Category Archives: Nihilism

Poster child for Atheism…Hannibal Lecter.

Many Modern Atheists are Pompous White horse Riding ‘Moralists’!
They are Religious Zealot’s on a Righteous Crusade, fighting the ‘Evils’ of Religion, and vigously propagating and defending their Faith.
They often get extremely vicious against declarations of Faith in the Christian God, which led one Blogger to inquire…

” I mean, if you truly believe there is no God, why get all worked up over what a bunch of delusional Christians think?”… Valley Girl Appologist.

Pondering upon a post on Richard Goode’s Face book page discussing this Atheist Mentality in respect to why many of them are so militantly Anti-Christ, and so strongly desire to deny God’s existence… I made the following comment…
“There is a psychological reason Richard, They Hide from God in the Dark so as to delude themselves they can do as they please, and yet Pesky Christians keep reminding them that there is a God, and that He sets the Moral Laws… not them, and that one day they will stand before him and answer for their sins. *This is a message they HATE* … to the very pit of their self deluded souls! They simply don’t want to know about God *End of story*

Which Solicited the following response from ‘Atheist Greg’
……… “GARBAGE!”

^^^ Now Greg has expressed an opinion, not a counter argument.
It is no doubt a very common ‘opinion’ among Atheists, yet I don’t think my position as stated above can be so easily dismissed.
Atheist Greg has actually provided me with further opportunity to discourse the arguments for the Theistic vindication for Objective Morality vs Atheist Nihilism, and the origin of Mans innate sense of Good and evil.
Here I employ the basic argument used by the Late great C S Lewis.


My Reply…

If You Greg, and your kin, are nothing more than ‘Space Algae’, well *then* my arguement would be ‘Garbage’, yet you are a Conscious Moral being with a sence of Good and Evil, and you appeal to the ‘Moral law’ governing human actions every day… eg when you get a bill in the mail which overcharges you, you immediately feel a pang of ‘injustice’… and experience emotions of sorrow, and anger…. And begin to make self righteous determinations to see justice is restored. Now this sense of injustice at ‘wrong’ is more than simply being upset that an agreement was broken (social compact)…ie that a mere human convention was violated, It is a sense that *A Real Moral absolute… binding on all humanity has been broken* and that you are within your right to seek justice for your injury.
You are in fact appealing to an objective Moral absolute… a ‘higher Law’ which you implicitly believe underpins all ‘conventional’ human agreements as moral duties/ obligations to fulfil.

Thus I say that You Greg do not/ cannot live as a human being consistently with your claim that the universe is nihilistic/ A moral, or that Mankind is merely ‘Space Algae’.
To do so you would have to loose all sense of moral duty. You would have say to yourself that a person steeling your car… was not doing anything wrong… that even saying the car is ‘mine’ is a moral irrelevance… the universe caring nothing for your claims to ownership.
And you certainly have no basis to think that when a school bus full of children plunges over a cliff that any ‘cosmic injustice’ has occurred… no basis to shake your fist at heaven… the only reason you would do that is if deep within you believe in Moral absolutes, and know that Children *don’t deserve* to die, and that you are angry at God for allowing this sort of thing to happen.


The people who come the closest to the embodiment of Atheism are the Tyrants, Mass murderers, and Serial killers…The Hitler’s, the Ted Bundies… the Hannibal Lecters… The Sociopaths and Megalomaniacs who… like Wild beasts devour and enslave their fellow human beings *as if they are mere Space Algae* .
These are the Atheist ‘Realists’, who live under the conviction that all Morality and Law’s of society are merely Human conventions…and that there is no Real ‘Higher moral Law’ than their own Will.
They are God’s unto themselves.
Thus unless you (Atheist Greg) are prepared to accept that these Killers are absolutely right, and are prepared to drop any sense of Moral consciousness you have, I say
‘Garbage!’… to you!
I say deep within you know there is a real Higher Moral Law… you know that you are a Moral being… and these things all point to the notion of *Universal Justice*… God will judge!

…and as I was saying Atheists hate this Knowledge and seek to hide themselves from it.
They despise Christians for their ‘Pesky declarations’ which puts a tourch light on them…reminding them of their flight from Reality and their knowledge of the Truth.

Thus We witness the Ironic spectacle of Atheists who insist they are Moral, yet deny all Moral Obligation! They are ‘moral’ in their own eyes, and ‘holy’/without sin according to their own standards.
*How Convenient!* 🙂

What Basis is left for Morality if God… the Divine Lawgiver is Obliterated?
Atheist Materialists in the 1800s admitted that Materialism was the end for objective morality, yet the Modern atheist is not so bold, nor so rigorous as to where their premises ultimately lead, and instead pretend that their Atheism makes them *more moral than theists!* and they attempt to utilize Historic atrocities committed in God’s name as evidence that ‘religion is evil’… forgetting they have no ‘higher ground’ upon which to stand to make any such moral judgments, and that in doing so they are applying standards which are not theirs to use!
Such a one eyed approach which only looks at particular negative historic events does not succeed in knocking all religion off it’s perch, or by default add one ounce of objective moral reality to Atheism.
While defending God’s Divine right to execute judgments upon Mankind, Christians themselves are just as rigorous as any atheist in their condemnation of atrocities like 911, or the Salem witch trials…committed in God’s name.

