coffee_enjoyer
☕️
No bio...
User ID: 541
Christianity in its original form (well what I strongly believe is its original form), in a “the words of Jesus decide 99% of the focus and the theology” form, has a rigorous immune system against vain purity spiraling.
infiltrators start gently rebuking everyone for everything because they don't adhere to the rituals in the 100% correct way, always ensuring that they are "holier than thou" for the people they are rebuking
Jesus specifically condemns those who prioritize ritual over substance. In fact, he saves his greatest condemnation for these people. He is put to death by these people, either directly or indirectly depending on your theology. It’s a surprisingly major part of the gospel. Some examples:
Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees […] They tie up heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on people’s shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to move them with their finger. They do all their deeds to be seen by others. […] But you are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher, and you are all brothers. And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven. Neither be called instructors, for you have one instructor, the Christ. The greatest among you shall be your servant. Whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted.
This trains Christians to be aware of anyone who signals virtue explicitly, where the spectacle of the virtue is sought rather than the substance. It trains Christians to be aware of anyone who prides themselves on stringent rule-following and burden-bearing. It then cuts out the possibility of the vain finding satisfaction in a prideful position, because Christians are told not to take any pride in that or even call themselves “teacher” or “instructor”. Then, it sets the actual standard for obtaining status: the more one humbles himself (in substance, understood as imitating Christ with all necessary sacrifices), the more exalted he will be in the community. Yet the one who exalts himself will be swiftly humbled by the community.
Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cumin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness. These you ought to have done, without neglecting the others
A purity spiral oriented around immaterial or vain issues is criticized. There’s a priority of importance.
“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs, which outwardly appear beautiful, but within are full of dead people’s bones and all uncleanness. So you also outwardly appear righteous to others, but within you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness.
This trains Christians to be cautious of those who appear outwardly righteous or who seem put on an act for attention.
Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you build the tombs of the prophets and decorate the monuments of the righteous, saying, ‘If we had lived in the days of our fathers, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.’ Thus you witness against yourselves that you are sons of those who murdered the prophets.
This is great. It instantly reminds me of some high status academic giving a land acknowledge: do you really think, you status-seeker, that you wouldn’t have been the one taking the land were you alive back then?
Fill up, then, the measure of your fathers. You serpents, you brood of vipers, how are you to escape being sentenced to hell? Therefore I send you prophets and wise men and scribes, some of whom you will kill and crucify, and some you will flog in your synagogues and persecute from town to town, so that on you may come all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah the son of Barachiah, whom you murdered between the sanctuary and the altar
This is the only place where Jesus goes absolutely demon mode condemning people. He was comparatively chill with the prostitutes and tax collectors. Even the woman with five husbands isn’t condemned but joined him for dinner, and she was a Samaritan, so not in his closest community. You see, the “scribes” are the journalists, “fact checkers”, and academic writers of Christ’s time. The Pharisees are like the combined “academic instructors” and “moral police” of his time. This is sufficient to understand his ire, really. And this isn’t an exhaustive list of criticism.
The crucial thing about Christianity is that Christ is conceived as a person (topical). As such, his character can be imitated in addition to his philosophy internalized. And his character was not “holier than thou”, which means that to obtain status, one cannot act that way. They have to act as follows:
Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves. Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others. Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross
What you see as a zero-day vulnerability would require all the Christians to be blind to it happening, to ignore the central teachings they are supposed to worship, and also for the Judas-defector to somehow be better at righteous conduct than the Christians. But by the defector’s very nature, they would be unable to defeat a good Christian in exemplifying genuine humility (no acclaim to be gained in the years of this practice, and they are apparently addicted to acclaim). And the reward for all of this would be genuinely miniscule compared to entering any other institution: it’s not like they would get extra gold or girls. If there exists some vicious person who is so addicted to power and status that they wish to subvert Christianity, it would seem that the years of Christlike conduct necessary to ingratiate themselves in the community would either cure them of their vice or make them absolutely mad. They would only be able to get their status fix from habitual conduct which is, if not debasing, equalizing. Now in modern Christianity they would be able to talk well, or claim to have a vision, or claim to know the most; not so in the OC religion.
