The first world and science – victims to the unconstrained vision?
Hello, I am new here, but I have been following Chris on Covid-19 since early March of 2020. As we are all aware and concerned, the sheer ignorance to empiricism and the scientific method has created a political climate so hostile as to be career suicide to even publish a paper stating the significant benefits of HCQ or Ivermectin. What has brought about this anti-intellectual thinking? What has brought about this culture of anti-common sense and anti-wisdom?
I’m not sure how many of you have heard of Thomas Sowell, but he is an economist and libertarian that has written dozens of books (with some of his most recent being done at 80 years old – he is 90 now and is as sharp as he was in his 40s) about various different subjects related to the economy, politics, intellectuals, and society. Notable ones would be ‘A Conflict of Visions’, ‘Basic Economics’, ‘Intellectuals and Society’, and ‘Discrimination and Disparities’. All of these books are chocked to the brim with empirical evidence and follow the scientific method. I highly recommend reading them, or watching his interviews with the Hoover Institute on youtube about them.
I want to bring up ‘A Conflict of Visions’ because I can’t help but notice this anti-intellectual ‘bad science’ behavior stemming from the unconstrained vision that Sowell describes in the book. The book speaks of 2 visions of human nature. The constrained vision, and the unconstrained vision.
The constrained vision sees human nature is filled with inherent and fundamental faults, such as selfishness, greed, envy, etc. It acknowledges the limitations of our nature, and that there exist no perfect solutions – only trade-offs. It sees the centralization of power as the greatest danger, and calls for the implementation of institutions designed to deter bad behaviors.
The unconstrained vision sees human nature as perfect, that becomes corrupt as a result of society. That a select few ‘enlightened’ individuals who understand this ‘truth’ have a moral obligation to guide society to this perfection. That human nature and human experience can be engineered to perfection by force.
The book goes into great details about how these 2 visions see the world – from law, war, economics, social policy, and even science.
The problem here with the unconstrained vision, is it makes assumptions about human nature that have no evidence. That equality of outcome is the moral imperative. But if the data shows otherwise, the data is simply thrown out because it doesn’t fit the vision. This is where Covid-19 and HCQ, Ivermectin and the ‘politicized’ science come in. All of these bad studies that came out trying to disprove HCQ efficacy seem to be from (unconstrained) scientists that wish to rewrite the narrative, simply for the sake of discrediting the ideas of old. And the reason is simple – wisdom is ‘outdated’ according to them. It’s all about what is ‘new’ for the sake of newness. That’s why they are still trying to prove Remdesivir’s efficacy. Remdesivir is new, Ivermectin and HCQ are not. Therefore that which is old is against the march to progress. The progress of social equality and the perfection of human nature.
Similarly, in ‘Intellectuals and Society’ we see countless examples of intellectuals speaking on matters they have no business speaking of. They acknowledge the complexities of society, yet assume they have the knowledge to understand it all. Yet none of these intellectuals have the consequential knowledge of the policies they are proposing. They just assume to know more than the common person on the ground. They right off experience and wisdom as ‘old’ ideas that are against the march to progress. In their minds, the conclusions they have drawn are as obvious as daylight. They cannot imagine someone else coming to a different set of conclusions on the complexities of reality. So they just assume you are either stupid, ignorant, or intentionally malicious. This is Western Science and Media 101. It doesn’t even matter if you show them the data that disproves the assumptions, they will simply dismiss the evidence as being wrong. According to the intellectual, he crafts a theory first. Then he looks for data to support the theory. Once the numbers show him what he wants to see, his job is done – QED and all. He has no interest in going further than that. That is the essence of bad science that we are seeing in the world today.
I highly recommend the two interviews on ‘A Conflict of Visions’ and ‘Intellectuals and Society’. They are a must watch for anyone that is interested in empiricism, and understanding the internal motivations of the insanity we are witnessing today.
And the reason is simple – wisdom is ‘outdated’ according to them. It’s all about what is ‘new’ for the sake of newness. That’s why they are still trying to prove Remdesivir’s efficacy. Remdesivir is new, Ivermectin and HCQ are not. Therefore that which is old is against the march to progress. The progress of social equality and the perfection of human nature.
