Posts made by Rah1woot

@WilliamBlake I don't know about this particular example of the eye (which is wild), but Michael Levin has been working on bioelectricity as a means of changing organism body plan, and enhancing regeneration of removed limbs (as in salamanders): https://www.bitsofwonder.co/p/a-revolution-in-biology

Wikipedia has some more elaboration:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Developmental_bioelectricity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_pattern

I don't know about being able to sleep wherever I am, but when I'm in good health, one of the important things that happens is that I need less sleep overall, and do take less time to fall asleep.

This is amazing as even without getting into the "quality of life" stuff, it gives me something like an extra hour every day, which is huge over the course of a life.

I've recently been following a variation of anabology's "Honey Diet" (mostly, I don't eat any fat, protein, or starch until dinner) which has pushed the needle in this direction.

Pretty interesting, thanks for sharing.

I sometimes turn on my red light for many hours at a time in the winter with some idea of emulating sunlight... I actually did that yesterday and today I felt quite tired and my eyes were hurting.

Perhaps that is counterproductive.

@pondfountain https://x.com/dannyroddy/status/1803094971563520476

Here is a possible alternative if you have the time and interest to explore.

For most people today, the main postural ailment is something like upper crossed syndrome, or forward head posture, usually caused by constant use of computers.

I would consider this personally my one main remaining, looming, health problem. I very rarely have migraines now, but when I do, they always seem to radiate from the atlas vertebrae, which connects the skull to the neck.

When my father had excruciatingly painful back problems, he was ultimately able to treat them by bedrest mixed with regularly hanging from a chin-up bar. This hanging is something I am considering implementing myself for my less severe issues.

Has this forum had good experience with simple therapies for treating this? Obviously "sit up straight' isn't bad advice, but perhaps there is something better to help.

The twitter account here: https://x.com/spheno_xiphoid is somewhat interesting and helpful so far. As are the articles on MSK neurology: https://mskneurology.com/association-tinnitus-neck-tmj/

@pondfountain If you find that thermometers available are not sufficiently accurate, or corresponding to a particular book... it may not be worth agonizing over. Assuming that each individual thermometer is accurate to its own bias (as opposed to truly all over the place), you already have a pretty good system for making bioenergetic improvements.

When I feel warmer after eating something like coconut oil and sugar, it is reflected in the thermometer I use. I am able to correlate my general metabolic state (stressful or redox) to this reading and how I feel.

Although I admit that it may be worth getting more serious for more serious problems. As you have no post history I am not able to judge your context.

@bio3nergetic Good points. I think if there is any hope it lies in simultaneously hitting the books, so as to benefit from some of the fruits of centralized power (such as knowledge of electricity...), and a fixation towards the real and immediately relevant above all else.

Perhaps it is naive but I think that the real and true will ultimately win by definition. The elites generally never let a good crisis go to waste, but it does not mean that genuine crisis, conflict, and change is not possible.

@bio3nergetic Hm. What to say? I think it makes sense if one takes the root of "dialectics" to be "dialogue" rather than "di" as in two. A dialogue often has two sides, but it can have more. Within the dialogue the number of perspectives hopefully exceeds two as it moves forward in time, otherwise there was nothing developed and it might not be called dialectical. There is a "negatiion of the negation" in Hegelian terms.

I think it is fair to say as you point out that elements of the ruling class attempt to gesture at this to gain a sense of legitimacy. Obama and Hitler are both decent examples of fake revolutionaries who tried to use this as a technology.
But the nature of the true opposition is within Carl Schmitt's war-theory of politics, whose conflict is often ugly and vulgar. And so a current of the actual opposition does inevitably develop, although it is scorned from all established sides and may not even make sense. MAGA is the most potent articulation of this so far.

@bio3nergetic This is not a bad point, but I think your notion of The Creation maps quite well onto Lenin's definition of matter anyways.

01:28:19.000 --> 01:28:39.000
Lysenko represented the truly materialist approach to reality.