I think the way that Christianity works — and the only way it can work — is if Jesus is perceived as a person in your community and becomes the sole measure of social status within your community. Everything else is corollary to this, an innocent dramatic exaggeration, or mystical poetry. You can learn every theological argument about God and not have your behavior changed; you can be an atheist yet a Bible scholar; and you can be a literalist Bible-thumper who also thumps his family. There’s no shortage of Bible-expert Church-going villainy in the world. But if Jesus (as moral exemplar) is the sole measure of all social status — all social interest, all self-worth, all peer competition and ranking, all value — then this will necessarily change your behavior. You might have your behavior changed kicking and screaming, feeling like a “prisoner of Christ”, or “a servant doing his duty”, or a chained foreign soldier dragged behind Christ’s imperial victory procession, but your behavior will certainly be changed for the better if all socially-mediated reward is contingent upon the imitation of Christ.
Christianity as a spectacle-sport where you hear someone charismatic and then go about your week (unless your whim or nonexistent “self-discipline” tells you to do something) is not its original form. It is amply shown in the primary text document of the religion that participation is cult-like. The apostles give up everything to follow their teacher across the nation. They exist at times in complete poverty. It is required that the church become your new family (Mt 10:37, 12:49). Disagreements between members are mediated by the community and the unrepentant defector is thrown out. The Church Fathers write about banning Christians from ever going to the theater or attending sports. They share everything in common and wash each other’s feet. The religion is called “the Brotherhood” — women don’t speak in church, and they keep their hair covered.
Imagine you were transported into this world. You try to bring up the local gladiatorial games and an elder gently rebukes you. Someone else talks about being a Rome First voter — they are gently corrected. Someone tries to talk about all he knows about the Bible — he is immediately questioned on why he is claiming to know anything at all when the illiterate shepherd boy shows greater faith through his conduct. Now imagine that, because everyone believes they will be judged by every unproductive and idle word they speak, that the conversations are always centered on (1) encouragement of moral conduct, (2) support for one’s moral conduct, (3) genuine brotherly love, (4) that the only thing of value is whether moral conduct is pursued as shown through their social superior. You will not get any social reinforcement or friendship except if you do this, and the only thing being reinforced is if you do this. What an alien world: no distractions, no (false) status signaling, no “empty knowledge”, just pure… effective altruism? In a Christian sense that is. “Taking captive every thought for Christ”. Poetry and hymns and incense are piled onto this substantive kernel, as morale-boost, but are not the main thing.
I like Jordan Peterson as an “idea factory” — he has produced some great ideas and a lot of bad ones. But JP is more like a pastor than an exemplar: he gives a dramatic performance with little evidence to back up his way of life. He extols cleaning his room and his own room is a mess. He extols reason but he cold turkey’d his psychiatric medication, putting him in a coma in Russia. His daughter is a divorced single mom who once met up with Andrew Tate. He literally only eats steak. He yaps a lot and sells a lot of courses. He is very much not Christ-like, just to draw the comparison.
My thoughts:
-
It’s hard to determine the relationship between vaccines and autism because of the confounder variables: Asperger’s has nothing to do with what we are talking about and is mislabeled as autism; parents of children who exhibit signs of autism are more weary about getting vaccines, and this applies to siblings; wealthier Americans are more likely to be vaccinated, may be less likely to have autistic children before the vaccine, but may be more likely to pursue an Asperger’s diagnosis for extra time on child’s tests; the least healthy parents are the least likely to opt in to all vaccines and the least likely to take child to doctor regularly …
-
You can reliably give monkeys autism symptoms by disrupting the natural mother-child bond, for instance Harry Harlow’s experiments with monkeys. The mother-child bond has been disrupted due to (1) early schooling, (2) stressed working mothers, (3) a generation of women who are not acculturated specifically for loving and bonding with young humans. This may have multigenerational effect, who knows?