I think it’s more about remdesivir being both ineffective and too expensive for most people. This opens the door to, or keeps the narrative alive of, waiting for a vaccine to save us. They don’t care about what’s new or old, they care about profits, market dominance, and political(/medical) control… and those at the very top care about depopulation (and they openly say so).
Well look at the company that produces Remdesivir – Gilead Sciences has been actively lobbying the Democratic party for years to drive out competition through legislation. Now they’ve somehow convinced Trump to go on it.
They have consistently spent 5 million a year lobbying the government to be the main supplier of drugs under Medicaid.
But they are not operating under the pretense of a free market. They are actively trying to monopolize the market for their class of drugs. If it were a real free market, other companies would have out competed them on Covid treatments by redistributing Ivermectin and HCQ solutions.
If we examine Gileads political contributions for 2019, a vast majority of them are for the democratic party.
Blanca Rubio – Democrat
Chris Ward – Democrat
Dr. Shirley Weber – Democrat
Mike Gipson – Democrat
Steve Glazer – Democrat
Chris Holden – Democrat
Ian Calderon – Democrat
Jim Cooper – Democrat
John Laird – Democrat
Lorena Gonzalez – Democrat
Marc Berman – Democrat
Adrin Nazarian – Democrat
Phil Ting – Democrat
Anthony Portantino – Democrat
Allison Tant – Democrat
This is all classical Liberal policies at work. Centralize power, centralize decision making, and strip away peoples choices.
From an article written in 2016. Trump has substantial holdings in Gilead.
Trump owns shares of drug developer Gilead Sciences (NASDAQ:GILD) in two of his five investment accounts. Per the filing, Trump owns between $100,001 and $250,000 worth of Gilead stock in a Deutsche asset management account and between $250,001 and $500,000 in an account with Oppenheimer.
I don’t imagine he is the only repuglican politician with shares in this company.
Empiricist, Your link about Gilead’s democrat donors doesn’t work
Thanks for pointing that out – not sure what happened with the link. Here it is again:
I think it’s far more simple than the aforementioned “unconstrained” argument. It’s a story thousands of years old. Good vs Evil. Evil is real, and having a hey day in our time. We are born into sin, and the only way out is through the saving grace of the blood of Jesus. Period.
We live in a post Christian world, right is wrong, good is bad. Without an anchor to truth, we are swept about and have no discernment, but our feelings, profit, and what we want to be right, not what is right.
An ebook which has same insights into good and evil.
The Human Reality Matrix
This is a book describing the transition of human consciousness and civilization as we approach the ‘bottle neck’ of exponential growth of an industrial civilization upon a finite planet with all its associated stress points like peak oil, technological tyranny, climate change, alien agendas and new world orders.
The main point is the primacy of consciousness which is common to every human and how this is a variable which is normally distributed within the population and how the whole curve can rise or fall as a collective. From normal waking consciousness it can increase towards enlightenment and also be suppressed and controlled towards deep sleep and how there is a similar increase from sleep to normal as the change from normal to enlightenment. It can literally be like waking from sleep when a person shifts from normal consciousness into an awakened state and how with a logical transition of civilization this enlightened state could become the normal state of consciousness shared by humanity.
Within consciousness there is duality and the freedom to cocreate with love or fear, punishment or healing, judgement or understanding, freedom or control, free will or determinism, God or atheism. Beyond that there are uncommon anecdotal experiences which are alien or involve uncommon changes in consciousness which are not practical to be shared by everyone however by sticking to basic scientific first principles they should be able to be appreciated without having to go through the trauma these experiences often entail.
There is clearly a deterministic view of reality and an associated negative timeline leading to the fall of civilization however there is also an intervention process to help humanity towards a successful transition. This intervention process on some level involves consciousness and intelligence which is not local to this present time space dimension and this ebook is part of that intervention process and would not have been created otherwise. Therefore by reading this ebook and similar materials that are part of this intervention you have the potential to shift your consciousness from its underlying deterministic path or timeline. It remains largely unedited as the text can carry energy or consciousness and was written over many years in a difficult transition process of a human psyche involving a variety of elements deep within the collective consciousness.