Monday, September 24, 2007

The Patterned Irrationality of the Left

In the unconscious mind, where symmetrical logic rules the night, the stronger the emotion one is feeling, the more "symmetrical deductions" are likely to occur.

For example, as Bomford writes, on a deep unconscious level, "one who hates has to believe that his or her hatred is returned." Note that this is a logical operation, only based upon a different sort of logic. This logic is no doubt the source of the psychotic fear of Israel in the Islamic world. Their unconscious hatred is so profound that it simultaneously reverses the relation, so that they can't help perceiving that Israel hates them. But Israelis just want to shop, raise their families, or read the Torah. They couldn't care less about Muslims, except to the extent that bloodthirsty Muslim barbarians harbor murderous rage toward them.

It's fine to hate evil, but in the Islamic world, what is hated is transformed into evil. Something is not hated because it is evil, but evil because it is hated. One could say the same of the left, which habitually fears what it eternally hates. The left cannot be comprehended unless one appreciates the extent of their unbound hatred. Once this is grasped, what seems illogical is suddenly seen to obey the dictates of symmetrical logic. For example, the unconscious feeling that I hate America and want us to lose in Iraq is transformed to General Petraeus is a traitor, or I am a racist becomes America is racist, or I am unbearably envious becomes the wealthy are engaged in class warfare against me!

Another characteristic of the unconscious is that it is timeless, in the sense that it can reverse temporal relations. For example, in the unconscious mind, if A is the cause of B, B can also be the cause of A. Thus, "before" and "after" become meaningless. Therefore, although we were inexcusably attacked by Islamists on 9-11, within minutes, leftists were saying that the real reason for the attack was that we had done something to offend Muslims.

Likewise, throughout the Cold War, leftist scholars wrote "revisionist" histories, in which the United States was the cause of the Cold War, or at least equally responsible for it. You will notice that there are no conservative revisionists who write, for example, that blacks were the cause of their own lynching, or that Japanese Americans were the cause of their own internment. You can only think in this manner if you are pathologically under the sway of unconscious symmetrical logic.

Also in the unconscious mind, there is no distinction between the memory of something that actually occurred vs. the memory of a fantasy. Here we can understand how and why the left is so prone to mythologizing the past, as their fantasies are mingled with reality.

Thus, no amount of reality and asymmetrical logic will ever convince them that FDR made the Great Depression worse, not better, or that the black family only began to disintegrate after the imposition of all the "Great Society" programs of the mid to late '60s. No amount of logic could convince a leftist that his policies harm the "little guy," since his ruling myth, in the face of all evidence to the contrary, is that he is here to rescue the hapless little guy (for whom the leftist always feels rich contempt in the unconscious mind, contempt which only seeps out everywhere).

One thing you will notice about the left is that they are passionate. Because the left is guided by feelings and intentions, they are blind to the results of their actions. If their feelings are infinitely good, then in the unconscious mind, the results must also be infinitely good.

As I have written before, this is a religious passion in the absence of religion, so it has no traditional means to structure and channel it. Just as religion partakes of symmetrical logic in an adaptive way (i.e., the meek shall inherit the earth, the Golden Rule, humans are made in the image of the Creator, etc.), leftists do so in a terribly unhealthy way. That is, because of the intensity of their feelings, these feelings reach way down into the symmetrical realm, with no way to structure or make sense of them. This is why you always see so much highly charged, "unfiltered" unconscious material coming out of the left. To borrow a metaphor from someone, reading dailykos or huffington post is like taking a ride through a sewer in a glass bottom boat.

As Bomford writes, the dictates of symmetrical logic mean that deductions "do not follow the path of fact, but of feeling or emotion." And although this inevitably leads to "crazy" deductions based upon a chain of feelings, in a sense, it is much more "free" than asymmetrical, Aristotelian logic. For example, the latter "has a deterministic feel. That is to say, it never delivers a new truth, though it may deliver truths that had not been clear before. Everything is already 'there' in the premises."

Not so symmetrical logic, which has considerably more freedom to "deduce." It can easily arrive at patent falsehoods while still obeying its own logic. For example, the knuckleheads at Columbia University believe that having a genocidal sociopath speak on their campus is an instance of defending "freedom of speech." I would agree, but only in a psychotically cluelessidal way, rooted in symmetrical logic. By the standards of normal logic, it makes no sense whatsoever. It's crazy.

