House of Eratosthenes

These things are ailments, moral shortcomings, other set memberships that have the effect of blinding those on the inside. When we discuss what is going on with these things, we value the opinions of people who are not part of them. If you are part of these things, we do not, and should not, value your opinion about that thing.

1. Alcoholics
2. Adulterers
3. Liberals
4. Senility
5. Personality disorders and other behavioral health issues, including homicidal ones
6. Government regulators
7. People who fall for scams
8. Tyrannical dictators
9. Cults
10. Any sort of addiction

These things are religious denominations, ideologies, associations that determine some ways of looking at life. They are situations in which, you have to be on the inside to comment credibly. A question about “What does X think about Y,” where X is any one of the following, is equivalent to a question of “What did YOU mean when you said something?” You don’t ask people on the outside about what people are thinking on the inside. That would be daffy.

1. Christians
2. Jews
3. Libertarians
4. Conservatives
5. Gun owners
6. Software engineers
7. Boy Scouts
8. Homeowners
9. Taxpayers
10. Parents

These things may belong on the first list, or on the second list, depending on the person. You can’t generalize about them, you have to take it on a case by case basis.

1. Atheists
2. People who scam other people
3. Environmentalist whackos
4. Children
5. Homosexuals and homosexual activists
6. Public school teachers
7. Radio talk show hosts
8. Bloggers, commenters on social media
9. People who are opposed to illegal immigration
10. City engineers responsible for designing really bad intersections, like the one on Bidwell in Folsom, by the Highway 50 overpass, in front of Starbucks

I’m sure nobody is going to agree with me entirely about the content of the three lists. But I would hope we can achieve near-universal agreement among thinking persons who observe the behavior of other human beings, and ponder what it means, about the concept. Sometimes you rely on the comments from the people on the inside, sometimes you don’t. Sometimes you merely probe; maybe find a polite way to ask “What the heck are you people thinking?”

I’m also reasonably sure someone who had something to do with city street planning in Folsom, was dating someone who had something to do with Starbucks, and got dumped.

Now this…

…borders on the obscene. I doubt very much that a Christian was responsible. Such a Christian would have to be capable of sketching, coloring and finishing something that demands a great deal of time and attention to detail, without ever reading up on Luke 2:1-7. Nobody really seems to know who first created or displayed the image. One commenter took on a search, which he says was not exhaustive, and the oldest embed at the end of that search was was here but that doesn’t look like the true origin.

There are those Christians who rely on their faith to think through their various problems in life, some of them going so far as to say it’s required for clear thinking. I don’t find that objectionable at all; I’m probably in that camp myself. And it’s mostly because of stuff like this. I see non-Christians forming ideas about Christians, apparently without ever once talking to any of us. Crazy. No I mean that literally; to presume it makes sense to do it this way, these people have to be off their nut.

They’re not following my three lists — which is fine, they’re mine. Someone else’s lists are going to be different. But, they’re not making any such lists, not stopping to ask themselves “Who knows something and who doesn’t? Whom should I be asking?” They just do what feels right and good.

Most troubling, since a lot of these people are in real positions of authority to say what is true, what is happening. Like cartoonists, reporters, politicians and those who write speeches for them. They consistently get Christianity backwards; they fantasize about what it means to be one, without ever thinking about becoming one, or asking anybody who is one.

They get the conservatives and liberals backwards a lot, too. Liberalism is an addiction. You don’t ask an addict for his opinion about what his addiction is, or is not. You don’t ask a liberal what conservatives think. The ignorance liberals have about their opposition is a special kind of ignorance. They don’t know, they’re proud of not knowing. They don’t care to learn. They’re proud of not caring. And they make up a lot of stuff that isn’t true because, again, it feels right and good. That’s their idea of gathering facts. Why would you ask them?

Related: Kirsten Powers: Becoming a Christian Ruined My Love of Christmas — But then I learned to see the beauty of Christ’s coming like never before (via Bird Dog at Maggie’s Farm).

Of COURSE I think those lists are simply batsh1t crazy.
But lest there be any confusion, I freely admit to practicing discrimination between “thinkers”, sport-contrarians, actual musers, attention whores, inquiring minds, “pop” victims, folks who use coasters, and that DRUNKEN BITCH AUNT EMMA who spilled red wine all over my polar bear rug in front of the fireplace (vegan, but I can’t PROVE she did it only because she self-identifies as an “important” -[vulgar term for cunt])
- CaptDMO | 12/19/2015 @ 16:39
[…] Later I elaborated… […]
- House of Eratosthenes | 02/27/2016 @ 16:16

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent

Items of Interest

Monthly Archives

What They Say

Links

Whom to AskSaturday, December 19th, 2015

Whom to Ask
Saturday, December 19th, 2015