I attended a Debate in Auckland a Few years ago between Matthew Flannagan and Prof Bradley on the topic ‘Is God the source of morality’ in which Dr Flannagan presented the God Command Moral theory, and the atheist Prof Bradley made the statement that he believed that because God does not exist that therefore he cant be the source of morality.
Instead he argued morality can only be founded upon ‘sentiment’!!!
Now ‘sentiment’ is an absolutely pathetic, subjective, and culturally relative foundation without any authority to impose Moral obligations! (and I criticised him for it at question time!)
This is really the subject fit for another Blog post, yet what is interesting about the modern Atheist is that they cannot bear the reality that their belief system is definitively Amoral and De-humanising.
To avoid this they attempt to change the game as to what morality really is.

See this debate Here:

Important End Note:
The Genesis story of the Fall of Mankind into sin declares that we were transformed from a child-like innocence into a ‘Knowledge of Good and Evil’, and It is this inner knowledge of Good and Evil which makes all mankind, in all times and places, accountable and Guilty before God and deserving of Judgment because they all have a knowledge of their own moral responsibilities. Thus I am saying that the Savage whom tortures his neighbor to death *knows he is committing Evil*… even if he has never herd of Jesus Christ. And God will Judge him for it. So too with the Atheist who does not believe Jesus Rose from the dead. This denial does not negate the Atheists own knowledge of sin, and guilt for his immoral actions for which God will hold him accountable.
Thus contrary to what Many atheists assert: The Bible does not deny Atheists cant have any sense of Morality… it insists that everyone does!
What We Christians say is that the Atheist position cannot justify their morality…. That Atheism itself is Amoral, and that it leads to mere cultural relativism, and social arbitrary law.
When Atheists claim to be moral, they a contradicting themselves.
Tim Wikiriwhi
King James Bible Believer, Dispensationalist, Libertarian, Christian.

Read More…

Hiding in the Dark….

The Valley Girl Apologist…The Illogically Hostile Side of Atheism.

“Keep things in the shallow end… because I just didn’t want to know…”

Atheists are Religious fanatics

Hell is for the Self Righteous, Heaven is for Sinners.

Materialism renders Man Nought. Meaning-less, Value-less, Right-less

Sir Bob Jones. Prophet of Nihilism. Advocate of Jackboot Civilisation. Pillar of Savage Society.

The Music’s over for Doors Founder Ray Manzarek.


Ray Manzarek, 74, Keyboardist and a Founder of the Doors, Is Dead

me terry tom
Before I became a Christian… in the late 80’s I believed in the Doors!
I used to roll… 100mph… in my Doorsmobile…a white Valiant Ranger 245 Hemi… with a Doors Badge in the Grill which had I cut out of 16mm thick Aluminum plate and painted Red.
I never Got tired of getting high and listening to the Doors, or Pink Floyd!
Ray Manzarek’s Keyboard put the ‘trippy-ness’ into the Doors sound.
He was one of the very best…ever!

The Door’s (of Perception) music is a Religion… Hedonistic, Mystical, Nihilism,… all mixed together… ‘Break on through to the other side!, ‘The Crystal ship’…
A word of warning to you young-uns….
You gotta be real careful who you Idolise!
Worshipping people like Jim Morison can put you in an Early Grave!
Dead is a Bath by 28.

I guess we young guys easily fall for that sort of thing to fill the black void… that mystery and enptiness which consumes the lost soul… wandering wandering in hopeless Night.
Out here on the perimeter there are no Stars.
Out here We is Stoned Immaculate.

I really hope Ray found out Life and reality are so much more that that…
It’s quite staggering to realise that millions of souls dont find any deeper meaning or value…

Yet again I question thus… Were the Drugs and Doors music really that bad for me… as all the Condescending wonkers like to assume?
I sometimes think that these things actually helped me in my quest for truth and that they were an essential part of my ‘mind expanding enlightenment’ which eventually led me out of atheism and into Faith in Christ.
Smoking a lot of Pot and listening to music like the Doors also meant I spent a lot of time meditating on the meaning of Life… They made me wonder if there was something more to life than mere materialism?
And Drugs and the Doors also (ironically) kept depression and suicidal thoughts to a minimum as being a lost soul is truly a frightening thing… and so the fact that the Drugs and the Doors gave me relief and stimulated Contemplation about reality makes me think they actually played a roll in saving my life and helped steer me towards belief in the Spirituality of existence… they got me started on my pilgrimage. 🙂
I Owe a debt of gratitude to Ray, Jimmy, John, and Robbie for that.
Along with other Great Muso’s, Their Art enriched my life.