One of the most fascinating aspects of unconscious logic is the way it can shift attributes from agent to agent. For example, as mentioned above, it is the work of a moment for a leftist to turn a perpetrator into a victim and a victim into a perpetrator, based upon the emotional needs of the day. For example, the standard leftist logic would be Larry Craig --> Homosexual --> Ultimate Victim. But place an "R" after the name, and the overriding logic becomes Republican --> Homophobic Victimizer --> Burn him!

Likewise, the normal train of leftist logic would be ROTC --> Don't ask, Don't tell policy --> Homophobia --> Get off our campus, fascists! But Ahmadinejad -- whose government's policy toward homosexuals is "don't tell, because we'll bury you alive" -- is given a pass because he shares the left's passionate hatred of America and of President Bush. Their interests converge in the deep, symmetrical unconscious. Ironically, it is obvious that Ahmadinejad is much more conscious of this than the left to which his manipulative talking points are tailored. You might say that he is consciously speaking to the left's unconscious, pushing every one of their happy buttons he can think of.

Don't believe me?

Daily Kos: 45% Want Ahmadinejad As US President

or

I Am a Jewish Lesbian, and I Have a Crush on Ahmadinejad:

"... the guy speaks some blunt truths about the Bush Administration that make me swoon... Okay, I admit it. Part of it is that he just looks cuddly. Possibly cuddly enough to turn me straight. I think he kind of looks like Kermit the Frog. Sort of. With smaller eyes.... I can’t help but be turned on by his frank rhetoric calling out the horrors of the Bush Administration and, for that matter, generations of US foreign policy preceding...."



Homosexuality? In Iran? We don't allow it. Makes the goats jealous.

33 Comments:

Blogger julie said...

"...like taking a ride through a sewer in a glass bottom boat."

I laughed when I read that, but when I read the Jewish lesbian excerpt, I couldn't help thinking the boat had sprung a leak.

9/24/2007 09:34:00 AM  
Blogger walt said...

Okay, I admit it! I read a lot of things, plus I have read a lot of things, and it takes a bit to make me really laugh out loud. But this did:

"Okay, I admit it. Part of it is that he just looks cuddly. Possibly cuddly enough to turn me straight. I think he kind of looks like Kermit the Frog. Sort of. With smaller eyes...."

She's not funny. And he's not funny, at all. But man! The two of them together.... (!)

(I wonder where my friend Robert Thurman stands in the whole Columbia mess? There is no one more anti-Bush than he!)

9/24/2007 09:40:00 AM  
Blogger River Cocytus said...

It seems to - as always - be the misappropriation or misuse of tools that does it. Using the eternal to describe the temporal and the other way around. As though the essence of things evolves while the surface of things (diversity) stays eternally the same. Even in the idea of 'studying cultures' in anthropology is almost loaded this assumption of non-change. Culture, which is ultimately the surface of the interaction of a bunch of changing creatures, is bound to change, even given the most minimum stimulus to do so. It takes tremendous effort on part of the members to stop or limit change. (Like the Amish, for instance.)

Whereas, it appears that the purpose of the church is, as an eternal thing, to be a permanent extension of eternity into time.

That is, the unconscious logic applies to these eternal things: Paul says 'those who he saved he justified, and those who he justified he glorified...' all is past tense, but the glorification is future. But all of the steps are compacted into a seemingly-temporal list. But, Paul seems to understand and resist explaining specifically where/when these steps occur - like, when does God plan for our lives? First problem - when! When will it be accomplished? It is accomplished. Etc. Over-application of asymmetrical logic to the realm of faith, and in particular God, forces either one to come up with a false but loophole-sealing conclusion (i.e. doctrine of predestination) or to be forced to ignore contradicting information (and thus reject God, being unable to use normal rational thinking to understand him.)

I guess it is an example of a reversed vertical, maybe?