-
the idea that the most STEM-brained men should mate with the most STEM-brained women is anomalous in history of humanity, this may have an effect
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
7mo ago
Rules on attire have relaxed but other rules around work have become stringent. Smoking and drinking when staying late at your white collar office job is obviously gone; off-color and boyish humor is gone; flirting with female employees at work is gone. Progressive shibboleths have been instituted. Where you go to school matters more, whether you’ve stayed at the same job matters more. Appearance of hair and teeth matter more. So is the workplace really more “relaxed”? It’s just no longer uniform regarding clothing, but it’s less-permissive in a whole lot of other areas.
the boilerplate celebrity interview question "What book are you currently reading?" was retired years ago: no one is reading books anymore
A lot of this is that non-fiction is filled with filler as it’s considered more respectable to publish a book rather than a pamphlet or booklet (so diminutive!). You can glean a lot of the valuable information of a non-fiction book from reading reviews and seeing discussions online.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
7mo ago
I read something interesting once about Chinese or Japanese military philosophy in ww2 and how they prioritized a pseudoscientific concept of energy flow which influenced their military directions. So like, they would march extra long without resting until they reached their destination because this enhances this energy flow. I think it was related to chi? Can’t find it again for the life of me, if anyone knows what I could be talking about
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
7mo ago
All humans and primates are motivated by status. It’s not something we can opt out of. Whether we decide to care about our status consciously or not, our actions revolve around our status in groups due to millions of years of evolution. If he is a true believer, somehow willing himself into true belief, it’s still a belief that comes with the highest possible increase in status per his worldview. I’m not saying that’s a bad thing for Elon, only that it can’t be generalizable to humanity at large, and in fact may be pernicious if attempted.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
7mo ago
Sorry what I mean by zero-sum is that it’s a “telic” zero-sum status game. The motivating force behind Elon Musk isn’t just “humans will inevitably reach Mars”, but that Elon is the one championing this species-significant event. He is involved in it, others are not; the fate of consciousness rests on his company’s shoulders. This is motivating for everyone at SpaceX: they at the company are the ones forever altering the trajectory of humanity, in their daily course of action. But this isn’t grounds for motivation for everyone else. In fact, this narrative kind of reduces everyone else’s motivation for perfecting their life. If they agree with Elon’s narrative, then their own boring “Uber for pet antibiotics” company life is meaningless in the grand scheme of things. They are just some person not at SpaceX.
I suppose you can try to enlarge Elonic ambitions so that it includes all of humanity. The janitor who stays late at Starbucks is doing his part for humanity, because he served the road repair crew of someone who might one day drive to SpaceX to repair a heating system. I don’t think this will be as compelling. I’m not criticizing Elon’s own mindset here, but noting that promoting this mindset is probably not beneficial and enlarging it is probably impossible.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
7mo ago
It is definitely helpful to see Elon’s ambition as religious: he replaces a supercelestial permanent abode in the heavens for an extracelestial permanent abode in the cosmos, for all of humanity. The exaggerated importance of his dogma orders all of his steps in the world. Will Elon, like the Biblical Enoch, ascend through the heavens alive? My issue with Elonic aspirations is that it’s zero-sum. There can only be one Elon, and only one SpaceX, and if they’re deciding the future of humanity then you’re not. This unconsciously reduces the enthusiasm of everyone else on the planet, whose labor fails to have eschatological importance. This is a considerable downgrade from a positive-sum spiritual system that can motivate all of humanity equally, and not just the 0.001% involved in a particular company.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
7mo ago
I don’t think “old tradition” is a requirement. If I’m looking for a rug and I see one like this, it doesn’t matter to me whether it’s traditional or brand new in style. It is innately pleasing to the eye. Similarly, it doesn’t matter whether it was made by some amazing machine or by human hands.
Re: “natural materials”, this is because rugs are a multisensory functionable object. Natural fibers are preferred by humans in terms of texture and smell and sound. So, natural fibers simply align with the most beneficial possible experience I can have with a rug. But if this design were placed on a storefront, it would still be beautiful even if the sign were made of plastic. (Though, humans actually enjoy natural materials more, probably for biological reasons, like the mood-enhancing effects of wood phytochemicals)
In a more complicated analysis, every object is socialized: our purchase can benefit another living being, which winds up benefitting ourselves. I think this is why humans usually prioritize “crafted” items. But this is simply part of the object’s experience: provenance is part of the product. And I mean, okay, same with stories…. But telling a story is different from an authentic story.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
7mo ago
I think taste in art is simply an acquired intuition of which experiences of art are ultimately beneficial to experience. I don’t like the idea of a “story” because this denies us from understanding art which includes wordless intuition, like music and architecture. There’s no need to develop a story about St Mark’s Square as it contains biologically determined indicators of beauty in the form of symmetry and motifs. I have no understanding of Chinese history and stories, and yet I can intuitively find beauty in Chinese architecture. No storytelling necessary. This is because of its innate visual beauty as determined by biological responses to visual stimuli. I am not Persian, but Persian rug patterns are beautiful.
