The Failing Blame-Based Model of Spirituality

It is noteworthy that the top five most populous global religions incorporate a philosophical aspect focused on guiding individuals or humanity as a whole towards a better state, away from a circumstance of blame, punishment, or disenfranchisement with God. Importantly, all these religions attribute the responsibility for this undesirable state primarily to its adherent and/or humanity itself. Meanwhile, our most ancient historical mythologies portray a different story.

As men grow in their spiritual thirst and understanding, religious institutions which exploit fear of the unknown continue to crumble, along with the dark empire they serve to occult.

They say that history is written by the victors. Religion, as an interpretive form of history, is written by the most manipulative among the victors as well. We’ve all had the spiritual fairy tale forced upon us, likely over a thousand times, with its relater operating under the delusion that you’ve never heard its pamphleteering drone before. The universe, currently in its nascent state, exists as a local and awe-inspiring essence. This enchanting realm, akin to a celestial garden, is believed to have been meticulously crafted solely for humanity by the divine hand of God. His love for us transcends the boundaries of our comprehension. Yet, it is ‘we’ who have marred this perfection, becoming the architects of our own suffering. Both collectively and individually, mankind has realized the wages of such rebellion – myriad consequences past, present, and impending yet again – a direct result of our (unforeseeable) innate corruption and transgression(s). Although God possesses the power to intercede in our relief, He upholds our autonomy and respects our free will.

The all-too-common notions comprised by this state of spiritual gridlock merely serve to perpetuate mankind’s ‘justified’ state of physical suffering, psychological terror, and most importantly, spiritual ignorance. Indeed, suffering, terror, and ignorance form the foundational ingredients of a dark spiritual ambrosia, empowering those entities which choose to partake in its intoxicating and addictive allure. An essence drawn typically from the lifeblood of an unblemished, vulnerable, and innocent youngling. This all spun as constituting aspects of God’s ‘mysterious ways’.

Perhaps these ways are not so mysterious after all, but rather constitute a ploy which exhibits a very familiar diabolical shtick instead. Ways which make complete sense, once one comprehends the inversion spell at play inside the mind of man. The monotheist sky-fairy taught by our major religions is very good at assigning and recompensing blame (especially over trivial and inconsistent doctrines), but is not nearly so skilled at alleviating, nay even comprehending, the human plight. Perhaps this should stand as a hint.

Ignorance in contrast, he has formed into an art. As an objective, ignorance is the most critical element inside this religious play-act. That is why the Library at Alexandria (and all works from its forebears) had to be destroyed by Christianity and Islam, while several caches of critical documents therein were smuggled out and preserved inside clay jars in the deserts of Egypt and the Levant. Aside from the 1940’s discoveries of the Qumran Caves Scrolls and the Nag Hammadi Codices, I suspect that many more troves of such wisdom have yet to be upturned. The ancient institutions which housed such documents (texts such as I Enoch, The Atrahasis Epic, On the Origins of the World, The Hypostasis of the Archons, Matthew 4:1-11, The Book of Giants, Sumerian documentation of the selfish and diabolical works of the Elohim gods, or even ancient Magi teachings) offered up far too much of the backstory behind this spiritual farce to be allowed to remain in existence. After all, it is difficult to maintain an informed victim in a state of perpetuated slavery.

As an example from mythology, The Hypostasis of the Archons, part of the Nag Hammadi set of codices, cites a science fiction or Star Wars like tale recounting that a sister world of ours, called Sabaoth, both comprehended the play in which they were captive inside an evil empire, and was able to attain emancipation from their captor as well. This successful escape enraged their former abductor, Yaldabaoth (Samyaza or Ha-Satan), who was defeated along with 200 of his ‘watcher angels’ (the Elohim) and fled to Earth during the ensuing conflict – taking out their resulting wrath upon his remaining and much-despised slave race, mankind.1

An essential spiritual principle revolves around the notion that an entity’s true character should not be defined solely by its expressed words, posed virtues, or visible actions, but rather by those ideas and actions it chooses to prohibit, destroy, or embargo. It is not your virtue nor ‘light upon a hill’ which will win converts to your cause, but rather your objectivity in quest, tolerance of and skill in adjudicating novel ideas, and ability to draw significance in others’ lives inside realms where few have ventured before. This is what genuine persons look for, and not necessarily one’s good works.