9/24/2007 10:01:00 AM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

Yes, you might say that the purpose of the Church is to articulate symmetry within the asymmetrical in a metaphysically sound way. "Before Abraham was, I Am," is a perfect example of sound symmetrical logic. Likewise, "I am alpha and omega." These statements make no asymmetrical sense, only symmetrical. It also illuminates the dynamics the Trinity, which we will discuss in a future post, e.g.., three-in-one and one-in-three.

9/24/2007 10:13:00 AM  
Blogger Robin Starfish said...

Columbia U continues to pump out graduates ready to engage the world with polymerized logic.

Mr. McGuire: I just want to say one word to you - just one word.
Ben: Yes sir.
Mr. McGuire: Are you listening?
Ben: Yes I am.
Mr. McGuire: 'Plastics.'
Ben: Exactly how do you mean?
Mr. McGuire: There's a great future in plastics. Think about it. Will you think about it?
Ben: Yes I will.
Mr. McGuire: Shh! Enough said. That's a deal.


And so here we are.

-----------------

Time Stamp
time before plastic
elvis on the radio
this day too shall pass

9/24/2007 10:51:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

Also interesting to note, that while Religion is rooted outside time, or at least in the beginning of it, but leftie cosmology is rooted not only within time, but in their most recent worldview. One of the effects of this, happens to jibe with the Proregressives goals, such as Dewey's, which held that an important feature of successful 'education' needed to be disassociating the student from their cultural past.

The result is of course, that there is no history to be remembered, troubled, or guided by, no need to fret about millions killed in its name, or the proven folly of its previous worldviews of eugenics, how the 17th amendment would eliminate campaign corruption (doh!), welfare, improve literacy thru Whole Language approach to reading (ef uw lrnd thas, uwe spehl liek thise, buht Kant reed at ahll),global cooling, DDT (save the birds, eliminate millions of people), etc.

9/24/2007 10:52:00 AM  
Blogger River Cocytus said...

When banning DDT,
They really gave us the bird(s).

9/24/2007 11:42:00 AM  
Blogger Johan (cosmic swede) said...

If you not already have seen this speech by Evan Sayet at the Heritage Foundation, do it now. It's amazingly clear about what's going (or not going) on in the leftist head.

You can watch at YouTube

"What I discovered is that the Modern Liberal looks back on 50,000 years, 100,000 years of human civilization, and knows only one thing for sure: that none of the ideas that mankind has come up with - none of the religions, none of the philos­ophies, none of the ideologies, none of the forms of government - have succeeded in creating a world devoid of war, poverty, crime, and injustice. So they’re convinced that since all of these ideas of man have proved to be wrong, the real cause of war, pov­erty, crime, and injustice must be found - can only be found - in the attempt to be right."

He makes it so clear. If you lack the will to recognize ANYTHING as good, how can you recognize evil?

And what I tried to figure out is what kind of human being are you becoming then you deny the ability to be right or wrong about anything?

The obvious answer is that you constantly is going to battle your own reason! Reason becomes the enemy, because reason is trying to tell you what is right and what is wrong. So, wich is one of Sayet's conclusions, the leftist makes a point of doing exactly the opposite of reason, because that's the only way to "prove" reason wrong.

See and listen to the speech youself if you haven't done it already. I think it's briljant.

---

And if you need to understand why I don't regret leaving the Swedish Church, this will surly make things clear - Brides' fathers banned from giving away daughters

9/24/2007 12:16:00 PM  
Blogger Smoov said...

It's never easy to tell whether one is over-reacting or not. It is hard to tell how bad things are historically when one is in the thick of the historical moment in question.

Nonetheless, I'd like report a little "feeling" of my own: watching the spectacle today felt like the advent of something deeply evil in America.

I hope to God I am wrong, but increasingly it seems like the same sort of slide is taking place that happened during the Weimar era. I'm almost certain I'm over-reacting (which to be perfectly honest, many conservatives do from time to time--we're not perfect), but I cannot be sure. It is very difficult to determine how bad things are.

In Germany in 1935 you could probably walk the streets and think nothing was amiss. You might have heard tell of a scruffy bunch of extremists who strut around like idiots--Socialist Nationals, or National Workers, or some such nonsense. Was there an ominous rumble just below the surface? Did burghers sense the approach of the Rough Beast?

What happened today at Columbia may amount to nothing in the scheme of things. I pray--fervently--that this is the case, because I fear what may come next...