01:28:39.000 --> 01:28:54.000
Western genetics theory represents the imposed rationalist, reductionist approach to reality.

01:28:54.000 --> 01:29:07.000
So the Westernization required knocking out any of the remaining actual materialists.

01:29:07.000 --> 01:29:32.000
One of Lenin's best pieces of writing was explaining essentially that the concept of materialism in the West is pure idealism, absolutely the negation of materialism in Lenin's sense.

01:29:32.000 --> 01:29:50.000
Lenin said knowledge is composed of memory, but the memories are recordings of experience, and experience is always new.

01:29:50.000 --> 01:30:03.000
The source of experience is matter, and so matter is only what is potential to be experienced.

01:30:03.000 --> 01:30:28.000
So materialism means looking to the future and the possibilities of experience, where the genetics and reductionists try to base their rationalism on an organization of existing knowledge, pre-existing ideas,

01:30:28.000 --> 01:30:35.000
and breaking those down into logical, computable units and so on.

01:30:35.000 --> 01:30:57.000
The essence of Lenin's type of materialism is essentially identifying it with the life process, the process of being conscious and having new experience is the process of interacting with the material world.

01:30:57.000 --> 01:31:05.000
So this is the same idea as Aristotle's prima matter, the pure potential out of which everything arises.

01:31:05.000 --> 01:31:09.000
Yep, creative potential.

Perhaps with an added understanding of potentiality, and a discarding of exactly what the life process cannot ultimately come to understand. Which as Peat points out is a big part of Aristotle, his emphasis on Infinity as not actually existing but being mostly a potential.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6ExkJhk7lA

@bio3nergetic said in RFK Jr. Officially Nominated for HHS Secretary.:

For example thinking only in terms of "they are part THEM" or they aren't. There is a middle ground of Controllers allowing for things to happen because of their belief in a Dialectic. And before shrugging that off, the belief in a Dialectic is more nefarious than it sounds; or at least is more potentially harmful than it sounds.

Dialectical reasoning is made plainly true by the practice of engineering. First you make a prototype to examine your hypothesis in the real world, and then you iterate. And so on. It is the way to understand understanding in a world with finite resources and people with finite capabilities and time. e.g., Newtonian physics as a "prototype" for Einsteinian physics et cetera. (Finite within each particular time-slice, at least). It's not about "duality" as such.

REAL reality is how we would know life in a Peat Arian world. THIS reality? No way things are as they appear. Learning occultism helps elevate ones perspective as well. You begin to realize uncanny parallels to what's going on around you.

After all, I "dare to think."

I think this is a laughable view in the Peat sphere, whose entire program is based in philosophical materialism.

If we do not think Reality is actually observable and modifiable on the basis of real knowledge, we may as well throw in the towel now and start watching anime and playing video games. It is an inherently degenerate perspective. Which coincidentally is the program of large parts of the right wing, whether they call themselves liberals or fascists, or even "democratic socialists". It is a cognitive technology that serves to excuse shortcomings and weakness in the real.

"It is exactly as science should be, and exactly what science isn't working as right now" - Dr. Ray Peat on Dialectical Materialism and the works of Lenin.

https://bioenergetic.life/clips/3aec8?t=6549&c=122

@yerrag

Just bad that Hitler got poor intelligence fed by UK that Russia would attack Germany and that's why Germany attacked Russia preemptively.

I'll download it but I prefer reading Mein Kampf over it lol.

I am puzzled by this. You are aware that Hitler declares his intent to invade the USSR in Mein Kampf (published in 1925), right? Or did we not read the same Mein Kampf?

@Mauritio Not bad... I suspect this could be our 1905 Provisional Government moment.

@Hearthfire I do think @Insomniac 's intention was the exact opposite, to show this as an example of good health and a "young mind". I am reminded of something Eduard Limonov wrote.