Call ye nothing good. For in the moment you do, evil will crucify it and wear its skin as a costume.

After all, a religion in contrast is not actually defined by its doctrines, but rather those things it forbids to be known or said. Particularly if the religious perpetrator can establish guilt and fear of punishment (even that which is solely self-inflicted) inside the gestalt of their victim. This is why the debunker can be seen as nothing more than a religious acolyte, falsely coercing an embargo of specific ideas all in the name of skepticism and science – relegating you to their hell of ‘conspiracy theory’, at the first mere hint of dissent. Victims learn to distrust such exploitation by agency, and whether by debunker or cleric, cynic or true believer – it is all the same dishonest shtick.

Through application of such strategy, the deceptive entity is able to keep the victim reeling on their heels, perpetually in a reactive mode and underdeveloped state. Afraid, ashamed, and guilty, the kidnapped and abused child in such circumstance will be defenseless against their abductor. A principal weapon of which the exorcist is keenly aware. And whether conscious or not of its cast dark shadow, hylic mankind is collectively possessed by this very spell.

The Signature Gimmicks of Spiritual Abuse (Guilt, Blame, and Shame)

The Mayo Clinic cites several key indicators as being essential signals of child abuse. These lies and abuses on the part of the captor apply to spirituality as well, and are adapted as follows.2 The astute reader might even be able to discern the demonic gimmicks outlined herein:

  • Isolation of child from potential friends or usual social activities (By means of creation or abiogenesis, it does not matter what you choose – as long as you understand that you are all alone)
  • Instilling guilt, a loss of self-confidence, or low self-esteem in the child (You are worthless and sinful)
  • Exploiting the child’s resulting desperate need for affection (I am the Lord thy God, you shall have no other Gods before me)
  • Maintenance and exploitation of the child’s ignorance (understanding in lieu of comprehension) or poor development (Man’s spiritual devolution inside a state of technological peril)
  • Excessive health and weight fluctuations, medical complications, and self-abuses that are not being adequately addressed (Self loathing, anomie, lack of ability to alleviate global suffering)
  • A parent who is massively self-absorbed, addicted, and/or shows little actual concern for the child (Abandoned to its own resources, lack of actual power to help is spun as allowing ‘free will’)
  • Expects the child to provide attention and worship to the parent and seems jealous of others getting attention from the child (I am a jealous God; bring the sacrifice before me)
  • Shaming the child under the burden of inappropriate demands or unattainable levels of performance (Be holy, for I am holy)
  • Reinforces the shaming notion that no one exists who cares for the child, save for the abuser themself (Debunking, cults, nihilism/monotheism, hyperbole regarding the reach and conclusions of science)
  • The demand of blood sacrifice and/or power of sexual rape/incest/corruption (The sons of god saw that the daughters of men were comely…)
  • Offers conflicting, fantastical, or unconvincing explanations for a child’s injuries or suffering (Mysterious ways, His actions transcend the boundaries of our comprehension, our state originated from ‘nothing’ by means of creation/abiogenesis)
  • Child exhibits withdrawal, depression, and behavioral disorders – which are then ironically then spun ex post facto as the justification or rationale for the child abuse itself (‘begs the question’ of original and ongoing sin used as blame)
  • Employs harsh physical discipline as a first and/or sole means of control; continually exploiting the fear of such punishment (Genesis Curses/Bowls of wrath/Judgment)

and finally, the pièce de résistance,

  • Blaming the victim (child) themself for their state of being and suffering (sin and original sin – you have ‘free will’, but if you do even the slightest thing I don’t like, I am going to cast you out, kill you, curse you and a lot of innocents as well, punish you over 30 times again, and then kill you again, and then make you suffer forever – but you have free will, and I am merciful)