9/24/2007 01:03:00 PM  
Blogger Smoov said...

The presence of Islamists in the world has never bothered me that much. They represent an external threat for the most part. Scary, but they can be defeated with military might if necessary.

Leftism is different.

Leftism is like having cancer. It knaws silently from inside. It nauseates me to think how many of them there are among us.

9/24/2007 01:11:00 PM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

From dailykos, via LGF:

"As an American, I was stunned and embarrassed by Bollinger’s harangue of Ahmedinejad. It was a craven and cowardly capitulation to political pressures, and unworthy of the academic institution that Bollinger represents. I know who and what Ahmedinejad is, but I also know that he was at Columbia at Columbia’s invitation. Bollinger’s speech was less a challenge to Ahmedinejad than it was an ambush, and it dishonered all of us as Americans.

"Bollinger could have challenged Ahmedinejad’s many hyperbolic and absurd statements in a manner that was not abusive and insulting. He chose instead to curry favor with those who are intent on demonizing Iran and plunging the U.S. into another illegal and immoral war.

"Bollinger’s behavior was inappropriate. It presented to the world the face of an ugly and bullying America. I am utterly humiliated that Bollinger should have behaved this way."

9/24/2007 01:14:00 PM  
Blogger Robin Starfish said...

Oops, Prez Bollinger's biography is being "updated". They're starting to eat their own.

9/24/2007 02:32:00 PM  
Blogger Mizz E said...

Hugh Hewitt has updated "prezbo's" bio.

9/24/2007 05:47:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

"It was a craven and cowardly capitulation to political pressures, and unworthy of the academic institution that Bollinger represents"

In a twisted way, the kosack is right, he did cave to political pressure - nothing in the recent history of Columbia suggests any such principles being held, as he gave voice to in his questioning.

Also the fact that the students cheered aminijihads retort indicates that such positions caught them by complete surprise as well.

Go Homeschooling, Go Hillsdale, abandon public schooling while we still can - that is the accelerator of the cancer that is leftism - learned ignorance.

9/24/2007 05:55:00 PM  
Blogger walt said...

"Go Homeschooling, Go Hillsdale, abandon public schooling while we still can - that is the accelerator of the cancer that is leftism - learned ignorance."

Right on, Van!

9/24/2007 06:00:00 PM  
Blogger google.com said...

Liberals suffer from Cognitive Disorder of Progressives. It is manifest in many ways, including the reflexive thinking described on this blog.

Liberals have to believe that conservatives are stupid or mentally (and public "scientific" papers to prove it). Well, the shoe's on the other foot, dummies.

9/24/2007 06:29:00 PM  
Blogger Smoov said...

Bob,

Let me ask you something--and please don't take it the wrong way. Like you I am very concerned about leftism and the effect it has on our society. Crossing back and forth between Canada and the US I get a "preview" of where the US could be in 5 or 10 years of Hillary and her ilk.

The question is: does it ever strike you that the energy and time we devote to discussing and analyzing leftism is somehow inimical to our personal spiritual development? After a day of truly sickening displays by the left--and with the internet buzzing like a beehive as a result--I decided to go down to the seaside with my Zen Buddhist friend for a while and just sit and listen to him play the flute. After a while the still, small voices could be heard again. The waves on the ancient shore washed away the painful memory of the Columbia students applauding a would-be heir to the Third Reich.

The "don't take it the wrong way part" means I'm not saying you--or we--should not spend our time in this manner (I think it is vitally important)--I just wonder if this ever occurs to you, and how you deal with it.

9/24/2007 07:08:00 PM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

Smoov:

I don't know. I just bang these things out spontaneously, not knowing ahead of time where they'll lead. I had no intention of blogging about the left or about Ahmadinejad, it just ended up that way. I have very little time for writing, much less reflection, these days.

Also, I don't like to see the spiritual world separate from the plain old world. It's the Aurobindo way.

9/24/2007 07:23:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

Smoov said "The question is: does it ever strike you that the energy and time we devote to discussing and analyzing leftism is somehow inimical to our personal spiritual development?"