I think this ‘apparant contradiction’ is very valid… It all depend’s on the Individual’s desire to know the truth rather than hide from it.

‘The End’
This is the end
Beautiful friend
This is the end
My only friend, the end
Of our elaborate plans, the end
Of everything that stands, the end
No safety or surprise, the end
I’ll never look into your eyes…again
Can you picture what will be
So limitless and free
Desperately in need…of some…stranger’s hand
In a…desperate land
Lost in a Roman…wilderness of pain
And all the children are insane
All the children are insane
Waiting for the summer rain, yeah
There’s danger on the edge of town
Ride the King’s highway, baby
Weird scenes inside the gold mine
Ride the highway west, baby
Ride the snake, ride the snake
To the lake, the ancient lake, baby
The snake is long, seven miles
Ride the snake…he’s old, and his skin is cold…

Sir Bob Jones. Prophet of Nihilism. Advocate of Jackboot Civilisation. Pillar of Savage Society.

NZ Cartoon Annual - Bob Jones 2

In an article in today’s NZ Herald entitled ‘NZ – No 1 danger spot for tourists’ (here:)
Sir Bob Jones talks about how important tourism is to our economy, and after driveling on about several ‘hassles’ visitors face when they come here, he moves on to the terrible problem of foreign tourists being preyed upon and violently assaulted when they visit God’s own.
He sums up thus…

“Sooner or later a foreign journalist will research our tourist crimes history and write a sensational account, pointing out that on a pro-rata tourist numbers and/or population basis, New Zealand is statistically the most dangerous popular tourist destination in the world – which beyond question it is.

So, what to do about it? Here’s one suggestion: Why not legislate that crimes against tourists automatically yield double the maximum sentences. That should produce a sharp improvement in what is nothing less than a scandalous national embarrassment.”

End Quote.

Now I admit that I too am alarmed by the violence in our society and appalled by reports of Tourists being murdered, assaulted, robbed, etc.
Yet I question Bob’s rationale.
Why is it that Sir Bob does not appreciate a Citizens life is just as valuable as that of a foreign visitor?
If increased deterrence is needed, Would it not make better sense to double the punishment for all acts of violence rather than just those perpetrated against visitors?
This idea of Bob’s actually shows his Atheist *lack of morality* as on one hand he clearly puts *the monetary factor* … the negative impact on Tourist revenues…as the chief reason ‘violence against visitors is bad’, and secondly this exposes the reality that as an atheist the only solution to the problem of violence he can muster is the retributive solution.
Ie he has no real *moral solution* … a code of ethics powerful enough to convert the soul of a violent thug… instilling a much greater ‘respect for others’ and cuting off the real source of violence… ie a lack of strong inner convictions and personal ethics… such as those of the Christian faith which can and have often converted violent criminals into peaceful and productive citizens.
There have been countless stories of violent Gangsters etc being reformed by the power of Christian morality.
Yet as an Atheist Bob has publicly ridiculed and undermined those whom hold the Christian faith dear.
To Him…We are Fools!

Dare I suggest that it has been a growing irreverence for Christianity… the very sort of irreverence which Bob Jones himself specializes in propagating which has eroded the Christian values of our society resulting in greater lawlessness and violence!
Yet of course Sir Bob will never admit that the corrosive Atheist nihilism which he fosters could have any such negative effect upon the morals of our society and thus a requisite serious negative impact upon our economy!
He’s too busy pretending to be a pillar of the community!

The Father of Sociology, and Libertarian Giant… Herbert Spencer called Christianity “That most Potent of Moral Antiseptics” . The Man vs The State.

It is tragically funny how atheists like Bob love to brag that atheism is on the rise in NZ, yet get a twitchy eye when you point out that the Stats also prove that lawlessness, poverty, and vice are on the rise too!
Not to mention Suicide, Divorce, Abortion, Depression,Etc!

The fact is Bob may be a millionaire, none the less he is too pig headed to understand the Important social and massive economic benefits of those Christian ideals and values which he busies himself corroding and undermining.

Ref: Bob Jones NZ Herald… ‘Religion rejection worldwide phenomenon’ here:

Voltaire was well aware that the greatest evil of Atheism was that it entails the loss of objective Morality and Devalues human life.
He knew that the fear of the God of the Bible, and belief in Judgment day…. kept many sinners and criminals in check, not to mention inspiring acts of charity and humanity.

Bob Jones may say that he is no Nihilist, yet none the less by attacking God he has rendered any pretence to morality as merely cultural relativism, and sinners and Criminals grasp this. They know that if there is no God then they are not Duty bound to keep societies laws. In fact they will deem any laws or ethics to be mere human inventions… just a ruse to fool the gullible away from preying on the Wealthy, and weak. And that ‘nothing is truly wrong… unless they get caught!


