Bruce Charlton likes to write about how every person is a kind of spiritual being that preexists their incarnation. He calls them “pre-mortal spirits.” He notes, rightly, that a soul by itself is lesser than a soul with a body. This is why, after we have died, we receive a resurrected body rather than merely exist eternally as a disembodied spirit in heaven. The purpose, if you will, of having a physical body of flesh here is to do what is necessary to have a spiritual body of flesh in the hereafter.
Anyway, keep this in mind as you read the following essay.
I once had dinner with an one of my closest actor friends in NYC. He lives in a loft overlooking some boushie square. This friend had a world renowned neuroscientist from Holland joining us. His specialty was criminality.
The neuroscientist had the room’s attention as he waxed on about his life’s work; He had done 10,000 patient studies, and in short, his work showed that criminals had abnormalities in their brain function, and therefore could not be held accountable. Crime is predetermined.
Crime is a disease. A man can no more be blamed for his abnormal brain then he can for missing a limb. The studies were absolutely conclusive, but the application was still mostly a failure; building lives for these men that accommodated their a-typical brains.
Now, let’s be careful here. The Blankslatist claims that inherent biological traits do not exist. This is different from an opposition to predeterminism. In practice, predeterminism is quite popular among blankslatists who believe that criminals are not responsible for their actions are predetermined by external influences like “institutionalized racism” and so forth. There are, so it goes, mysterious forces which cause a person to commit criminal acts.
Accordingly, when the anonymous neurologist mentioned above talks of crime being predetermined, we cannot deduce whether or not he is a blankslatist or not. Based on his research, we presume that he believes that criminality is largely genetic, but we do not know for sure. What we do see is his ideological agreement with blankslatists that criminals are not responsible for their actions.
Now if you’ve read much of Bruce Charlton’s work, you won’t be surprised by this. To become a “scientist”—and receive funding for your work—you are required to lie. This scientist likely believes that criminals are largely “born that way,” but he’s forced to parrot the blankslatist belief that this means the criminal shouldn’t be held accountable. The truth is hopelessly conflated with the lie.
The neurologist’s position—if he is a hereditarian—is not a rational one. A hereditarian would not conclude that because crime is predetermined, criminals should not be held accountable. He would conclude the opposite, judging each man according to his deeds. A hereditarian would conclude that no man that is incapable of doing good would ever be declared innocent.
In general, those on the political left embrace blankslatism wholeheartedly. Meanwhile, those on the political right tend to embrace blankslatism more halfheartedly. They know that blankslatism is wrong, but promote it anyway. I suspect the neurologist fits into the second category, but I have no way to know for sure.
Now, let’s continue the essay.
I listened politely for a while. I was already Catholic at this point and mentioned that his studies show exactly what a Catholic would expect to see. The whole room cooed expecting that I was in agreement… of course I wasn’t.
I said that in Catholic moral theology, the body conforms to the operation of the soul, and so we would expect to find in the body, signs of the soul’s degeneracy. The dinner party was appalled by my choice of word. I continued…
As a man continues to habituate more and more depraved degeneracy a Catholic would expect to see the brain altered. Then I asked a simple question; “In these 10,000 patient studies do you have a large sample of brain scans from the same men when they were children?”
The neuroscientist just stared for what seems like forever, registering the obvious, when my actor friend finally burst out in a laugh; ” Hahaha Buggy here just destroyed your life’s work!”. The doctor admitted that no such data existed.
I aimed for amicability, and suggested it would be neat to see that data if he ever decided to collect it, difficult as such an undertaking would be. The conversation shifted elsewhere, and that neuroscientist went on to meet with the heads of state that he was in town to meet.
Lewis talks about the danger of pretending crime is a disease and criminals patients. What he predicts is precisely what we now have. The only way back to normal is normalizing retribution. The only solution is real justice, immediate, and radical by liberal standards.
Let’s be honest about the elephant in the room. Approximately 1 in 3 black men will have at least one felony conviction over their lifetime. Approximately 1 in 20 will commit murder, and that’s ignoring repeat offenders. The chance of being the next Iryna is not a fringe, statistical outlier. Moreover, school kids are at greater risk from a fellow black student than a mass shooter, by orders of magnitude. The arguments made above are ideologically motivated by this reality.
Bug’s argument is blankslatist to the core. He believes that each man is born in a kind of blank slate, but that one’s later actions cause one’s brain to deform. The corruption of his brain follows the corruption of his mind. This is a rather clever way to try to maintain a blankslatist position. I’ll give the man props for creativity. He’s lucky we don’t (yet) have the direct evidence to overtly disprove his claim. Although, we don’t really need it.