This last bullet point in the series is all important. Because, in order to enforce such a play in captive-abuse, the ever-present and awesome insistence of blame and impending just desserts is vital (see The Riddle of Sin). It does not matter how many times the child has been punished for the same offense, rather that the punishment be awesome, ultimate, repetitive, forever impending, and eternal if the child does not straighten up their act and join the club.3

The ‘Big Five’ Religions – One Ring to Rule Them All

Before assembling this article, out of curiosity I asked ChatGPT 3.5 to provide a listing of the top five world religions. I then asked ChatGPT to refine that listing to exclude both secular and spiritism philosophies, since those can constitute merely methods/intellectual pursuits and not necessarily religious beliefs. ChatGPT produced the following result. I found it indeed curious that the final tally comprised a list of blame and/or punishment-based (even if the punishment is a mere false ‘perception of self’) spiritual quests along a spectrum of severity or agency in the forms of entailed blame, or even worse, eternal punishments.4 The reader should bear in mind that together, these five religious sects compose 93% of the world’s population.5

See why both atheism and traditional religious beliefs are in decline. The public is rejecting dark nihilist and blame-based ontologies. Whether one worships a bearded grandfather icon, an empty set, or the spectrum of irrationality in between, an abusive captor could care less. Just as long as you are not aware of your actual circumstance.

  1. Christianity/Mithraism – (the complicated) belief that one must accept that Christ (Mithras) is the Heir (Son) of Earth’s wrathful and schizophrenic head (Enlil/Yahweh/Jehovah/Sol) of the Triune God (Sol/Luna/Mithras) itself, and that Christ (Mithras) died to redeem man from his corruption, sin, and impending eternal damnation – or be condemned by that very same Ruler (Archon) of Eden-Earth to damnation themself (under original sin – a second punishment for an event under which you have already been punished before).6
  2. Islam – belief that one must both become a believer and repent of sin before being committed to the eternal torment of hell by a wrathful Allah.
  3. Hinduism – belief in the continuing cycle of negative entanglement in passive self-punishments (the resulting birth, life, death, and rebirth in this form of hell), Karma (action, intent, and consequences), moksha (liberation from attachment/suffering).
  4. Buddhism – belief in the path (mārga) to liberation from negative entanglement in passive self-punishments (the resulting birth, life, death, and rebirth in this form of hell), Karma (action, intent, and consequences). “The nature of life is suffering.” Once that is realized, there is a path to reduce the suffering… one of compassion and non-judgement. Non-judgement does not imply a lack of observation or discernment, nor a lack of necessary action, but more an abstention from hate and loathing.7
  5. Chinese traditional Confucianism/Taoism – belief that the order coming from Heaven preserves the world from suffering, and has to be followed by humanity finding a ‘middle way’ between yin and yang forces.

Personal Shortfall Employed as Both Red Herring and Weapon

It is noteworthy that all five of these religious beliefs incorporate a philosophical aspect focused on guiding individuals or humanity as a whole towards a better state, away from a state of suffering, punishment, or disenfranchisement with God. Importantly, these religions attribute the responsibility for this undesirable state primarily to the human or humanity itself. In general, as we move from Western and into Eastern philosophies, visceral or violent condemnation gives way to various forms of ‘blame-shame lite’. Fewer calories, same great taste.

Wicker Man – a religion, doctrine, or philosophy of which, no matter what description is offered, such description will be specially plead as constituting a straw man. Wicker Man refers to a belief system, ideology, or philosophy that consistently evades accountability for its negative consequences by distorting or dismissing any critique against it as a straw man argument. It operates as a form of abuse by avoiding responsibility for the harm it causes.

One ramification of this principle I call the ‘wicker man’, is that a religion can be best defined by what it forbids to be known or discussed – and not by what it ostensibly promotes. The idea that man is captive, and that the first order of business is the amelioration of that captor/captive state is a principle cited among mankind’s most ancient religious texts (listed in the third paragraph of this article), a principle which runs anathema to the teachings of today’s most populous religious philosophies (the Big Five cited above).