Whether Bob admits it or not his Atheism opens up Pandora’s Box…and chaos and disorder ensues.
Tim Wikiriwhi
Christian Libertarian.

Read what Thomas Jefferson had to say about this here:

P.S If Bob was to ever to visit ‘Eternal Vigilance’… $5 says he slams me for my spelling and poor grammar!

Why a new Constitution for New Zealand must protect the Individual from Mobocracy.


Because I have failed in the attempt to organise an association of ‘Heavy hitting’ Libertarian minds to directly challenge the governments appointed Committee which is currently running a Mickey Mouse commission looking to entrench Waitangi Racism and Socialist Democratic tyranny, I am attempting to put together a ‘condensed’ submission advocating the institution of a New constitution embodying Libertarian principles for New Zealand to be submitted to Muriel Newman’s the independent Constitutional review panel.
Go Here:

This panel is primarily concerned with insuring any new Constitution guarantees Racial equality before the Law, and does not entrench the current Apartheid doctrines and institutions of Radical Indigenous racism and treaty separatism.
This independent Panel is to be highly praised for this work.
It is absolutely essential that the Government be prevented from establishing an Apartheid constitution, yet I fear the scope of this Independent lobby is not broad enough to challenge the many other injustices and usurpations perpetrated against the people of New Zealand in the name of ‘Social Democracy’ which is the prevailing ideology of 99% of MPs and their parties whom populate our parliament.

The difficulty for me is not only that I despair having to sit out and watch everything unfold from the sideline as a spectator rather than a participant in this process.
I despair of being able to do justice to this ‘Mother of all Political Institutions’ in a brief submission.


One of the most important jobs of a Constitution is to protect the Rights and liberties of Minorities and individuals from Mob Rule.
Living in an age in which Atheist Materialism and Moral relativism dominate the thinking in academic circles it is difficult to speak of ‘Higher Law’… Moral absolutes which trump the mere whims or Legislators in large numbers.
It is difficult to get support for Ideals which set limits to the pseudo-moral justification of Legislation founded upon the mandate of the majority.
In Today’s world I cannot make appeals to Individual rights as being inalienable because they are ‘God given’… which was in times past a perfectly acceptable and rational position to take for the simple reason that so many intellectuals have tragically abandoned belief in God.
Thus I must make appeals to other arguments, in secular terms which embody arguments which such mentalities will not dismiss because of personal bias against theistic Ideas.
And most essentially these arguments must be powerful enough to expose the evil delusion that Humanitarian sentiments can justify tyrannical and oppressive political means.

The Little video below was posted on Face book by a friend (Hat tip Mark Casey) and I share it with you here because it does a very good Job or presenting the distinction between real charity and Socialism/ forced welfare…. and the travesty of that pseudo-moral justification… ‘the democratic mandate of the Majority’…
In so doing this video embodies one of the important attributes my submission to the Independent Panel must encompass.

Watch and enjoy.

This video also makes me wonder if my submission could somehow included such streaming Media?
Tim Wikiriwhi.
Libertarian Independent.

Epitaph. The Death of America and Western Democracy. Ron Paul’s Farewell Speech.

The Vid below is one of the greatest speeches on what’s wrong with Western civilisation ever delivered.
God Bless you Mr Ron Paul.

Update: 16-11-12
Transcript of Ron Paul’s Historic Farwell Address Here:

Update 2.
On Hearing Ron Paul is retiring,…even after his monumental address an Objectivist says…
“Best news in the last eight days. I wish the rest of the Tinfoil Hatters would follow his lead into retirement”

Read how Objectivist Atheist Bigotry worked to undermine Ron Paul here:
God is the Font of Morality. Why Objectivists Hate Ron Paul.

The Rape Of American Democracy

Fizzer. American Demo-crazy.

The Rusty Cage: Scientism.

Are you Lost in Scientism?
Lies destroy our grip on reality.

The Bible tells us of a Necromancer whom raised the prophet Samuel’s Ghost.
Do you doubt this really happened? Do you assume science proves this is impossible? If so you have been decieved!
Science has proven no such thing!
You have been decieved into believing Science proves Materialism/ monism/ Naturalism!
You have been Mentally Hobbled!

If you have been conditioned to believe Reality is strictly limited to only what Empirical Science can substantiate, then you are trapped in the Straight jacket of Scientism.
If you Believe absolutely in Naturalism, No God, no Ghosts, No miracles… You are a prisoner of Scientism.
If you Believe that Material reality is the only reality… You have been Smoked by Atheist Scientism.
Scientism is form of intellectual Coffin Torture!… a closeted mentality… a short sighted blindness… a vanity.
Scientism is a Religion…and not a very intelligent one at that!
Scientism is Irrational.

