ‘STRONG female characters’ is so strong in the minds of the new pagans. That is why all this jabber from Left and Right about ’empowerment’. Feminists despise femininity because they think it makes them look weak.

Anyone who reveres strength despises weakness.

I say Christianity is unique because not even the other monotheistic religion, Judaism, nor the monotheistic heresies, Deism, Gnosticism and Mohammedanism, have the monotheistic God in a position of weakness, born in a stable and dying on a cross. Only we saw our God humiliated. Hence only we have a logical reason to revere and respect the humble.
Read the remainder of this entry »

57 Comments so far. Join the Conversation
Filed in Apologetics, Musings

The Infinite Brat

Posted June 6, 2014 By John C Wright

Sarah Hoyt has a simply brilliant article up on her journal: http://accordingtohoyt.com/2014/06/06/the-victimy-victim-victimized-competition/

She lists the several reasons and drawback to claiming to be victim while living in the most just, peaceful, prosperous, lazy, fat and happy nation in all human history since the Fall of Saturn and the exile of Adam. One drawback is that perpetual victims give up on attempting to be virtuous and hardworking. The only thing they are taught to think and to do to get ahead in life is roll in the mud shrieking and whining for attention, kicking their legs in the air, and threatening violence they are rarely in a position to carry out. They are not just brats, but brats without boundary, reason, pause, or cease. They are infinite brats, because the whole of the endless universe is so very unfair to them.

The Infinite Brats are eternal losers. They do not want to be winners, because all winners are cheaters, so they adopt the behaviors which make them losers.

Read the remainder of this entry »

37 Comments so far. Join the Conversation
Filed in Musings, Only Posting a Link

Case for the Prosecution

Posted June 5, 2014 By John C Wright

Part of our ongoing, and perhaps endless MARS NEEDS WOMEN discussion.

The discussion took an interesting turn, when a reader asked me about an atheist argument in favor of moral objectivity.

Having been an atheist who was convinced of the objective nature of moral law, and who for that reason was puzzled that my hated enemies the Christians somehow came to the correct conclusion based on what I took to be their superstition and irrational worldview while many or most of my allies among the paragons of logic called atheism could not, I certainly have an argument in favor of the proposition.

So this, in a rather rough form, is what I would give as the argument for the Prosecution in the case of Mars v Craig.

Read the remainder of this entry »

97 Comments so far. Join the Conversation
Filed in Reasonings

A Motion For Discovery

Posted June 5, 2014 By John C Wright

Part of an ongoing conversation. A reader with the pseudonymous name of False Keraptis replies to our ongoing MARS NEEDS WOMEN hypothetical with the following:

First, I move for discovery. I’m going to need the foundational texts of Martian Civilization (if that’s too contentious to define, then just give me the 100 most common texts), and a translator, or better yet, some kind of Arisian mind-alteration that gives me fluency in the tongues of Mars.

The Martian has a harem, appreciates the art of dance, calls himself warlord, and looks like Elvis. He’s pretty human-like. I think it should be easy enough to prove the Martian moral code indicts his act of aggression, or at least that Martians are similar enough to humans to be bound to a similar morality by both genetics and game theory.

Read the remainder of this entry »

104 Comments so far. Join the Conversation
Filed in Reasonings

Quote of the Day. Now with Paint Chips!

Posted June 4, 2014 By John C Wright

From Larry Correia, International Lord of Hate:

Somebody suggested [as an alternate term for Social Justice Warriors, SJW] Perpetually Outraged Cockroaches, but that abbreviates to POC, and that is already being used for People Of Color, which is the supposedly not racist version of Colored People which is extremely racist. Got it?

I seriously hate the term People of Color. I think it is a ridiculous term. It lumps vast groups of humanity together into “NOT WHITE”. So, a Fillipino is the same as an Indian is the same as an Australian Aborigine is the same as a Ghanan because they are all browner than an American white guilt liberal?

My color is Warm Beige (according to these Home Depot Paint Chips) but I’m going to mock any idiot who says I’m a PoC, because that’s just f*cking stupid.

7 Comments so far. Join the Conversation
Filed in Wisdom

More on Selfish Gene Theory

Posted June 4, 2014 By John C Wright

In this space, in recent days, we have been paying homage to the Z-grade yet schlocktastic sciffy movie MARS NEEDS WOMEN by posting as many pictures of Yvonne Craig as possible. I have also, between pictures, been discussing and debating whether or not morality is objective rather than conventional.