Really, the judgment of art is objective according to subjectively-determined social values, with the addition of biologically-determined beneficial stimuli. A war-like culture enjoys art which speaks to the qualities which produce good warriors. Art in a communal culture will be different from art in a raw individualist capitalist culture. And so on. But a Soviet socialist can still find beauty in Norman Rockwell, just might conclude that in the whole the art is bad because of its consequences. I am especially dubious of “taste as telling stories” because our culture has an overproduction of bad storytellers who justify their salaries by word count: most humanities professors, most fiction writers, most journalists. In their little cannibalistic and solipsistic micro-culture, art that is bad for normal people is good for them, because by pontificating on it they can justify their class position. I truly hate these people.
Kinkade is an interesting case. This is art for lower and lower-middle Americans, who want to buy art when they go to the mall. It is visually easily to consume and it portrays scenes of happy domesticity. 2. In viewing this art, someone who works all day and tends to familial obligations in his down time can remember why he is doing this: for the rare moments of celebrations and joy which are experienced as a family in lower income America. This may occur on the toilet, and at an age when one’s eyes have decayed from overuse. (The oversaturation reminds me of World of Warcraft; likely optimizing for visual engagement and ease of visual differentiation). Before we criticize this art, we should consider which art would be more beneficial for these people to experience. I would say with confidence: nothing that the parisitic class produces in modern art galleries, modernist music, or modern literary circles. And actually, very little art in normal art galleries. Okay, they see something beautiful by Caravaggio, but unless they are religious then that fleeting animalistic noveltyslop feeling of “ooh interesting” is lost on them. Norman Rockwell? Sure! Rockwell is probably better than Kinkade at expressing moments of domestic American bliss. “They should be challenged” might say a pretentious person, but this class has genuinely no benefit to being challenged, and in facts need less stress, fewer challenges, more optimism and simple joy.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
7mo ago
No, I don’t watch anything for debates / politics, I prefer reading for that because of efficiency. But clips of Destiny will come up in my feed (involuntarily), right now on Twitter because of Adam Friedland (involuntarily), and I’m confused why the consensus is that he is the Worst Person Ever. His personality seems likable and his demeanor is calm, so I can’t figure out what’s causing it.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
7mo ago
Why does everyone hate Destiny? I probably disagree with him on every issue but he seems likable, is able to reason, etc.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
7mo ago
Lily Philips made a simple calculation: in exchange for fucking 100 men, she becomes a millionaire through OnlyFans. I doubt she is traumatized; women cry when they are exhausted. The joke is on all the other women: the ones who post thirst traps for nothing, who are used by famous and rich men for nothing. I respect Lily for going all the way and knowing her place. She’s not hiding anything, she’s an old fashioned prostitute. She’s not trying to be anything more!
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
7mo ago
None of the cultural developments of 2023/24 could have been predicted in 2020. I think even right now, the backlash against such an organization would be containable. No telling what can happen in the future.
You can’t make a consequentialist analysis without considering all of the probable consequences. You predict that health insurance companies are going to approve more, but that instead of this affecting their profits (United’s 22bil), or C-Suite payouts and bonuses, it is only going to be passed on to consumers. As if, magically, the company would suddenly cease to exist except with the surprisingly high profit margins it currently has. I don’t find this probable. What I find probable:
-
the most important political discussion topic is now predatory practices in the healthcare industry, which politicians will respond to this.
-
everyone is reconsidering whether their coverage should be UnitedHealth, because their predatory practices are now common knowledge. The effects of this will take time.
-
health insurance boardroom meetings will reconsider whether predatory practices are a solid longterm plan, or whether they will result in reduced longterm profit and possible assassinations
Oh, and he's a complete midwit to boot
His book reviews, twitter messages, and educational history show a different story.
Imaging writing this Reddit-tier slop
If someone is on the run after the most high profile murder in the western hemisphere, I doubt their writing would be very good quality, even if they’re ordinarily a good writer. In any case, most men of action aren’t very good writers.
thinking your ideas are so valuable you can have license to go and murder someone
And yet he did! He gambled his life on the idea that he is right. Let’s see how it plays out.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
7mo ago
A great way to deter frivolous lawsuits for political agendas is to form a cohesive group identity which can lobby and fund politicians, and then ensure that you have appointed most of the judges. Which I think a lot of people are afraid can happen.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
7mo ago
Why?
All of the above. His target was the CEO of a healthcare company that is despised by the public, and (from what I can) by doctors and those who have to deal with their insurance in a professional setting. So his cause is arguably just. He killed the person directly leading the operations without any unnecessary casualties, then miraculously left Manhattan and remained free for days. So now it’s just + relatable + skillful. Then it came out that he’s a handsome Ivy League graduate that was personally affected by a medical issue. So it’s just + relatable + skillful + attractive + sympathetic.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
7mo ago
No it’s not. There are ways to enact the above without violating any law. For instance, a white identity summer camp can just extol white culture, it doesn’t have to exclude by race.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
7mo ago
Catholicism and Protestantism are pure religion, which is distinct from culture and race. There is white culture distinct from Catholic or Protestant faith. Just like there’s Pashtun culture distinct from Islam.
Judaism is a collection of distinct ethnicities, both historically (different tribes plus additions from other lands) and today with the genetic differences between Ashk and Mizr. Although they have genetic similarities the differences are substantial (+50% european versus +30% Arab). What’s important is that they all claim to be one people, and thus they are one people. This is a subjective value choice. A lot of white Americans consider themselves “one people” with other white Americans, and because they believe this, they are. We are just waiting for the organizations to develop.
I’m for whichever affiliation people wish to affiliate with. If someone wants to be 100% Polish they should pursue that. But if you spend time online you see millions of white people who cherish white culture from Britain, Germany, Italy, etc. So clearly a lot of white Americans have concluded that their central affiliation to be Europe-derived, as opposed to “specifically a Cornwall-ish Celt” or whatever. It’s really no one’s right to say that they are wrong about something so deep and heartfelt as their culture, right?
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
7mo ago
An “obsession with victimhood” isn’t a bad thing in itself. It’s a bad thing when its consequences are bad and a good thing when its consequences are good. Victimhood ideology led to Trump winning as he highlighted stories of foreigners victimizing Americans, bad COVID policies affecting conservatives, foreign allies taking advantage of NATO, etc. It’s an incredibly powerful political tool. It needs to be persuasively argued why the Ascendant Right should put down the tool that paved their victory, and saying “but the Left also did victimhood” is 0% compelling.
The constant whining about how the West is somehow doomed
The belief that the West is on the brink of destruction is actually a winning strategy. First, the idea that the West is doomed is as old as the West, because the presupposition of Christianity is that we live in a fallen age that is ultimately doomed as we look back to a more glorious age of righteousness in Eden, then among the prophets, then among Christ and his brethren. The renaissance revised this slightly by including more of the Pagan Greeks. This is of tremendous psychological importance. It causes the following: a perfect standard of culture and conduct to compare oneself to (even if artificial); a sense of loss at something that you ultimately deserve; and an increased sensitivity to threats against something you value. You want this mindset if you want people to care about something and motivated to benefit it. We can call this the Batman effect.
how certain groups are being victimized by a shadowy “elite,”
And this we can call the John Wick effect. This is also important. You’re going to be more frustrated if your money is stolen by someone than if it fell out of your hand and flew in the wind. Humans are naturally competitive with a keen sense of justice. If someone is taking advantage of you, this causes motivation to seek justice.
I do wish that the Right would be less “Jews bad”, and more “how can we create networks that mirror the most successful aspects of our Jewish co-Abrahamics”. Instead of complaining, imitate. I’d like to see white billionaires donate to white families and spend money on white identity summer camps, I’d like half of all white kids to attend pro-white summer camps and hear stories of their ancestors’ trauma at the hands of Ottomans or Moors or Soviets, I’d like to see European culture and history enmeshed in religious schooling, etc. This is what preserves Western culture, not complaining on Twitter. There’s so much I like about Western culture and yet vanishingly rare places to send your kid to indoctrinate them into it. Why aren’t they learning the dances / meals / recipes / clothing / songs from a tax exempt pro white after school program?
doing a lot of harm to meaningful discourse
Meaningful discourse can occur in the backroom and shadows of political organizations. The age of meaningful discourse sailed many years, decades, or centuries ago. We are in an age of potent discourse and the discourse with the most potency wins.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
7mo ago
His most telling follow IMO is Martin Shkreli. Because if Luigi were naively against healthcare corruption, he wouldn’t follow him. To be against healthcare corruption and to follow Shkreli means that you have read enough from independent media to dispute the popular story about Shkreli.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
7mo ago
If he’s caught he’s caught. Doesn’t matter if he has the ID and gun on him or not. Probability that an officer will go through his bags yet not arrest him is super low. Likely he kept the gun in case he decides to off himself rather than life in prison.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
7mo ago
The assassination isn’t celebrated online because he worked in insurance, or because he worked in health insurance specifically, but because the company is accused of violating a life-or-death contractual commitment by “delaying” and “denying” the promised coverage, in order to extract money from people who are sick and dying. This was literally written on the bullets (now stained with the CEO’s blood), based on a title of a book about these practices. The salary, industry, etc are all side points. United was apparently the worst offender in the industry. Read the exchanges between Vinay Prasad and the numerous doctors who disagree with him and single out United as the worst offender.
A thought experiment is helpful here. Let’s say you and I become stranded on an island. I promise to hold the heavy medical supplies in case one of us is injured, and in turn you provide me with more of your rations. You gash your leg, and I renege on my commitment to provide you the promised medical supplies. If you have a weapon, what would you do? The ethical intuition of normal people is that certain things become permissible.
Now, the greatness of civilization is that you don’t need to resort to weapons because you can take a large company to court. But that’s not a silver bullet! Because our third bullet reads defend: healthcare companies can hire the best lawyers and lobby better then you. So it’s an open question whether today’s civilization provides a remedy that is sufficient to stop someone from taking the less civilized remedy. It seems most people have no problem with the less civilized remedy in this particular, very unusual instance.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
7mo ago
How would you go about determining the total cost of a person pursuing a humanities PhD at Cambridge? Beyond tuition, there’s the subsidies and donations which go to graduate student programs, and there’s the undergraduate tuition which goes to graduate student work. There’s the cost associated with taking up the time of relevant expert faculty. Then there’s the opportunity cost: someone is spending 4+ years of important professional years pursuing the PhD, which is high for someone intelligent. Is there any research on the total, society-wide cost of one humanities PhD student at an elite university?
There are simple ways to protect against this threat if the threat were plausible. You could mandate that everything must be judged exclusively by Christ’s words and deeds as handed down unchanged for many centuries in the Christian gospel (with the apostles in a very far second place, never overruling Christ). This means that the standard of behavior can’t be changed. You can enact a “majority rule” vote decision, if any teachings needed to be changed. You could mandate that they must be married with children and have their children attend the religious schooling — meaning anything that harms the religion now harms their children. And so on.
In real life, people’s behaviors are motivated by rewards. This sleeper agent needs a genuine compelling reason to “take over the community”, such that they bear the discomfort of helping members of the community selflessly for decades for a small chance of taking over the community. Every time he helps someone he hates, he will be demoralized, while his virtuous counterpart is moralized. The virtuous counterpart enjoys pure cognitive efficiency, whereas the vicious one needs to constantly double-think everything he does. At the same time, the sleeper agent will be spending many hours a week being propagandized into loving Christ, which may involve persuasive arguments. At best, all of those hours are spent in discomfort; at worst, he is persuaded into virtuous behavior.
This is kind of like saying that an evil person who hates SpaceX will join SpaceX in an attempt to subvert it. SpaceX easily filters for people who genuinely care about the mission: they are made to work on it with their whole mind and heart and strength, to participate in “all night vigils” where they work on their project. A hater is less likely to be able to do all of this, because every aspect of it lacks the feedback loop of motivating reinforcement. Yet unlike SpaceX, Christianity involves rituals for propagandizing the faith, with music and poetry and spectacle and drama and stories.
More options
Context Copy link