At 54 Chaplin have married 17 years old girl, Oona, she gave him a bunch of children, they lived happily until he died at 91. But a Russian worker at 54 usually very old man, he has a difficulties to live, not marrying young girls.

@LetTheRedeemed

The indigenous and enduring version of hierarchy, is and will always be family.

Practically yes, probably true for at least the next few centuries. In my personal politics I support the social support of family development by means of financial help and so on, curing alcohol addiction of parents so as to create better role models, etc. But there is no theoretical reason why this will "always" be so. Cockshott gives a good description in his book "How the World Works" of how societies changed from matriarchies (the "longhouse" that the internet right wing often complains about) to patriarchies partially as a result of the agricultural revolution, what he calls a "trophic level descent". Another trophic level descent could well disrupt even the somewhat vestigial aspects of the current reproduction relation and its consequences.

For warfare to exist you need something to fight over. Whereas warfare in pure hunter-gatherer societies seems rare [Fry, 2007; Ryan and Jethá, 2012] it has been common in societies with either herding or at least some form of agriculture. It is clear that once cattle or other beasts are herded they can be stolen, and can be the object of a war party. But fighting is not limited to what Smith called Nations of Shepherds, formidable as these have been.15 Nations and tribes that combine some hoe horticulture with hunting have been warlike. Why?

According to Meillassoux [1981] the motive for the conflict was the capture not of cattle but young women. Pure hunter-gatherer societies are nomadic, with no fixed villages, and mobility of people between wandering small bands. Agriculture ties people down. He argues that the initial form of family in the transition to agriculture is the matrilocal, which means a society in which adult women stay in their mother’s home or community. Insofar as there is mobility between communities, it is the men who move, seeking wives in other communities.
...
This leads to endemic hostility and suspicion between communities. Men acquire the social role of warrior both to abduct women from other groups and to protect their own women. Such societies may remain matrilineal, with children being brought up in a relatively communal household with their uncles playing what we would regard as a paternal role. There may be no system of strict monogamy. But the beginnings of the collective dominance of men over women exist. Men as hunters and warriors develop ideologies that represent them as protectors and heroes and which justify relegating women to what are presented as menial horticultural tasks. In particular the abducted women, cut off from their own community, are likely to be in a very subordinate position.

Today, IVF and egg freezing already mutate this relationship somewhat. Sheep have already been reproduced using both cloning and artificial wombs. The right wing's response to this has generally been to complain about it or point out (not necessarily incorrectly) that this is inferior to the Real Deal. But then you have something like a society which uses these methods to create "cheap" soldiers, for example, capable of conquering others that stayed with the "old way". So pearl-clutching generally puts one at a disadvantage. Just as production of energy has largely been socialized in the form of electricity, sexual reproduction has already been socialized by technologies like birth control, the medicalized abortion, "One Child Policies", most recently primitive forms of embryo selection. There is no reason to think that sexual reproduction will be untouched. Even if we realized that some of these things (such as birth control) have negative consequences.

The families with the strongest cohesion become communal pillars of stability.

Sure. But it would be wrong to extend this relationship wholesale to the present day, in which the size of communities, for example, is dramatically expanded by roads, internal combustion engines, telecommunications. To do otherwise would appeal to the naturalistic fallacy. But I don't think spending many hours a day acquiring food (as a male) and collecting water (as a female) is the ultimate calling of man. Humanity itself is inherently technological insofar as our brain was made possible by the use of the spear and such for hunting. And so the idea of the inherently natural is not only fictional, but literally deficient as a method of fighting conflict, which is one of the most important pressures on a social system.

I think your characterization of the rational "social contract", in which the peasant "rationally understands" how hierarchy is good, is not correct. Julian Jaynes, in his book "The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind", gives a good characterization of how the first "super-hierarchies" of God-Kings in first agricultural states in Iran and Iraq were religious structures enforced by things like replications of the God-King figure in a dedicated room in every home.