The day anyone realizes the trap that is Materialist Naturalist Scientism, and boldly embraces the possibility of Super-naturalism…is a day of personal Liberation!
It is an awakening…to a greater reality… Greater possiblities… more plausible probabilities!
It is mind expanding… Freewill is not an Illusion!
It puts Emperical Science (and our sences) into their proper context.
It apprehends their limitations.
It allows the enlightened person to shrug off the absurdities, the Gross implausibility, the wild superstition, The Deadness, The Amorality, The Meaningless, The Purposeless, The enslavement and surrender to Determinism…that Materialist Naturalism demands of it’s devotees.

Hour Of Power. The Great Dr Robert Schuller (Senior).
“Faith is the Optimistic vison of a Possiblity thinker, whereas Atheism is the Pessimistic lack of vison of an impossiblity thinker…” (Quote from memory)

Then One can look back at the past 500 years and appreciate the how the Ideologies of Materialism, Naturalism, and Scientism came about, and why they have successfully blinded the minds of millions of Men whom vainly consider themselves ‘Superior’… ‘Modern’… ‘Men of Reason’…. ‘Liberated from ‘Faith’ and Superstitious Error’, Etc yet ultimately have proven to be Blind, leaders of the Blind.

Thus saith THE LORD…
There is No conflict between True Religion/ The Bible, and True Science!
The Bible gives us access to a reality which is otherwise beyond our reach.
The Bible is Super Natural…Divine Revelation.

“A little philosophy inclineth man’s mind to atheism, but depth in philosophy bringeth men’s minds about to religion.”
Francis Bacon…The Father of Modern Science.

“But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.” (1Cor2vs114)
“O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:…” (1Tim6vs20)
St Paul

Tim Wikiriwhi
Christian. Libertarian. 1611 King James Bible Believer. Dispensationalist. Possibility Thinker.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Scientism is a term used, usually pejoratively, to refer to belief in the universal applicability of the scientific method and approach, and the view that empirical science constitutes the most authoritative worldview or most valuable part of human learning to the exclusion of other viewpoints.
The term frequently implies a critique of the more extreme expressions of logical positivism and has been used by social scientists such as Friedrich Hayek, philosophers of science such as Karl Popper, and philosophers such as Hilary Putnam to describe the dogmatic endorsement of scientific methodology and the reduction of all knowledge to only that which is measurable.

Scientism may refer to science applied “in excess”. The term scientism can apply in either of two equally pejorative senses:

To indicate the improper usage of science or scientific claims.
This usage applies equally in contexts where science might not apply, such as when the topic is perceived to be beyond the scope of scientific inquiry, and in contexts where there is insufficient empirical evidence to justify a scientific conclusion. It includes an excessive deference to claims made by scientists or an uncritical eagerness to accept any result described as scientific. In this case, the term is a counterargument to appeals to scientific authority.
To refer to “the belief that the methods of natural science, or the categories and things recognized in natural science, form the only proper elements in any philosophical or other inquiry,” or that “science, and only science, describes the world as it is in itself, independent of perspective” with a concomitant “elimination of the psychological dimensions of experience.”
The term is also used to highlight the possible dangers of lapses towards excessive reductionism in all fields of human knowledge.

For sociologists in the tradition of Max Weber, such as Jürgen Habermas, the concept of scientism relates significantly to the philosophy of positivism, but also to the cultural rationalization of the modern West.

1 Overview
2 Relevance to science/religion debates
3 Philosophy of science
4 Religion and philosophy
5 Rationalization and modernity
6 Dictionary meanings
7 Media references
8 See also
9 References
10 External links

OverviewReviewing the references to scientism in the works of contemporary scholars, Gregory R. Petersondetects two main broad themes:

It is used to criticize a totalizing view of science as if it were capable of describing all reality and knowledge, or as if it were the only true way to acquire knowledge about reality and the nature of things;
It is used to denote a border-crossing violation in which the theories and methods of one (scientific) discipline are inappropriately applied to another (scientific or non-scientific) discipline and its domain. An example of this second usage is to label as scientism any attempt to claim science as the only or primary source of human values (a traditional domain of ethics) or as the source of meaning and purpose (a traditional domain of religion and related worldviews).
Mikael Stenmark proposes the expression scientific expansionism as a synonym of scientism.In the Encyclopedia of science and religion, he writes that, while the doctrines that are described as scientism have many possible forms and varying degrees of ambition, they share the idea that the boundaries of science (that is, typically the natural sciences) could and should be expanded so that something that has not been previously considered as a subject pertinent to science can now be understood as part of science (usually with science becoming the sole or the main arbiter regarding this area or dimension).

According to Stenmark, the strongest form of scientism states that science has no boundaries and that all human problems and all aspects of human endeavor, with due time, will be dealt with and solved by science alone. This idea has also been called the Myth of Progress.