Of course, emphasis upon personal responsibility, self-accountability, forgiveness, agape love, ethics, etc. always bears applicability. Such virtues in development are universally important, regardless of one’s level of progression or status. These principles should always be followed and should not be employed as a form of institutional tu quoque argument – or worse be wielded as a weapon by power hungry religious institutions. Just as the church does not actually own the right to administer ‘marriage’ as a human institution, in the same way neither does it own nor commission these spiritual principles. Moreover, while personal responsibility is essential, its leverage should not be used as a means to belittle, divert attention from, or discourage the investigation of an ongoing crime.8

It does not benefit a kidnapped child in any way shape or form to compel or coerce them to ‘stop procrastinating and do their homework’. The kidnapping itself is the first and only critical path argument at play (salience). To focus on such issues of personal responsibility, blame, guilt, or even spiritual advancement inside the wrong context, is a form of virtue signaling (crucifying ‘good’ and wearing its skin as a costume) on the part of our Big Five religions – an insincere display of moral superiority rather than a genuine attempt to address effectively the situation at hand.

The Secret of the Magi

The reality of Mankind’s captivity is an idea which has the most ancient of roots, yet has been expunged from all libraries, religious texts, and theological deliberation. A religion is not distinguished by what it teaches, but rather by what it embargoes. In that regard, all of the world’s top religions (to include secularism) constitute indeed the same species of manipulation, red herring, and tu quoque cult thinking.

If we are to believe the world’s oldest religious texts, which have nearly been exterminated for this very reason, the captor of humanity shows no concern over a person’s intellectual beliefs or how they may choose to interpret disparate religious doctrines or pathways to self development. His acolyte does not even have to believe in God or gods at all. The captor only requires that one suffer the accompanying guilt, terror of mortality, blame, shame, and ultimately, ignorance. Sweet ambrosia, the intoxicating blood of the unblemished youngling. Inside this, it remains critical that few perceive or ponder the bifurcated notion that we reside in an abnormal, captive, and abusive circumstance.

When you impart a conception of God to children, one that starkly contradicts their later observations as adults, this engenders an inherent existential strain – an unfortunate loosh craved by those who exploit such distress. Whether one doubles-down on fanatic theism or reacts to the opposite by means of atheism, no respite is offered in either extreme.

In that realm where innocence resides,
We caution young hearts of life unknown,
A fable of God, upon faith abides,
Yet reality authors a contrasting tome.

Exploiters revel in the soul’s unrest,
Feeding on pain, their dark delight,
A harvest of innocence, suffering pressed,
As spirits shatter in the desperate night.

This is the answer to the riddle as to why a ‘God of truth’ would blithely tolerate so much suffering amidst so many disparate, confusing, and conflicting religious philosophies. In the end, what anyone positively believes does not matter. You are free to worship the flying spaghetti monster. In reality, there is actually only one protected global religion – one Ring to rule them all – and it is based upon the obfuscation and embargo of this single specific idea of man’s captivity

I believe that this may well explain why the prayer commonly referred to as ‘The Lord’s Prayer’ can be most readily interpreted as a prayer of sedition, as it seeks not personal salvation from sin – which is conspicuously absent from the quintessential prayer, given salvation’s supposed priority in the scheme of man’s relationship with God – but rather the dethroning of a costumed, desperate, and crumbling hierarchy, intoxicated through its unlawful rule over the existentially terrified, confused, and suffering affairs of Adamu Man.

Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor. “All this I will give you,” he said, “if you will bow down and worship me.”

~ Matthew 4:8-9, NIV

This was the secret teaching of the Magi, the world’s oldest esoteric, which was passed generation to generation from those ancient Vohu Manah (ethical skeptic) astrologers to Antoichus I of Commagene, whose priestly title was ‘Theos Epiphanes’ – the ruling keeper of the ancient wisdom of the Magicians (Persian, Babylonian and Macedonian tradition ‘Magi’). A gift of birthright which infuriates the siblings of envious darkness – which does not depend upon such insignificant criteria as one’s intellect, allegiance, memorized writ, professed doctrine, observances, practices, foods you eat when, meetings you may miss or attend, pride, fake humility, how you choose to have sex or spend money, nor even terrified insincere repentance of same. Mankind’s emancipation from this empire of the dead and dying, along with its demonic prison of blame, which are to be displaced by thy Kingdom of Heaven come of the Messiah, The Son of Man.