Unfortunately for Bug, criminality is already known to be extremely heritable, as discussed in Monday’s “Blankslatism Strikes Again!” It’s not really some unknown proposition for which we have no evidence. It is a well established fact.
What this means is that even if a person exhibits biological changes over time, these are themselves highly heritable traits. After all, you are not born tall, you have to grow into it. There is no logical problem with criminality being an inherently genetically-determined degenerative condition. This means that even if you surround a predetermined criminal with a solidly good environment, like a special private school or into an adoptive high-IQ family, he’s still going to end up more-or-less the same.
Bug is a Roman Catholic who believes “the body conforms to the operation of the soul, and so we would expect to find in the body, signs of the soul’s degeneracy.” The problem is that, by and large, criminals are born that way. In other words, his blankslatist “Catholic moral theology” is imaginary and falls prey to the warning:
“It is a dangerous mistake to premise the moral equality of human beings on biological similarity because dissimilarity, once revealed, then becomes an argument for moral inequality.”
— A.W.F. Edwards, Lewontin’s Fallacy, 2003
Bug has set himself up such that if his assumptions about brain development prove unfounded (e.g. say criminals can be predicted by AI examination of the brain scans of infants), his argument—which premises moral equality upon biological similarity—becomes an argument for moral inequality, the inherent greater relative degeneracy of the soul, based solely on one’s birth.
Obviously, this conflation struggles to match reality (hint: it doesn’t). Criminality peaks in the young and tails off as people get older. Brain-based predeterminism doesn’t account for this. Nor does it leave any room for redemption in Christ, for when one is saved by Christ, their brains do not, by miracle, transform into a non-deformed state.
As I noted in “Racism,” it would be better to acknowledge reality:
Reality is the acknowledgement that:
- Moral equality is not based on biological similarity
- Biological dissimilarity exists
Thus, being of a particular race is inherently amoral.
What I find most interesting is that Bruce Charlton’s view accounts for the differences that the blankslatists are struggling to explain.
Blankslatists believe that reality is racist.
In that case, with the San Fran Transit, it is mostly about them NOT wanting women(& their simp frame goddess worshippers) to be afraid to use trains and such(like MEN in general had become of dating and marriage by the 2000s, when simp frame goddess worshippers started saying ”WHERES DA MENZ?” ), it’s like when simp frame goddess worshippering soccerdads discovered MENS RIGHTS, MGTOW & PUA -”How can I make this useful for my simp frame goddess worshippering ways?” and by 2015?-It =” married game” and its accompanying Mark Driscoll-like MENZ-UP sermons like in these ST.DAL posts https://theredarchive.com/blog/Dalrock/game-for-pastors-parti.12189
&
https://theredarchive.com/blog/Dalrock/a-fathers-day-call-torepentance.23588
– had collapsed the MENS RIGHTS, MGTOW, & PUA sphere A.K.A. the Roissy/manosphere, which had encompassed the MRAsphere & MGTOWospheres by then.
IOW?
Simp frame goddess worshippers(in their arrogant greed and lust for power) CREATED the blackpillers and the ” NEVER-GET MARRIED” die-hard variant of MGTOW that they detest so much! Such as here with Voxhttps://voxday.net/2017/12/09/mailvox-low-morale-men/
”Mailvox: low morale men
JAG defends MGTOW:
This is why I don’t look down my nose at the MGTOW guys. Most of them are MGTOW because women have become so toxic through feminism that they are no longer attractive. Plus, many of these guys have seen their brothers, fathers, uncles, etc., utterly destroyed by the feminist court system that makes the man an indentured servant for the rest of his life after taking everything else away from him all because the woman got bored or some other ridiculous reason.
I realize that this is not a popular opinion around here, but those are my reasons for being sympathetic to the MGTOWs. How could you blame them, really? I know that lack of breeding is the biggest issue many have with them, but they are staunch allies when it comes to the issue of feminism.
How could you blame them? Easily. MGTOW are low morale cowards. From the societal and civilizational perspective they are useless parasites who, by their fecklessness, are helping the barbarians win the civilization war. Sure, they’re vastly to be preferred to the feminists, foreigners, globalists, and anti-Christians who are actively waging war against Western civilization, but they are passively refusing to defend it in any way.
How are they any better than the very Western women they excoriate? They are, in fact, observably worse, as both are in it merely for themselves but at least the women may produce the next generation of Western children, even if they will surely raise them in a sub-optimal manner. ”
-see how wimminz are always superior to(suffering) MEN in a simp frame goddess worshipping mind?