E. F. Schumacher in his A Guide for the Perplexed criticized scientism as an impoverished world view confined solely to what can be counted, measured and weighed. “The architects of the modern worldview, notably Galileo and Descartes, assumed that those things that could be weighed, measured, and counted were more true than those that could not be quantified. If it couldn’t be counted, in other words, it didn’t count.”

Relevance to science/religion debatesThe term is often used by speakers such as John Haught against vocal critics of religion-as-such.[25] Philosopher Daniel Dennett responded to criticism of his book Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon by saying that “when someone puts forward a scientific theory that [religious critics] really don’t like, they just try to discredit it as ‘scientism'”.

Michael Shermer, founder of The Skeptics Society, draws a parallel between scientism and traditional religious movements, pointing to the cult of personality that develops around some scientists in the public eye. He defines scientism as a worldview that encompasses natural explanations, eschews supernatural and paranormal speculations, and embraces empiricism and reason.

The Iranian scholar Seyyed Hossein Nasr has stated that in the West, many will accept the ideology of modern science, not as “simple ordinary science”, but as a replacement for religion.

Gregory R. Peterson writes that “for many theologians and philosophers, scientism is among the greatest of intellectual sins”.

Susan Haack argues that the charge of “scientism” caricatures actual scientific endeavor. No single form of inference or procedure of inquiry used by scientists explains the success of science. Instead we find:

the inferences and procedures used by all serious empirical inquirers
a vast array of tools of inquiry, from observational instruments to mathematical techniques, as well as social mechanisms that encourage honesty. These tools are diverse and evolving, and many are domain-specific.

Philosophy of science
In his essay, Against Method, Paul Feyerabend characterizes science as “an essentially anarchic enterprise” and argues emphatically that science merits no exclusive monopoly over “dealing in knowledge” and that scientists have never operated within a distinct and narrowly self-defined tradition. He depicts the process of contemporary scientific education as a mild form of indoctrination, aimed at “making the history of science duller, simpler, more uniform, more ‘objective’ and more easily accessible to treatment by strict and unchanging rules.”

[S]cience can stand on its own feet and does not need any help from rationalists, secular humanists, Marxists and similar religious movements; and … non-scientific cultures, procedures and assumptions can also stand on their own feet and should be allowed to do so … Science must be protected from ideologies; and societies, especially democratic societies, must be protected from science… In a democracy scientific institutions, research programmes, and suggestions must therefore be subjected to public control, there must be a separation of state and science just as there is a separation between state and religious institutions, and science should be taught as one view among many and not as the one and only road to truth and reality.

— Feyerabend, Against Method, p.viii

Religion and philosophyPhilosopher of religion Keith Ward has said scientism is philosophically inconsistent or even self-refuting, as the truth of the statements “no statements are true unless they can be proven scientifically (or logically)” or “no statements are true unless they can be shown empirically to be true” cannot themselves be proven scientifically, logically, or empirically.[32]

Rationalization and modernity: Rationalization (sociology)
In the introduction to his collected oeuvre on the sociology of religion, Max Weber asks why “the scientific, the artistic, the political, or the economic development [elsewhere]… did not enter upon that path of rationalization which is peculiar to the Occident?” According to the distinguished German social theorist, Jürgen Habermas, “For Weber, the intrinsic (that is, not merely contingent) relationship between modernity and what he called ‘Occidental rationalism’ was still self-evident.” Weber described a process of rationalisation, disenchantment and the “disintegration of religious world views” that resulted in modern secular societies and capitalism.[33]

“Modernization” was introduced as a technical term only in the 1950s. It is the mark of a theoretical approach that takes up Weber’s problem but elaborates it with the tools of social-scientific functionalism… The theory of modernization performs two abstractions on Weber’s concept of “modernity”. It dissociates “modernity” from its modern European origins and stylizes it into a spatio-temporally neutral model for processes of social development in general. Furthermore, it breaks the internal connections between modernity and the historical context of Western rationalism, so that processes of modernization… [are] no longer burdened with the idea of a completion of modernity, that is to say, of a goal state after which “postmodern” developments would have to set in… Indeed it is precisely modernization research that has contributed to the currency of the expression “postmodern” even among social scientists.

— Jürgen Habermas, The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity

Habermas is critical of pure instrumental rationality, arguing that the “Social Life–World” is better suited to literary expression, the former being “intersubjectively accessible experiences” that can be generalized in a formal language, while the latter “must generate an intersubjectivity of mutual understanding in each concrete case”:[34][35]

The world in which human beings are born and live and finally die; the world in which they love and hate, in which they experience triumph and humiliation, hope and despair; the world of sufferings and enjoyments, of madness and common sense, of silliness, cunning and wisdom; the world of social pressures and individual impulses, of reason against passion, of instincts and conventions, of shared language and unsharable feelings and sensations…

— Aldous Huxley, Literature and Science

Dictionary meanings
Standard dictionary definitions include the following applications of the term “scientism”:

The use of the style, assumptions, techniques, and other attributes typically displayed by scientists.