The Ethical Skeptic, “The Blame-Based Model of Spirituality”; The Ethical Skeptic, WordPress, 13 May 2023; Web,

OMG Not Another ‘Skeptic’ Book – The Shtick of Canned Conspiracy Theory Journalism

Because ‘Flat Earth conspiracy theorists’ exist, therefore you have no right to dissent. Vestiges of how Royalty views itself in the age of collapsing dogmatic science and pop-skepticism.
I worry more about garbage skepticism than I do the vagaries of Flat Earth Theory. Fake skepticism presents both a much larger movement behind it, and as well bears the greatest potential footprint in terms of societal and human harm. A hard lesson we learned in 2020 and thereafter.

The world was blessed with yet another ‘deep dive’ expose by a self-proclaimed skeptic journalist in February 2022. More than two years into the worst disaster of public health science and policy failure in history, we are obliged once again to be instructed as to how irrational we all are. However the poor timing of this book is not its only myopic feature. Kelly Weill’s treatise, Off the Edge: Flat Earthers, Conspiracy Culture, and Why People Will Believe Anything, is simply the latest in this holier-than-thou cult’s habitual foray in misplaced intent. A quintessential application in Pollyanna’s Laws.

Setting the author’s abject lack of qualification inside science and skepticism aside, one should be concerned about the mental health of a person who would go out of their way to debunk Flat Earth Theory upon a world stage – and then tagline it throughout by means of worn-out political shibboleth. For a person to bear such enmity towards their fellow man, one so deeply seated inside their Gestalt of insecurity, that it would drive them to waste copious amounts of time seeking the meager and bitter fruits of harm, notoriety, and money – one should regard this as is indicative of a psychosis at play.

To broad-brush every idea which one does not like, as both analogous of and linked to, Flat Earth Theory – is a signature trait of a malicious and immature mind – one which falls well below the Dunning Line.

Now first, let me be clear that I am no fan nor ponderer of Flat Earth Theory. The concept bears earmarks of propaganda agency – being suddenly injected into society in late 2014, but not by any form of ‘true believer’. It is a lob & slam ploy. I am a student however, of how propaganda and counter-propaganda function inside a dynamic social and political structure. I am wary of the stooge-posed farce (for instance, debunking ‘birds are not real’ claims), such as is entailed in the Flat Earth debate. I am familiar with how disinformation/misinformation agents will insincerely promote an idea, simply for the objective of disseminating Trojan Disinformation, under the goal of discrediting a targeted opposition group. The art of the lob & slam.1 2

It is never about the topic at hand. Disinformation and Misinformation, no matter how correct may be its tenets, is always about discrediting targeted groups in order to neutralize their power – and nothing more.

Most pop-skeptics are not familiar with the tactics of intelligence nor agency, rendering themselves unwitting participants in a clever game of pseudoscience football. It is exactly this Pollyanna lack of self-awareness and willingness to be utilized as a pawn, about which I am more concerned. The book cited, along with the propaganda push Science article above, do not disappoint accordingly.3

Ethical skepticism is about ceasing one’s participation in such a charade. No, the ethical skeptic does not reflexively leap onto the bandwagon of every crazy idea which is foisted before them. However, I do worry far more more about garbage skepticism than I do the vagaries of Flat Earth Theory. Fake skepticism has a much larger movement behind it, and as well bears the greatest potential for societal and human harm (see Covid-19).

