PAUL WERBOS >”Since a time five years ago, many things have happened which
seemed impossible, to those who assume nothing can change.”

The changes we’ve seen in the past few years are amazing… certainly
exceeding anything that I had anticipated. The seed for that change, I
contend, was the men’s rights movement. How has this come to pass that
gender politics might lie at the heart of cultural change? Let’s take a

Very briefly… the core problem of the Occident currently expresses itself in
the form of Neo-Darwinian genetic determinism (genocentrism). Genocentrism
is the not-God reply to the because-God of anthropocentric Judeo-Christian
Creationism. From the perspective of not-God, because there is no god, a
vacuum is created that demands an explanation. The dumb luck of sterile
materialism has to be sufficient to explain life confined to a lone, average
planet, within a universe comprised of trillions of galaxies and trillions
of billions of planets (such innocent naïveté would be endearing, were the
implications not so devastating). This contrasts with eastern religions,
such as Hinduism and Buddhism, which never externalized and
anthropomorphized their interpretation of god. In contrast to the Occidental
god, the Hindu/Buddhist god never stood outside of nature as an external
meddler that created stuff to alleviate his loneliness/boredom.
Hinduism/Buddhism, from what I’ve seen, has little difficulty with the
notion of life throughout the cosmos.

Gender roles have been especially problematic, within the context of
genocentrism. You know, the idea that genes determine the motivations of men
and women. This brings us to feminism and liberalism. Cultural relativism is
one important expression of this dysfunction. Cultural relativists have an
important point to make with reference to the choices that we make… but
their cultural relativism is naively formulated, because Occidental
epistemology never laid the foundations upon which to build a solid
paradigm. You can’t just wake up one morning and decide that you are the
wrong gender, and that society has to accommodate your self-indulgent
interpretation of LGBTW…XYZ. The cognitive dissonance of the left, for whom
anti-white racism is not racism and anti-male sexism is not sexism, is
staggering. And now that liberalism, in the wake of Trump, is mockingly
discrediting itself, we are seeing an apparent resurgence of the
because-genes baloney. This is unfortunate… it needs to be nipped in the
bud. It is imperative, at this critical point in history, for the Occident
to get their paradigm right, to stave off the resurging because-genes
nonsense of Neo-Darwinism.

Ultimately, the broken narratives of a broken paradigm eventually had to
come to a head. And they expressed themselves most sharply in that
inevitable response to liberal-feminism’s dysfunctional narratives… the
men’s rights movement. What is now called the right, or alt-right, or
alt-lite (for those seeking to distance themselves from the extremists), has
its origins in the men’s rights movement. In 2004, my article The wage gap
myth is hazardous to men's health
-mens-health/>  was among the first to challenge the wage gap myth, and the
wage gap controversy took off from around that time. Because my thinking was
never constrained by the because-genes of Neo-Darwinism, I was able to focus
on the basis of men’s and women’s motivations, and therefore, on how men and
women made choices… as, for example, When one side has an escape hatch
n-escape-hatch/> .

These days, mercifully, the challenges to liberal totalitarianism and
feminist orthodoxy are everywhere. From Professor Jordan Peterson on the
wage gap <>  to former feminist Cassie Jaye now
turning her back on feminism <> , there is a
powerful awakening that ensures the world will never be quite the same
again. If we know something, then we each have a duty to speak out… to run
from that obligation because we fear being called mean words, like “racist”
or “sexist”, is an abdication of responsibility. None of us can change the
world on our own, but speaking truth to groupthink plants the seeds of
change. Sure solipsism might still stand to destroy us… but I think there’s
hope on the horizon.



[] On Behalf Of Paul Werbos
Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2018 2:04 PM
Subject: [Sadhu Sanga] could solipsism destroy the human species?


Does that sound like a bit of an overstatement, an exercise in alarmism or
exaggeration? Be careful what you assume. Since a time five years ago, many
things have happened which seemed impossible, to those who assume nothing
can change. 


But what can REALLY cause the human species to become extinction? That is an
important question, to us, and I am glad that there are groups like the
Lifeboat Foundation and assorted futurists who really try to remember that
question and address it in a serious way. High on the list of things which
really threaten the very survival of the species, in a direct and concrete
way are still nuclear war (and its aftermath, and perhaps biological warfare
as well), but the possibilities for climate change at the fatal level are
far greater than most people know as yet, and the Tderminator AI threat is
also real. (See and the loinks at the end
to back it up.) 


But at the end of the day, whether these horrid, ever more likely disasters
will actually happen depends on how humans respond to the challenges and the
threats. That in turn depends on what kinds of assumptions they hard wire
both in the symbolic reasoning part of their brains, and in IT systems. We
all know already that there are many varieties of solipsism out there -- the
belief that there is not objective reality, or that we can safely make it go
away by ignoring it. But this morning, a particular form of it comes to


Many people believe that high level decisions all over the world have been
made less constructive and intelligent because of a deterioration in the
quality of information sources, such as "fake news". The naive, solipsistic
approach to that is to build government agencies which stamp out views which
are not the truth AS SEEN by political authorities. An objective viewpoint
would admit that all of us are fallible, and try to come up with better
systems, and make that real. As IT takes over the world .. NOT JUST
Terminator robots, but the Internet of Things which has been moving very
very quickly... naive solipsistic policies and designs really could kill us,
simply because of the lack of real intelligence in the system in the face of
complex challenges. 


Easier to say than to fix. Systems design when humans play a central role is
not trivial. We now know how to build consciousness, but human survival is a
more difficult challenge. 


Fifth International Conference 
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal

Send a Donation to Support Our Services:
(All Indian residents are eligible for tax benefits for their contributions 
under section 80G of the Income Tax Act)

Report Archives:

Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?:

Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view:


Darwin Under Siege:

Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute:

Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: 

Sadhu-Sanga Blog:

Contact Us:
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." 
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
To post to this group, send email to
Visit this group at
To view this discussion on the web visit
For more options, visit
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L 
to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to . To 
UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to with the 
line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at .

Reply via email to