Methods and attitudes typical of or attributed to the natural scientist.

An exaggerated trust in the efficacy of the methods of natural science applied to all areas of investigation, as in philosophy, the social sciences, and the humanities.

The use of scientific or pseudoscientific language.

The contention that the social sciences, such as economics and sociology, are only properly sciences when they abide by the somewhat stricter interpretation of scientific method used by the natural sciences, and that otherwise they are not truly sciences.

“A term applied (freq. in a derogatory manner) to a belief in the omnipotence of scientific knowledge and techniques; also to the view that the methods of study appropriate to physical science can replace those used in other fields such as philosophy and, esp., human behaviour and the social sciences.”

“1. The collection of attitudes and practices considered typical of scientists. 2. The belief that the investigative methods of the physical sciences are applicable or justifiable in all fields of inquiry.”

Monism: Evolutionary Psychology and the Death of Morality, Reason and Freewill.

The Atom. Monists say that Each Individual, All Humanity, All Life, Love, Artistic expression, Every Moral crusade, Politics, Religion, Every Conscious thought, Every moment of Ecstasy and wonder are nothing more than the interaction of Atoms.

Its been one of those days…Reading the Waikato Times pg 7.
So much Atheist Bullshit… So little time to Rub their noses in it!

One of the favorite Atheist ‘Group hugs’ is their Self delusion that their beliefs are planted in ‘superior soil’ to Balmy Religious ‘Hocus pocus’.
They claim to dwell at the pinnacle of the evolutionary advance, having Superior Intelligence and Superior Education to their Lesser Religious cousins, and having escaped the primitive mindset which is religiously prone, they claim *Reason* as the mighty Rock upon which they stand.

Now if the stench of vanity is not enough to make you question the validity of these claims, The Exploits of one of their Sects ought to.

I refer to that sect of atheists known as ‘Evolutionary psychologists’ whose primary ambition is to take the mind of mankind and using scientific jargon make up a rationale to vindicate their faith that everything in the universe conforms to their Atheist Naturalistic Cosmology.
That is their brief, their duty, their delight.

What is important to realize about this process is that insodoing they De-Humanize Mankind from being a Freewill/ reasoning/ Moral Agent into a mere Automation… a robot.
This can be clearly seen in such declarations as this….

Politcal leanings linked to Genes…

How Flocking Ridiculous!
They want you to believe your little Tot has a Pre-disposition to vote Left! (Or Right, or Whateva)
What more via this notion that Genes make our political decisions for us, they have negated your power of reason and freewill …which is what the very purpose of their conclusions are aimed at achieving… forcing the Mind to comply with materialistic determinism, and just as importantly undermining the Moral culpability which underpins The Christian Argument in respect to freewill and Divine judgment.

Many Atheists will get warm fuzzies from this announcement and say to themselves…”Yes! Freewill is a myth! Everything in the Universe has a purely Naturalistic explanation… There is no God and Man is not a Moral Agent.”
“Everything that is… from the Moon, to Leonardo’s Mona Lisa was Pre-ordained in the Big Bang”
Ie they will accept these findings simply because they conveniently integrate with their Materialistic faith…. Ha ha…. Think about that! Blind leading the Blind…

I ask you this…Why would anyone believe any such research produced by such a partisan lobby to be objective and valid?
To think this sect is capable of Real Scientific Objectivity is as Nieve as believing the Waitangi Tribunal’s Ruling that Maori own the Water rights of New Zealand was an objective and impartial judgment in respect to 1840 British Law, and the treaty!
To expect the Evolutionary psychologists to present findings that were contrary to their personal Materialist delusions would be as Naive as expecting Anti-slavery Abolitionist John Brown to have been found ‘Not Guilty’ of treason and insurrection by the Slave State Virginia court!
John Brown did not receive justice, and like shambolic rulings of The Waitangi Tribunal, in declaring Politics to be a Genetic trait, the Priests of Materialism have simply dictated their own prejudices.
This is not Science!
It’s a scam!
And these ‘findings’ fly in the face of Common experience!
Materialism is absurd!
(I had the option of saying Materialism is Ridiculous!… ie we exercise freewill every day!)
We change our political opinions based upon convincing enough Rationale.

*If The Atheists apply their own arguments upon themselves and their Atheism… they must concede that their atheism is not based upon Reason at all but that their rejection of the Idea of a God is simply a Genetic Predisposition!
They ought to conclude that they are not more intelligent…. Not more rationale…. Their education counts for Naught…. They are simply Genetic Atheists… and no amount of reason will convince them God exists.
Thus their own arguments render them stupid.
In the light of this ramification by what act of self delusion do they continue to insist that they are guided by reason, or that Reason is the preserve of atheism?
They have utterly destroyed Reason and enshrined Chemistry!
Our thoughts have been reduced down to chemical actions.
This is where Monism leads to.
The annihilation of the Human being.