   Dead Body Count

  • Flat Earth Theory: 0
  • Pop, Fake, and Social Skepticism which ignored bad Covid-19 policy alone: 749,172 (as of March 18 2022) and rising faster than Covid can explain, especially among younger persons…4 5

The Psychosis of the Skeptic-Journalist

Accordingly, the features of garbage skeptic-journalism as exemplified in the article and book cited, include:

  1. The investigator finds almost exclusively club-conforming results – perspective is rarely framed nor offered – surprises and serendipity are rare. This is not how real investigation progresses at all.
  2. They will straw man opposition held ideas and then ad hoc rescue the straw man by citing, ‘a variety of ideas are held, but…(now I bear a license to lie)’.
  3. They regard, that since they represent the ‘right and correct’, there is no need for them to provide recitation nor backing for their claims. Only the opposition need do this.
  4. If you dissent, you are automatically part of the conspiracy theory enemy. “Any disposition that identifies my condemnation of conspiracy theory as being wrong, is itself conspiracy theory.”
  5. Their treatise will often fire its wad in the first chapters and then meander thereafter, almost as if it were a journal and not a work of investigative argument – which prosecutes and builds a case.
  6. A lack of humanity pervades their monolithic message – indicating a lack of global and human experience base. What little humanity they do offer is canned, and trumpeted under a virtue flare – almost as if they learned it from watching a Hollywood production.
  7. All opponents are framed as a ‘circle’ or ‘believers’ – which implies that the author carries no belief nor irrational circle membership. This is almost unilaterally false.
  8. All opponents are framed as residing in a state of confusion and life turmoil. This of course explains why they would latch on to crazy theories. This is pseudo-theory – explaining everything, anything, and nothing, all at the same time.
  9. All believers ‘Do their own research’ – an effort which only involves unauthorized sources and methods. Why are they unauthorized? Well, when one looks most often the litmus for such categorization is merely that they dissent, and nothing more. Doubt, you will notice, is a luxury reserved for the fake skeptic alone.
  10. Social media, or the lack of censorship therein, is often framed as the problem. Oh, for the heady days of one-way-only ‘science communication’, Khrushchev, Malenkov, and Pravda. If only!….
  11. Conspiracy theory is framed as a kind of gateway drug to even more extreme conspiracy theories or bad political stances. This claim is tendered with no supporting evidence whatsoever. Opponents are habitually framed as drooling idiots.
  12. The hyperbole of some grand research initiative on their part, is often betrayed by shallow, biased, and extremely canned results – a sincere researcher rarely finds only and exactly what they seek (‘deep dive’ is code for ‘sat in my cubicle and made stuff up’).
  13. As an overriding goal, they seek revenue, notoriety, and club acclaim for their scant effort and shtick. This contrasts starkly with the supposed lower caste they target, who for the most part are not seeking money at all – rather truth (even if misfounded).
  14. The skeptic chooses the most ludicrous-yet-visible subject they can muster, one which is subscribed to by a couple thousand people at most – and then falsely portrays this to be a foible on the part of the majority of humanity (for those insecure acolytes inside their club). This is lazy stooge-posing.
  15. It often quickly becomes clear that the skeptic bears no interest, background, nor depth in the actual subject’s broader discipline itself. ‘I have shown zero life interest in astro or geo physics, but oh yes, I am a qualified reviewer of Flat Earth theory.’ Sure you are…
  16. The skeptic often fails to cite where their targets learned their pop-skeptic habits in the first place – often the same bastions of skepticism from which the researcher themself sprang.
  17. The skeptic leads off with the pejorative framing ‘conspiracy theory’ and ‘theorists’ – from this quip one can guarantee that a lie is forthcoming – under the guise of rationality or science. The lie is not about the idea they are addressing per se, but rather the ‘conforming method of philosophy in selecting for ideas’ they are promoting. If they add in the word ‘facts’, then you can be assured that they have never prosecuted a scientific argument in their life.
  18. They immediately connect one conspiracy theory, with all conspiracy theories, and then with all forms of political opinion or persons they disfavor. Everything bad eventually connects back to the FOG (fat orange guy). Just like with ‘Six degrees from Kevin Bacon’, this is a self-deception of apophenia.
  19. They falsely regard that everyone who disagrees with them, all
    • hold to the same beliefs
    • are irrational and anti-science
    • hold to the same politics
    • entertain superficiality
    • are Flat-Earth styled theorists
  20. They fail to grasp that many times ‘true believers’ are counter-intelligence agents in the first place. They also don’t believe the shtick, but are there for the jollies or because they are paid to do it. They don’t have experience in nor do they comprehend the nature of propaganda, agencies, and populations.
  21. They habitually frame a compliant-but-unintelligent mind as one bearing ‘social intelligence’. This too, is an ad hoc rescue. Chimpanzees possess even higher social intelligence than that of humans, but that is not a goal to which most of us should aspire. Learning how to fit in and put on an act, is not a virtue.
  22. They regard their work as analogous to visiting some erstwhile Amazonian tribe of lost humanity, with the skeptic-journalist performing the role as a kind of white savior, come to rescue the heathen from their backward ways – then ironically daring to accuse the tribe of ‘lacking a willingness to engage on the issue’. This is very comical.
  23. They flag a success at censorship, as a victory of science – failing to grasp the irony in such an event; having never experienced a nation or culture wherein censorship was the rule. They applaud Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter censorship.
  24. They will often desperately crave mention and pictures of themselves in the media.
  25. They fantasize the dangers of alienation, conducting dangerous experiments, and finally stereotype connections to 9/11 Truth, Nazi’s, Anti-Semitic, misogynistic, QAnon, and other conspiracy theories as the downsides of their targets’ bad belief. This is extremely bigoted shtick on the part of the skeptic-journalist.
  26. The ‘bad people’ are almost always eagerly identified as being members of the opposite sex – males in particular. The exploitation of the term ‘the patriarchy’ is particularly pandering and unscrupulous.
  27. They are celebrated as a crusading hero, a great white savior, by their club. A club with a severe case of anomie. An example can be viewed here.