Pardon me for butting in (I think it actually has something to do with job description of ‘Pataphysical Science Officer’ - at least that's what I say when people ask about it on my business cards), speaking for myself, I think there's a few layers involved.

One, unlike the standard (not all, but many) conservative sites who point out and attack the lefties for no further purposes than of pointing out, attacking, and furthering a point or election, OC does so with the point of illuminating a principle, and one which leads to wider contemplation and understanding - it isn't the attack that's the point, but the wider Truths involved.

Two, sometimes the smack downs are just downright fun, even the little skirmishes with the aninnymouses - they're an amusing way to relax, and not so very time consuming (ok, perhaps I should be spending this time on my site completing the series of posts I started, but in a round about way I am - I'm thinking deeper on ideas and matters that concern and interest me, than I would otherwise, and that helps me better perform time in the rest of my life).

Three, you and the rest of the Cosmic Raccoon’s are a fun bunch to be in contact with, and the discussions nearly always shed light or emphasis on areas of life which have few other opportunities of being brought up.

Four, how many of us really dwell on the matter? Personally, I don't. Sure, the pointing out of the latest snail trail of slime has its distasteful aspects, but the fact that unlike the news and other sites which stop there and go no further, OC directs my attention to the healthy growing life beneath the moments slime, and reminds me that while it must be guarded against, it is but a transient nuisance, and that there are other Gardeners out there aware and tending the garden.

That in itself is soothing, and calming. I enjoy the flute too, but there are many ways to approach the ocean.

So I guess my short answer would be, if the purpose of discussing and analyzing leftism was only to advance, or wallow in, an argument, that would be inimical to our personal spiritual development, but I don't think that's the case here. Like the martial arts instructor who instructs his student not to hit the board, but to punch through it, the board is never the point here, the point is to realize the freedom of knowing that it is of no real substance, no true obstacle to our personal spiritual development.

(BTW, anyone noticed that Uncle Bernard, Night Security (below Cuz & the twins on the main page) looks a bit like what Murtha would look like if he was ever put on a Pork free diet for long?)

9/24/2007 08:57:00 PM  
Blogger Smoov said...

tlkOh gosh I hope you keep blogging indefinitely. I know it's hard work. I'm no stranger to it either. If you get one tenth as much out of it as we do then it must be very rewarding indeed.

wv: sshtlk - Well, which is it?

9/24/2007 09:04:00 PM  
Blogger Smoov said...

Van:

That does make sense. It certainly helps to understand why they "think" as they do--and nobody on the web does it better than Bob.

9/24/2007 09:08:00 PM  
Blogger NoMo said...

The "plain old world" IS the spiritual world - pure and simple. How can it be any other way? Unless escapism is your spirituality. But to where?

Smoov - You who are steeped in material reality, as much as anyone, must find the bridge between the two. As your Zen friend might say, "Wherever you go, there you are."

Speaking of bridges, one that I discovered only recently and come to really appreciate spans east and west - Ravi Zacharias. Quite a compelling thinker and speaker (and you have to love a Christian preacher with an Indian accent).

9/24/2007 09:33:00 PM  
Blogger Susannah said...

"Also, I don't like to see the spiritual world separate from the plain old world."

That's what I love about OneCosmos!

The college where my husband teaches, like Hillsdale, does not accept federal money.

"Go homeschooling!" Yes! :) 2 million strong and growing. I just learned today that the NEA recently adopted another anti-homeschooling resolution. They must really feel threatened!

9/24/2007 09:34:00 PM  
Blogger Susannah said...

Nomo...I love Ravi Zacharias's site. Lots of good stuff there.

9/24/2007 09:36:00 PM  
Blogger Robin Starfish said...

"Homosexuality? In Iran? We don't allow it. Makes the goats jealous."

Ha ha! And right next to Spike's Sexiest Bartender too!

A despot just can't catch a break.

9/24/2007 10:17:00 PM  
Blogger USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

Robin said:
"A despot just can't catch a break."

He can if he stops by my place (plenty of breaks...no charge).
Just a taste of good ol' American hospit(al)ity.

If'n he lives, that is.
Y'know how culture shock can be
(don't taze me...gakk!).