This reality is cut as deep in the brain as the need for sex and food -- it can never be replaced. I hope communists can see that even they would need a leader in history past, to trust and follow when revolting...

To your point, the "Great Leader" meme is one of the most endemic ones in Communism. Mao Zedong achieved success with the Red Army because it was highly people-oriented, and so people helped and trusted it.

This isn't incoherent, but somewhat conveniently for me, food production is a pretty good example of what Marx and Engels describe as "dialectical materialism". And as Cockshott puts forth in the above book as well.

Going lower in the system unlocks dramatically more energy. Hence the value of Sugar (produced by plants) in Peatarianism.

So I don't see why sexual reproduction relations would necessarily have to remain fixed.

In general, one aspect of Marx that you seem to overlook is Dialectical Materialism. You gesture at "dialectics running their course", but generally don't consider actual change in productive and social relations to be possible, you instead invoke the past as an example of what is correct. This is an unserious perspective as their system was completely different from ours today, just as theirs was different from the prior one.

Is taking exogenous progesterone (which is synthesized using organic chemistry techniques from yams) natural? No. Neither are the highly productive varieties of fruits that Peaters benefit from today. Nor the Nitrogen Chemistry which makes it possible to grow so many plants anyways. And yet these things offer an advantage. To reject them on the basis of naturalism would be suicidal in the face of real conflict in the world.

It is not necessarily warm and cozy to contemplate such realities, the little cliches that make up life as we know it today one day becoming limiting factors on existence. But we must make peace with their expiry (when it comes, which is not today) and find the good in the real at all costs. There is no going back.

Postscript: I suspect that when embryo selection becomes standard procedure in the socialized sexual reproduction system, only then will the medical establishment realize that genes aren't all that. Down Syndrome may well be eradicated, which I welcome. But something like "selecting for intelligence", people will eventually realize that doesn't really work. And so the paradigm will be questioned.

By the time soft-engineering slithers out of its box into yours, human security is lurching into crisis. Cloning, lateral genodata transfer, transversal replication, and cyberotics, flood in amongst a relapse onto bacterial sex.

@LetTheRedeemed Yes, I would agree with that summary. As I've sort of pointed at it has already largely happened especially considering that Marx was working in the 19th century. Capitalism arguably ended in 1929, and continued to end. Blackrock owns everything, but who owns blackrock in kind? The pension funds, et cetera. Capitalism in the US today is financialized and "superstructural", dependent overwhelmingly on beliefs held in the brain ("credo" as the root of "credit") rather than objective conditions of social production.

So the revolutionary act remaining is to recognize this state for what it is.

https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/feds/files/2023041pap.pdf

@S-Holmes As predicted, your worldview is a fantasy of secret warfare. Hypotheticals. What would've happened in Another Timeline or something like that. Rather than embracing the one and only History as the sole truth that it is.

This is our last chance and if we don't succeed, the hounds of hell will be released upon the world.

Here I can sympathize. Just get ready to be disappointed is what I'll say. Admit it truthfully as a possibility, rather than relegating it to a secret defeat in an imagined internal office politics, "the best he could do", et cetera. The "anti-beauty" of that game is that it can be played literally forever.

Don't confuse the symbol for the symbolized. Which as you point out is really We The People, and nothing else.

@S-Holmes

Why so many black pill dispensers in this group?

Framing the conflict in terms of drugs (would you call yourself a "white piller"?) is a great way to lose a productive outlook in favor of the messianism of a truly downtrodded population. Instead of entering in a dialogue with reality one can only take the speculators positions of "it's so over" and "we're so back". Kerensky's Napoleonic cult of personality comes to mind, at the time of Russia's involvement in WW1.

Stop taking pills. Plunge unconditionally into the abyss that is the real. Because there is literally nothing else.

And there, you will gain the ability to actually know what's going to happen. Instead of being forced into increasingly limited and convoluted interpretations of Trump the Savior, who saves in secret, unknown ways.