By objective, I mean the principle of ‘do as you would be done by’ applies to everyone, and is always and everywhere a valid standard for discriminating morally licit from illicit. I do not mean all applications of of all rules have the same force and effect in all circumstances, especially where two principles conflict. Conventional means that the principle only applies by convention, use or tradition, that is, it applies only to your own kin, comrades, clan, tribe, nation, or race, but not to others’.

Now, the most common and most persuasive argument an atheist or materialist can make in favor of universal morality is a genetic argument. The argument is that, as a matter of pure game theory, any races and breeds that develops a gene which imposes an instinct for altruism toward other members of one’s own bloodline, will, as a matter of course, have a definite statistical advantage in the lottery of Darwinian survival, and will come to outnumber those races and breeds that do not.

The argument is that the purely blind and selfish drive of the genes we carry in us therefore mesmerizes us with an instinct to altruism and self-sacrifice which is not in our immediate self-interest, but unintentionally serves the self-interest of the family, clan, tribe, breed, bloodline, and race.

The argument is that this mesmeric spell makes us hallucinate that there is such a thing as a moral code we are bound to obey, but whether this hallucination is true or false, it serves the blind and selfish reasons of the parasites called genes dwelling inside us, whom we much, willy-nilly, serve and obey.

Putting this argument to the test, I asked a hypothetical question about the following rule of behavior:  “Abducting Nubile Young Woman to Serve as Concubines, Dancing Girls, or Breeding Stock is bad.” Is this a rule that bind only those who share the non-abduction gene, or does it bind all men, including those with not one gene in common with us? I used the hypothetical example of an abductor who is a Man from Mars. He is not of our tribe, nation, or race. He is, at least during the Obama Administration NASA days, beyond the reach of any reasonable expectation of retaliation from Earthlings.

Is it objectively wrong for the Martian Warlord to abduct a luscious Earthgirl like Yvonne Craig to his horrible harem of terror atop Olympus Mons? Or is it only wrong because the Selfish Gene says it is wrong? Is it wrong objectively, or only genetically?

(Of course I mean to use this as an excuse to post more pictures!)

Read the remainder of this entry »

48 Comments so far. Join the Conversation
Filed in Reasonings

The Unexpected Enlightenment

Posted June 4, 2014 By John C Wright

To any new readers, welcome. Thank you for visiting my humble blog. Anyone sharing my worldview or taste in books, I strongly suspect you will greatly enjoy the novels of my beautiful and talented wife, who writes under her pen name (and maiden name) L. Jagi Lamplighter.

Here is her most recent book. I drew the interior illustrations with my own pen!

1 Rachel final mid-size

Link to first four chapters:
http://www.ljagilamplighter.com/chapter-one-the-treacherous-art-of-making-friends/

Link to Amazon:
http://www.amazon.com/dp/1937051870/

2 Comments so far. Join the Conversation
Filed in Announcement

The Wright Perspective: Conservatives are From Mars, Leftists are From Venus

Posted June 4, 2014 By John C Wright

Conservatives are From Mars, Leftists are From Venus

My latest is up at EveryJoe:

How angels arrange their affairs is unknown. We humans have only two approaches to the puzzles and battles of life: The first is from Mars and the second is from Venus.

It is Martian to confront a problem with blunt speech and unsparing honesty, and yet to welcome unsparing bluntness in return. It is Martian to attack the enemy at the strongest point of the line, and yet to treat a fallen foe with courtesy. It is Martian to command without backtalk, and to obey without complaint. The Mars approach is most useful when confronting problems that require courage, force, majesty, dispassionate intellect. Results matter; intentions don’t.

It is Venusian to negotiate around problems so as not to provoke a clash of wills. Venus seeks compromise, makes sacrifices and expects sympathy in return. Speech is indirect, diplomatic, because feelings are delicate, easily bruised. Venus avoids ultimatums, and uses speech to seek out secret motives. A Venusian does not call adversaries enemies, but patients, meant to be healed of their ignorance and fear.

The Venusian approach is never used between equals.

Read the whole thing.

20 Comments so far. Join the Conversation
Filed in Musings, Only Posting a Link

Mars Needs Women; Earth Needs Men

Posted June 3, 2014 By John C Wright

A follow up to an earlier post found here: http://www.scifiwright.com/2014/05/mars-need-women/

Let me add a leg to the hypothetical in my earlier post, to ask to anyone willing to answer it the following question. If morality is based on genetics, or based on instinct, or based on  a game-theory situation where each player is rationally concerned with maximizing his winnings after repeated iterations of a ‘prisoner’s dilemma’ situation, then does morality apply in a case where there is no genes in common, no instinct shared, and no repeated iterations?