9/25/2007 02:28:00 AM  
Blogger USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

"It's fine to hate evil, but in the Islamic world, what is hated is transformed into evil. One could say the same of the left, which habitually fears what it eternally hates. The left cannot be comprehended unless one appreciates the extent of their unbound hatred. Once this is grasped, what seems illogical is suddenly seen to obey the dictates of symmetrical logic."

Damn! That one paragraph explains more than hundreds of pages (good ones, too) I have read over the last several years or so.

I'm gobsmacked (tw: Mizz E), flabbergasted and awestruck!

Outstanding, Bob!

9/25/2007 02:39:00 AM  
Blogger USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

Smoov said:
"Nonetheless, I'd like report a little "feeling" of my own: watching the spectacle today felt like the advent of something deeply evil in America.

I hope to God I am wrong, but increasingly it seems like the same sort of slide is taking place that happened during the Weimar era. I'm almost certain I'm over-reacting (which to be perfectly honest, many conservatives do from time to time--we're not perfect), but I cannot be sure. It is very difficult to determine how bad things are."

Smoov-
We need a lot more over-reacting of that sort, considering the consequences of under-reacting, or worse, actually helping the enemy, as is the wont of leftists (dems and repubs) these days.

9/25/2007 02:47:00 AM  
Blogger USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

Johan-
You are absolutely right, and it all stems from a rebellious spirit, originally.

9/25/2007 02:50:00 AM  
Blogger USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

"Homosexuality? In Iran? We don't allow it. Makes the goats jealous."

The gay goats are prolly bleating a (collective) sigh of relief!

However, the straight goats are still nervously looking over their shoulders.

9/25/2007 03:54:00 AM  
Blogger Susannah said...

Is it just me, or does the picture at the end make everyone else's gorge rise?

"Their unconscious hatred is so profound that it simultaneously reverses the relation, so that they can't help perceiving that Israel hates them."

I've noticed this phenomenon too.

Who was it who said, during the last election cycle (I paraphrase), "Conservatives think leftists are stupid; leftists think conservatives are *evil*"? It's so true. Conservatives tend to laugh at leftist ideas because they are just so muddle-headed, self-contradictory, and pathologically emotion-based.

But leftists, because they are trapped in a prison of their own construction, see the bars they put up and forget they are the ones inside them.

E.g., a thief doesn't trust even the most trustworthy, for "there is no honor among thieves." A greedy man attributes the same motive to everyone around him. And as Bob pointed out, someone who instinctively categorizes and then patronizes the human race according to skin-deep superficialities will attribute that impulse to everyone else, especially those who try to point out the contradiction.

It's almost pitiable. Really, it makes one realize why Christ had compassion on us.

9/25/2007 07:28:00 AM  
Blogger bonerici said...

it seems puzzling at first that republicans always talk about what liberals think and feel, like with ann coulter's books, "If democrats had any brains," "Godless, the church of liberalism", "Liberal lies", "Liberal Treachery", "High Crimes and Misdemeanors", there's a lot about what liberals think, not much about what it means to be a republican.

i think that's what being a republican is today. it's not defined with any particular monetary policy or social program, to be a republican you have to hate liberals.

Now if you think about it that way, then of course conservatives need to talk about liberals all the time, they need to definte what a liberal is clearly and precisely, because that's the single defining chracteristic of the conservative movement: anti-liberalism.

Which seems kind of boring, but does have a certain amount of intellectual honesty. If the defining trait of being a conservative requires that you identify liberals and then become anti-liberal, then of course most of your intellectual resources will be spent investigating liberal thinking.

9/26/2007 08:51:00 AM  
Blogger Bugs said...

"the single defining chracteristic of the conservative movement: anti-liberalism."

On the other hand, then, the single defining characteristic of the liberal movement must be: anti-conservatism. I think the Buddhists call it Pratītyasamutpāda.

Bollinger made a spectacle of himself by trying to please everyone - the nutjobs in his own institution who thought it would be a good idea to invite Pres. A to speak, and those outside his institution who criticized the invitation. Say what you will, the man is deeply committed to his own ass and will do whatever it takes to protect it.

I'm wondering if he ever considered what a propaganda coup this little trip has been for Pres. A. Or how it looks to Iranian dissidents who think the US supports them.

9/26/2007 12:33:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home