Solipsism and inversion

inversionIn our modern time, we like to show how enlightened we are and talk about “big concepts” like relativity — as long as they confirm our viewpoints, and let us go back to doing whatever it is we do in our personal sphere.

For all our blather about relativity, we don’t understand that we are part of any equation, and that it not only applies to us but refers back to us.

Those who are free of this delusion recognize that no statement exists in an absolute context, and that we self-reference by any statement we make — and that if we don’t recognize that, we’re solipsists who assume the external world is part of ourselves and that we reign over it like gods, not needing to see or reveal where we fit in the equation.

We can see this most clearly in some of the socially-popular memes that people use to “justify away” ideas, or explain why they’re not relevant. Here’s the first:

Person 1: As you can see, each nation that adopted crack smoking as a national passtime is also deeply impoverished.

Person 2: Correlation is not causation, therefore we cannot assume the two are connected.

They say “correlation is not causation” as if to imply that if you find a correlation, it’s proof of an acausal relationship.

But the truth is that correlation is not causation and correlation is not not-causation either; it’s just correlation, and can coexist with either causation or lack thereof.

That of course ruins an easy way of explaining away troubling trends, and so is not popular because like all things that show us they’re a problem, it demands we either fix it — or face our own reluctance, cowardice, powerlessness or other lack of ability to fix it.

Here’s another case of solipsism in argument:

Person 1: Here’s an idea I had…

Person 2: This guy really thinks he knows what he’s talking about.

Person 3: You’re implying that you know better, and therefore, you really think you know what you’re talking about.

Internet Follies

Here we have an inversion: accuse others of what you are doing yourself. If someone says something you don’t like, imply that they’re placing themselves above others as an authority — ignoring the fact that you’re doing the same by presuming to judge their intent and viability of their argument.

Ignoring the inversion presents a problem because it allows people to imply authority through passive aggression, and as a result, use that assumed authority to tear down anyone with an idea other than the status quo.

And with humanity, the status quo is always solipsism. “I want to do what I’m doing now, and I don’t want you to interrupt it, no matter what the consequences may be.” Defending personal autonomy is seen as more important than dealing with consequences, and to avoid conflict, we avoid attacking personal autonomy — which allows people to continue doing stupid, bad, destructive, passive, erosive and corrupt things.

Unless they’re so blatant as to get caught, or be seen doing them in public, of course. But Plato was hip to our inversion and solipsism as well, when in his parable of the ring of the Lydian Gyges, he says that given a ring which confers invisibility, a bad man will hide his bad deeds and show his good deeds, while a good man will hide his good deeds and show his bad deeds, so that good men appear bad and bad men appear good.

That’s the ultimate inversion, and one common to any social circumstance including a civilization, so the one most likely to be its downfall.

8 Responses to “Solipsism and inversion”

  1. highduke says:

    Brilliant. ANUSian. But don’t write for Humanity. FUCK HUMANITY. Write for your own people: Anglo-Americans & Texans. Ethnocentric elements of the former are the only ones who can build healthy nations after the US goes bankrupt. Hipsters eschew ethnic identity & you’ve been faking Birchian Hipsterism too long Brett. Let it go. Embrace your people. Write for them. Negroes, Latinos, European & 3rd World immigrants hold you back & look down on your people. Trust me.

  2. misanthropope says:

    it’s gotta make you god-damn proud, the quality of the people who congratulate you on these screeds.

    i don’t know where you encountered the words “solipsism” and “relativity”, but you really might want to stop using them since you demonstrate a complete incomprehension of what they mean. the people you are impressing will continue to hold their lighters in the air for you if you stick with things like “hippies are gay”, and the rest of us will have just a bit less amusement at your expense.

    • AnHero says:

      Yeah, this Brett guy really thinks he knows what he’s talking about.

      Making general criticisms is a good way to look better than someone without having to demonstrate understanding of the subject yourself.

      How rational is it to judge the quality of an article by the comments posted?

  3. Shawn Nondlebutt says:

    Here’s another case of solipsism in argument:

    “Apparently having forgotten that one of the key elements of metal’s appeal is its egalitarian populism, these sneering exclusionists—who are far more snobbish than the so-called “hipsters” they claim to denigrate—get off on casting anyone out of the real-metal club who doesn’t fit their definition of realness.”,35494/

    Guy 1: This is real metal.

    Guy 2: That isn’t real metal, how dare you define metal, fascist! Therefore, I’ve implied that I know what real metal is.

  4. CallistoRising says:

    I think you have the wrong end of the stick. This site is primarily aimed against certain elements of human psychology, its solipsisms and sophistry. Whilst a part of that includes having the balls to admit “races are not equal”, “immigration is a big problem” and advocate a traditionalist outlook, to think the name of the game is about blaming some sort of racial enemy for our ills, pisses all over that. This isn’t fucking Stormfront. Also, where you get this idea that is hipsterish is telling of some bizarrely low threshhold for what you define as hipsterism.

    • highduke says:’s Hipsters see ideas on social organization as extensions of their personality, always talk about themselves, eschew ethnic kinship for ‘culture’ while ignoring that the former produces the latter, are conservative but not nationalist, as they ignore that the former depends on the latter to flourish. A Conservative who doesn’t think Euro-Whites are targeted for assimilation should read Pat Buchanon & watch the documentary Hollywodism on Youtube but dont dismiss it as stormfront b.s

  5. Elle says:

    Yes, that metal guy did seem like he knew what he was talking about. Let me tell you why: He spoke as thought he understood musical composition, he was able to site metal bands, had an elitist attitude toward other genres of music (I’ll have you know there is nothing to be ashamed of for liked a side of mindless pop music every now and again), and even stuck his nose up at other, less desirable metal bands. His overall tone is “if you question me, you obviously know nothing about metal”. For example, I don’t think it’s very fair to say that the songs sound alike at first listen. If he knew so damned much about composition, he’d be able to hear that. To the uninitiated it may sound like nothing but big guitar noise and shrieking/guttural vocals, but I’d wager this article was not written for those people.

    But yeah, it’s is the same old BS. Seems when it comes to comment threads there’s always a struggle between those whole happily, whole-heartedly agree to those willing to offer an actual opinion. Guess who usually wins.

  6. […] of measurement show a single pattern, there is validity and more likely a causal relationship. As pointed out elsewhere, “correlation does not equal causation” has a caveat which is “correlation does […]

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>