Nostr Web Client

Consider, if you are prepared to do so, that some lies are the catalysts of other lies, enablers if you will, and fiat is one of these fundamental and corrupting containers encouraging a house built on the lie that effects don’t have causes. We know this is bullshit—as Ayn Rand dramatizes.

The arrow of causality has to account for the dialectical relationship between individual responsibility and social cohesion—fiat is the narcissist abusing our human need for trust. If the individual cannot save his value (his productivity), his life is rendered meaningless because responsibility is not possible and without responsibility there is no freedom.

So you can see how the lack of freedom as a possibility (fiat) leads to reality itself, in a multiplicative sense, becoming a palimpsest of psychological operations intended to delude.

Bunnyman 14h ago 💬 1

I completely agree with everything you said. And I am certainly not arguing against skepticism in general.

But similarly to how no bitcoiner would be lectured to by a no coiner about how “Bitcoin won’t work”, I don’t get my information about science from a bitcoiner. Science can only be disproven by new data. It cannot be disproven by fantastic narratives.

I don’t trust science communicators, as they can have agendas, or even follow logical extensions of fiat fuckery, as you suggested - lies built on lies. But I do trust science, until it’s disproven by better science - the same way I trust Bitcoins transparent ledger. It’s observable and repeatedly demonstrable. I also distrust people who pedal narratives disguised as science, chiropractors with nutrition channels, and the like.

If you don’t have your skeptic hat on, you will get stuck in normie land, but science allows us to not have to “question everything” because there is already people who have done the proof of work. So conversely, if you don’t bullshit guard up you will spend your days trying to work out if the earth is flat, when people have clearly solved that mystery a long time ago.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Primate 3h ago

“I don’t trust science communicators, as they can have agendas …”

Let’s continue this line of inquiry—where does the scientific method come from? Athens. Who invented it? Socrates. What is it? Asking questions.

Your implicit agenda is to make the case that we don’t need to keep asking questions because some of the science is settled. Is science ever settled or is settled science just agenda setting or propaganda? Sure some data trees may be more persuasive than others but curiosity has to remain our default state.

Curiosity has to remain our default state because we understand that there is no intrinsic or ontological value without the observer’s say so.

Or you believe in God as the prime mover and you stop pretending you don’t know, stop pretending you value learning.

You are right that Bitcoin is the most objective truth record in the history of man but that truth, or science, is also based on common agreement or consensus.

So science will always be a question and not a statement no matter how advanced our knowledge and technology because, I suppose, there is no pure and perfect recursive action at a distance.

Only if causality itself is shown to be its own effect via Quantum shit will we have to rethink our bias toward asking questions rather than assuming. Stay curious, my friend.