May 1, 2011

The opposite of teaching

Conspiracy Conference 2010, panel pt 4

Dough Millar and Mike Tsarion confront Papal Knight Horowitz from the "black" (invisible) Party of the Papists

"To me that disingenuous ploy of pretending that he did not know what the phrase referred to – 'jesuitical argument' – is his biggest faux pas. A man of his knowledge would certainly know what it referred to. If he was trained by Jesuits then he would specialize in that kind of sophistry. That is why I wanted to directly bring that up to him, to see his response.
Of course, he responded jesuitically – that is, by simply stating that the term meant nothing to him. Brilliant."

The Trivium vs the Jesuitical Argument

Is the "Jesuitical Argument" actually a fallacy of its own or a compilation of several deceptive maneuvers?
What exactly is a "Jesuitical Argument"?

Richard Grove) Excellent observation, Tosco!
Now you're getting to the point of why we're teaching intellectual self-defense :)

The "Jesuitical Argument" is a) a fallacy, as it tries to deceive, and b) a compilation of several layers of deception. The point is ... "Jesuitical Argument" is the opposite of teaching, it's the use of words to obscure the truth ... or, to occult the truth (as "occult" comes from Latin, meaning to obscure from view, occultare, which is a verb).

The ruling class hides all of its sources of power, these secrets are hidden in an area where things which have been occulted reside. This creates a gap in situational awareness, wherein the group which occults has access to all the info, and the general public only has access to part of the information.
See: National Security, and the fact that one-third of American History has been occulted ... for what purpose? To empower those who occult things.
The aristocrat class has (for thousands of years) used words to control people, as it's more efficient than having to prod them all with spears, etc. ... That takes a lot more money to keep people against their will ...
The solution (in their eyes): to get people to willingly consent to their slavery. They did this by creating a gap in knowledge/power/liberty/wealth (all the same thing) in the form of providing their class of elites with an education which supercedes that of the population ... this is how they maintain power.
Their use of intellectual tools and teachings (the seven liberal arts for example, according to the 1610 Wood Manuscript, are the ancient foundations of "masonry" ... which is using words and word magic to build the world in their image) create a gap, which is thereby used as a sword (or weapon) against those who are un-armed (with the ability to learn for themselves).

The reason most people don't recognize the "Jesuitical Argument" is that they a) lack any form of critical thinking skills, which b) blinds them from the rhetoric, and thus c) puts them under the "spell" of an "authority figure", which is all created as a function of the ignorance or nescience of the audience.
However, by educating the audience to a) be aware of logical fallacies, b) practice a systematic form of bull-shit detection and c) a methodology of how to learn anything for yourself, the audience becomes resistant/immune to d) "Jesuitical Argumentation" and other forms of persuasive rhetoric, which aim to control them.
Intellectual-Self Defense: Because most of the ties which bond us are not physical!

tt) Self-defense, defense, always defending ... I want to attack, man!
No false flag peace with the "piety profiler" ... :)
per mail) Just "the opposite of teaching" you say, and that from the teachers of all nations? Fascinating.
Thank you very much, Richard, for your first-class reply.
A more detailed comment follows presently after I will have finished my thoughts on Lisa's "the media we publish" ... I'm slow, you know.