Reason is a Theistic/ spiritual concept. Understandable in the Idea of God *THE CONSCIOUS REASONING SPIRITUAL BEING*.
It involves Liberty, and Choice.
Things which are completely alien to Materialistic determinism, and random chaos.
Computers don’t Reason.
Humans Reason. We are not computers… We are like God. We are Free, and we can make real choices. We are Moral Agents.

An ‘Educated’ friend of ours tells me he finds the notion of dualism to be incomprehensible… He’s been saturated in materialism too long!
I must remind him that the fact that we may not be able to understand something (ie Dualism) does not necessarily make it irrational or superstition to accept it and believe in it.I accept Dualism and Biblical morality because it’s explanatory power is vastly superior to Materialism Naturalism.
You cannot expect science to synthesize God, or weigh/ measure the Human soul.
That does not negate their reality. It merely sets limits to the power of science.
(The materialist Tech-myth of artificial consciousness is sooo in fashion!)
I accept spiritual Being as absolutely necessary because materialist naturalism is woefully inadequate to explain reality, and laugh at the pathetic efforts of Materialists to render everything sterile and dead… and accidental.
Scientifically speaking The Human soul is like The Higgs Boson. It’s a Theoretical spiritual particle postulated to explain Consciousness and freewill. Nobody has ever seen it. It’ cant be directly observed. Yet we can trust/ believe in it’s existance because of indirect observations …

Read more on free will and morality…

Sick Puppies.

We are not Robots Ayn Rand. We are Moral Agents.

Atheists are Religious Fanatics

How many Atheists feel this way?
Those of you who do feel this way are one and the same as the religious extremists who want ‘their Man’ in power, In fact you justify them by your own position. You are just as Petty.
You have no higher ground… no Better vision.
Personally I want a Leader whom respects the inalienable and equal rights of Individuals, and understands that he himself has no special privileges which put him above the same laws and morality as every one else…. and Objectively speaking Few Atheists would be fit for duty because they believe Morality is merely Culturally relative… or Genetic predisposition (So they don’t believe in any higher power to answer to for their Corrupt deeds) , and they believe Mankind are merely smart monkeys…that came from fish…. that came from germs…. that came from a gigantic cosmic accident.
These materialistic Fantasies are incompatible with the Ideals of Inalienable rights, which are only Rational within a Theistic Cosmology.
Denying the Theistic Idea of Mans Fallen Sin Nature Atheists are prone to Utopian delusions.
Utopia being part of an evolutionary progression.
The following Dictators are just a handful of Atheists whom applied ‘Scientific Materialism’ to Politics and came up with… Communism and the Absolute Sovereign State.

Vladimir Lenin. ” Whatsoever Means Serves the Party State and World revolution is Moral”

Joseph Stalin. Russia

Mao Tse Tung (Mao Zedong) China.

Brother Number 1. Pol Pot. Cambodia

Kim Jong il North Korea.

Robert Mugabe Zimbabwe.

Helen Clark New Zealand. “The State is Sovereign”

Marxist Atheism.
Marxist Theology is clearly stated by Lenin, “Religion is opium for the people. Religion is a sort of spiritual booze…1
“We Communists are atheists,”2 declared Chou En-lai at the Bandung, Indonesia Conference in April 1955. This Chinese communist leader captured the fundamental theological ingredient of Marxism-Leninism in one word: atheism. Today, Marxists-Leninists prefer two words: scientific atheism.

From the university days of Karl Marx to the present, official spokesmen for Marxism have been consistent about the content of their theology—that God, whether known as a Supreme Being, Creator, or Divine Ruler, does not, cannot, and must not exist.3

God is considered an impediment, even an enemy, to a scientific, materialistic, socialistic outlook. The idea of God, insists Lenin, encourages the working class (the proletariat) to drown its terrible economic plight in the “spiritual booze” of some mythical heaven (“pie in the sky by and by”). Even a single sip of this intoxicant decreases the revolutionary fervor necessary to exterminate the oppressing class (the bourgeois), causing the working class to forfeit its only chance of creating a truly human heaven on earth: global communism.

Marxist Ethics.
An ethical ideology that includes the inevitability of change and the evolution of morals leaves Marxists free to abandon generally accepted moral standards in pursuit of a greater good—the creation of a classless communist society. This pursuit requires Marxists to dedicate themselves to the cause and to use whatever action they believe will bring about a classless society. Any course of action then, no matter how immoral it appears to a world that believes in an absolute or universal moral standard, is morally good within the Marxist-Leninist worldview.