Read the remainder of this entry »

60 Comments so far. Join the Conversation
Filed in Reasonings

United Underworld Literary Movement Manifesto

Posted June 3, 2014 By John C Wright

A follow up to a previous post: Well, in the last 24 hours,  I’ve had at least fourteen people write me and ask to be members or minions of the Evil League of Evil, Gun Molls and Henchmen, and one guy wanted to be a Evil Janitor of Evil in the Lair.

It seems as if people would rather be Evil than Leftist. Ponder the irony of that for a moment.

At this rate, we can start a new Science Fiction Writer’s guild to compete with SFWA. I have already designed a new heraldic emblem and logo:

United Underworld

Read the remainder of this entry »

78 Comments so far. Join the Conversation
Filed in Fancies

The Evil League of Evil is Given Pious Advice

Posted June 2, 2014 By John C Wright

A certain Mr Damien Walter whose books I have never read (perhaps because he has written none) makes bold to advise me how to conduct my professional career as a science fiction author. The comments are somewhere hereabouts.

“I think Correia did two things. The first was appeal for votes on the basis of a perceived liberal bias in the genre. That was the basis of his campaign, a protest vote against liberal influence. That was divisive and did a lot to spark the backlash he’s still feeling. Secondly, and this is going to be much more damaging for him longterm, he allowed himself to become very closely associated to Vox Day in the process. Ultimately people do judge others by their associations, and both Larry Correia and John C Wright have made very public declarations of support for Day, that I fear both will deeply regret in the long run.

I’m quite serious about my suggestion by the way. I think if Correia wrote publicly to support the new diversity in the genre, and apologised for any perception he was campaigning against it, that might help him a lot. Remember, we won’t know who missed out on shortlist places until after the awards. At that point Correia et al could find the response to them gets much, much worse even than when the story broke.”

Of the suggestion that Mr. Correia should apologize for the perception in passersby that he was or was not campaigning against Deracination, or Divarication, or Dipsomania or whateverthehell Mr Walter is talking about, other voices than mine must speak, since I am choked to silence with contumely.

Once I was trapped in a room by a opium-addled drunk who was hallucinating about trashcans, but I see no need to apologize about what other people perceive, particularly when they damage their organs of perception either with strong spirits, opiates, or the far more addictive spirit of partisanship.

I am confident Mr Correia can speak for himself, with more energy and patience than I can muster.

But I must speak up on my own behalf. If I may say it without offending Mr. Day, when did I ever publicly express support for him, or express anything like it?

Vox Day is not a nervous schoolgirl trying to break into a highschool clique, nor is he running for public office, NOR HAS ANYONE ACTUALLY ASKED ME MY OPINION ABOUT ANYTHING VOX DAY HAS EVER SAID, ergo the deduction of this Walter creature to know my thoughts on the matter would be insulting, if he were of the stature to be worth noticing long enough to take offense.

It is now considered not just to be a public declaration of support but indeed a very public declaration of support for someone to say ‘I decline to heed or to echo malign and false accusations against a man I hardly know, as it is none of my business, and I hate falsehoods’?

Vox Day and I have a professional relationship. He is a publisher of some of my work. It is a situation we both find to our mutual benefit.

The same hour Vox Day and I signed our contact, a small, shrill,  cowardly and mentally backward group of anonymous strangers and dank gargoyles wrote me incoherent and gargling notes expressing unsightly yet pathological hatred toward Vox Day for reasons that never were made clear.

(I am under the impression that he had offended their political cult dogmas by not allowing an arrogant leftwingy loudmouth named Jemisin to upbraid him in public, but manfully returned blow for blow. This is apparently an unforgivable sin, even though it picks no man’s pocket and breaks no man’s leg.)

But it is none of my business either way; I am not the father confessor of Vox Day, nor the father of N.K. Jemisin. I can neither hear his confession nor send her to her room without supper. The Morlocks knew this. The Morlocks were crowding my inbox merely to display their political credentials, that is, to pat themselves on the back for supporting Big Brother by dumping insincere ritualized hate on Emmanuel Goldstein.

I answered these uncouth Jacobin sans-culottes with the back of my hand, as any gentleman should do.

How is that a show of support for him? I just wanted the drooling and poop-flinging yahoos off my lawn.

Read the remainder of this entry »

153 Comments so far. Join the Conversation
Filed in Fancies
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »