@‍CoinCube responded to this blog of mine and provided a rebuttal which is quoted below. I wish to draw his and readers’ attention my ENFP personality type as it applies to creativity and reasoning contrasted with his INTJ personality type; and ask him to note that he is more than a decade younger than myself. I posit that these two differences account for significant differences in our philosophy and world view. @‍CoinCube is (cited and involved in discussions) cited by some links in this blog. @‍CoinCube and I were in the past discussing and debating at BCT (bitcointalk.org) about morality and religion, especially Christianity and Judaism. My recollection is that essentially @‍CoinCube believes that morality is objective, absolute, and essential for obtaining truth, although he admits that such claims of his cannot be scientifically falsifiable.

I offer the following disagreement as prima facie evidence of ideological ressentiment. Both of us arguing for our respective ideologies to make us each feel superior to each other.

My reaction to his comments is that my blog points out the prima facie fact that ressentiment en masse has been the only way to obtain groupwise adaptation towards maximum division-of-labor. This should be taken as a given by the mere fact that most people are completely unaware that they’re already enslaved in a mafia-run state which has programmed our minds by employing psychological warfare, deception, and propaganda. How could it be that en masse we the people could be based in an objective conscience in any non-ressentiment paradigm? Impossible. @‍CoinCube doesn’t refute the prima facie evidence of how civilization evolves, nor has he offered another equivalently detailed account of human history that would argue that ressentiment hasn’t been essential. It seems he is attempting to make some claim about what is possible in the future, yet also my blog urges humanity to take a stewardship morality psychological approach. However, in my blog I quoted from the Bible. Those quoted scriptures state that those who do righteous stewardship are not part of this world, i.e. not part of the majority en masse. Even Romans and 1 Samuel 8: Israel Asks for a King in the Bible explain that the people en masse get the false idols government which they demanded.

As Glenn Greenwald eloquently articulated, it’s especially arrogant for Americans to think they’re somehow more moral than for example Muslims. As for the violent groupwise actions of Anglo-Saxon Roman Catholic Christians, refer to the Crusades, Nazi Germany, the French Revolution (Napoleon even tried to invade Russia), enslavement of various people by the Roman Catholics and Bible belt southerners, etc… The Jews also do this in Palestine, via usury, and their capture of the reins of government. Their religion allows them to harm the goyim and to Jesus who they demanded be crucified which forced the Roman governor to comply.

Specifically I have suggested to @‍CoinCube many times that humans have an innate conscience and we’re innately aware of good and evil. Even the Bible tells us that after Adam & Eve tasted the forbidden fruit that the genesis of our innate ignorant innocence was voided and eviscerated. Conscience and meditation/prayer is a personal and private matter as explained in scriptures for example Matthew 6:5. All the plans, writings, and accomplishments of mice and men will eventually return to dust (to maximum entropy). Is it any more “correct” that we philosophically defend Jane’s freedom which her hormones will actively destroy because nature abhors perfect order? Or would it be more reasonable to seek to align with nature’s trend to maximum division-of-labor and entropy?

I expected @‍CoinCube to issue hollow¹ false judgement of my blog after being offended by the implications of my blog, because I have observed that in my opinion his embracement of his “faith” has been tied up in ressentiment-based psychology such as idolization of certain ideologies and politics. This is a characteristic of the lies (e.g. monotonically improving human nature: “man-subjugates-nature”) that Westerners tell themselves and a classic sign/symptom of the prevalent ressentiment-based ideology. The Bible implores us to come out of the Great Harlot. My next blog about cognitive dissonance that surrounds false flag events will explore this sort denial and lying-to-oneself in more detail. In the interim, I can quote one sentence from my future blog now:

• Millennials are preoccupied with social values […] and fake fairness. See their reaction to a female peer doing a laughably inadequate dunk compared to the male contestants.

We shouldn’t expect people to have an expansive mind, learn, and change throughout their lifespan. For most, our philosophy and attitude about life (i.e. their world view) is hard-coded, programmed surely by the time we reach our 30s.

@‍CoinCube doesn’t mention the creative and theoretical discussion of theories of our universe in Part 2 of blog. It’s as if he only has time or focus for morality. I take the stance that such a presumed imbalance in reasoning and focus is indicative of ressentiment-based mania. A sage or wise man is much more reticent and circumspect about forming deep-rooted philosophical conclusions. By definition, metaphysics is a fluid (aka relativistic or varied perspectives) approach to philosophy.

¹ _{His comment is vacuous. It lacks any explanation whatsoever (not to mention a well developed model) which could support his allegations. For example, he states that my model is not well supported, yet he offers nothing to justify that claim.}

@‍CoinCube wrote:

^{I disagree with the opening argument about the concept of ressentiment.}

^{The argument assumes the premise that ressentiment is essential for formation of a group ideology capable of groupwise adaptation.}

^{I disagree that the concept that ressentiment leads to morality and that it is essential for the formation of group ideology. This argument is not well supported by the essay and is in my opinion incorrect. Though there is no doubt ressentiment can lead to mobs rule and attacks on the existing social order.}

^{To have a stable morality you need to ground it in a non falsifiable apriori truth. Morality or the lack thereof ultimately comes from ones metaphysics.}

^{Resentment does often leads to a violent marxist or fascist collectivism as discussed in the following video. This is the opposite of morality as I would define it and usually amounts to an acceptance of the premise the ends (social utopia or genetic/racial dominion) justifies the means.}

@‍CoinCube provided a link to the following video.

_{P.S. @‍CoinCube has ostensibly decided to not signup for the censorship-free Steem, although he remains accessible at BCT which has banned numerous controversial individuals such as myself. This causes me doubt whether the search for truth (as opposed to echo chambers) is his highest priority. The major discussion threads which he and I were involved in at BCT, have all ground to a halt since I was banned. If he continues to argue that we must make sacrifices and ignore our conscience in order to be part of a larger society, then I challenge him to explain why his Bible tells me to come of this world and the Great Harlot? In any case, I guess I am happy is not here debating me because it would cause both of us to waste time.}