Then !A#$ and {REDACTED} wonder ”where is all da MENZ who want me as their ”redpill” pope,LAWD & MASTA?”-”da MENZ”-as !A#$ and {REDACTED} so eloquently write, long ago knew NOT to go to Simp frame goddess worshippers like !A#$ and {REDACTED} for advice on anything , mainly thanks to ST.DAL’ & VOX.
Vox and other Simp frame goddess worshippers helped create those ”low morale” MEN they h8 with passion by saying ”IT IS COMMANDED THAT MEN MUST LEARN GAME & TO TAKE THEIR DAILY BEATINGS WITH A SMILE AND MUCHO PRIDE”.
Derek,
See this latest post by !A#$?
If No Peace, then War!
Posted on 2025/09/13 by !A#$(really GBFM who is William Wallace)
When all that is good, beautiful, and true is desecrated, utter destruction is imminent.
Readership: All; Men;
Theme: Validation; Awareness and Introspection;
Length: 700 verbose wordy words
Reading Time: 4 minutes
The Martial Disposition of Peacemakers
Peacemakers are men who are peaceful to the very snuff of their souls. Their very presence has a calming effect on others, able to end an argument with mere eye contact. Ironically, this may be because Peacemakers are some of the most violent, warmongering, ZFG individuals among all mankind. Ironic, but true.
(Really, GBFM, who is William Wallace)
YEP!
So !A#$ isn’t that much of a blank slatist, BUT a ”redpill” plagerist as he nearly copied zlzozolzozo for zlzozolzozo what is written below in that verbose wordy words post.😉
BRAVEHEART (GBFM is William Wallace): You’re so concerned with squabbling (gaming) for the scraps (pre-buttocked, desouledz Dalrockianz womenz) from Longshank’s (Chuchian/Frankfartian) table that you’ve missed your God given right to something better (the schools, universities, and a loyal, virginal wife).
BRAVEHEART (GBFM is William Wallace): You’re so concerned with squabbling (gaming) for the scraps (Dalrockian pre-buttocked, deosuledz womenz) from Longshank’s (Chuchian/Frankfartian) table that you’ve missed your God given right to something better (the schools, universities, and a loyal, virginal, wife).
Wallace (GBFM): We have beaten the English (the manosphere gets more traffic than many well-funded frnkfartian blogs), but they’ll come back because you won’t stand together (too many dalrockian frnkfartians attack the Great Books for Men in favor of gamey game).
MacClannough (DALROCK): What will you do?
Wallace (GBFM): I will invade england (the chruches/universities/publishing houses) and defeat the English (Frankfartians/Churchians) on their own ground with a literary and spiritual renaissance exalting the Great Books and Classics.
MacClannough (DALROCK): Invade? That’s impossible.
Wallace (GBFM): Why? Why is that impossible? You’re so concerned with squabbling for the scraps (gaming the pre-buttocked womenz) from Longshanks’ (Frankfartian schools and churches) table that you’ve missed your god-given right to something better (A literary and spirtual renaissance exalting our birthright–the Great Books for Men, and a truly Holy Wife, loyal to God and Man instead of da bottomz lineszzz debtesz butt gina tinzgzlzozolzozo). There’s a difference between us. You think the people of this country (bloggers of the manosphere) exist to provide you with position (instalanches for teaching men they need Game instead of Moses and Jesus and Homer). I think your position exists to provide those people with freedom (the Truth of teh Great Books for Men that Sets Them Free), and I go to make sure that they have it.
–From the Movie Braveheart. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0112573/trivia?tab=qt&ref_=tt_trv_qu
Commenter John recently stated:
John4.3.14 / 7am
I am wondering why you type these things and it is hard for me to figure out sometimes.
On one hand you say we need to reclaim the churches, society, schools, university and deride Dalrock (perhaps rightly so) for accepting game.
But whenever Heartiste makes a post about alphas or game you claim in an exaggerated way that you have all those attributes.
Which leads me to believe either
1) You are mocking this concept of alpha in a funny way.
2) You are not a Christian and therefore do not hold yourself to the same standard. However, you will hold a Christian person to their own standard and call them out on it.
You are probably go for something subtler that I am not getting. In any case for the talk about reclaiming society..It make me think about the Iliad again.
Why did all of Greece under Agamemnon invade Troy for one girl? Why did the families of these men support them in doing so, even the women? Was this woman that beautiful? Yes, it is that in part. There is the saying of the woman who launched a thousand ships. But in going after this woman and the cowardly Paris who stole her, the men were going to reclaim society. It was not that the men were horny and all marveled the beauty of this woman. It was that these men upheld their values so much, that they wouldn’t even let this woman, who had beauty blessed by a “goddess” get away with doing something so heinous as breaking a wedding vow and running away with another man to another country.
And we see this again when Achilles refuses to fight. The Achaens had vows that a certain maiden, as a spoil of war would go to Achilles. But King Agamemnon broke this, and thus Achilles refused to bend to his will and retreated to his own tent. This is showing a people who held on to honor, respect, justice, even at the cost of defying the most beautiful woman in the world (and the mischievous deities that supported her) as well as kings. In both cases what was theirs was reclaimed.
DA GBFM REPLIES:
Yes John, the Iliad and Odyssey exalt the nobility of Honor.
The very first word of the Iliad is “RAGE.” The “RAGE” of Achilles when his honor is violated and his rightful prize and love is taken from him by his very own commander.
Right here we see Man versus State, as Achilles is the superior warrior, and as he takes all the risks, he ought get the reward. That is the Natural Law of Zeus, for after Achilles Natural Rights are violated and Achilles quits, Zeus sees to it that the Greeks begin to lose, as Zeus’s will was done.
Long before Atlas Shrugged in Rand’s cheap novel, Achilles quit the Greek army.
Homer shows that women who honor their commitments, like Penelope, lead to happy endings. Women who disregard their commitments, like Helen, lead to War.
Achilles quits for the sake of Honor, refuses to return when offered millions times more prizes, arguing that once honor is taken away, mere money/prizes cannot buy it back. He also reasons that all the wealth in the world is not worth him losing his life in an arena where his honor was taken away. When offered honors and awards, Achilles states, “I receive my honor from Zeus, not from corrupt Kings.”
And too Achilles returns to fight for Honor, so as to avenge the death of his friend Patroculus, knowing full well he will die.
Simply put, Achilles is a man who lives and dies not for mere prizes, nor perks, nor tenure, nor titles, nor money, but for honor, and honor alone.
A few hundred years later, Socrates would invoke Achilles while facing death at his own trial. Socrates was offered perks and prizes and life if he would only recant his teachings that “Virtue does not come from money, but money and every lasting good of man derives form virtue.”
But then Socrates asked, “Would Achilles back down from battle is bribed by physical wealth?” Socrates reasoned he would be dishonoring the Great Achilles if he ever recanted his teachings.
And of course Socrates mentored Plato who mentored Aristotle who mentored Copernicus/Newton/Galileo, who gave birth to Western Science and Technology and Freedom, all via the Homeric Honor of Achilles.
In the same way Socrates internalized the physical battle of Achilles and made it a battle for the soul, so too did Jesus inetrnalize the physical battles of Moses, and make it a battle for the soul, for the Kingdom of Ideals.
And in Hamlet, we see the clash of Athens and Jerusalem, as Hamlet is called upon to avenge his Father, only to find his murderous uncle begging for forgiveness beneath a cross. So too do we see Athens and Jerusalem as two pillars of our Liberty and Freedom, which is why Dalrock and his Frankfartian Fellowship must attack, belittle and castigate it.
Wallace (GBFM): We have beaten the English (the manosphere gets more traffic than many well-funded frnkfartian blogs), but they’ll come back because you won’t stand together (too many dalrockian frnkfartians attack the Great Books for Men in favor of gamey game).
MacClannough (DALROCK): What will you do?
Wallace (GBFM): I will invade england (the chruches/universities/publishing houses) and defeat the English (Frankfartians/Churchians) on their own ground with a literary and spiritual renaissance exalting the Great Books and Classics.
MacClannough (DALROCK): Invade? That’s impossible.
Wallace (GBFM): Why? Why is that impossible? You’re so concerned with squabbling for the scraps (gaming the pre-buttocked womenz) from Longshanks’ (Frankfartian schools and churches) table that you’ve missed your god-given right to something better (A literary and spirtual renaissance exalting our birthright–the Great Books for Men, and a truly Holy Wife, loyal to God and Man instead of da bottomz lineszzz debtesz butt gina tinzgzlzozolzozo). There’s a difference between us. You think the people of this country (bloggers of the manosphere) exist to provide you with position (instalanches for teaching men they need Game instead of Moses and Jesus and Homer). I think your position exists to provide those people with freedom (the Truth of teh Great Books for Men that Sets Them Free), and I go to make sure that they have it.
As I noted in “Racism,” it would be better to acknowledge reality:
Reality is the acknowledgement that:
Moral equality is not based on biological similarity
Biological dissimilarity exists
Thus, being of a particular race is inherently amoral.
Derek,
i ,{REDACTED}, and Farm Boy saw this version of Motorhead last night😉
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/HLSUAaIK-IA
All FB could say was ”that drummer is amazing bro!!!”😉
While {REDACTED} was saying AMEN, AMEN, AMEN!, about the singer😉