This elitist form of propaganda and shtick is replete through such works of garbage skeptic-journalism. We in ethical skepticism dissent of such self-serving hypocrisy.

The Ethical Skeptic, “OMG Not Another ‘Skeptic’ Book: The Shtick of Canned Conspiracy Theory Journalism”; The Ethical Skeptic, WordPress, 28 Mar 2022; Web,

What Constitutes Belief?

A believer is not one who ponders, considers, or investigates. The believer is one who mocks the investigator, refuses to reveal the reasons why they would demean the curious and their ideas, and meticulously avoids acknowledging their own protected notion or exposing it to risky critical scrutiny.
The skeptic in contrast honors the ethic of the investigation, and chooses to remain neutral until they know more.

In an ancient mythology a certain man befriended a horse who happened to graze in the same valley as the one in which the man lived. One day the man decided to impress his friend the horse with his ability to create and maintain fire for his purposes. So he did just this, creating fire from a stone flint and some dry leaves he had gathered beforehand. But he did not show the horse this process, rather merely brought the horse to witness the fire once it was well ablaze. The horse’s reaction was so immediate, fearful, and visceral that the man was slightly taken aback. It was at this point that the man hatched a plot in his mind.

A potential difference is always useful, not simply between energy states, but between entities as well. The man therefore insisted to the horse that, unless the horse could also create and control fire, the horse could never be the man’s real equal as a friend. The horse’s lack of articulating fingers and abject ignorance at creating and exploiting fire was a shortfall or miss (sin) on the horse’s part. Thus their friendship must now be modified to that state of skilled-master and servant as well. The man reassured the horse that he was a degreed, qualified, just, forgiving, and loving master – so not to worry. If the horse would obey the man, there would be no trouble at all. After a couple almost guaranteed instances of ‘disobedience’, and seeing that he had no option at hand in that the valley was critical to his food supply, the horse therefore accepted its slavery role as something it deserved. The horse had undertaken the working burden of a premature conclusion of science, called a ‘belief’.

For the (ancient) Scriptures say, “You must be holy because I am holy.”

1 Peter 1:16, Bible – New Living Translation (added context)

In this mythology, the horse had been coerced by a magician’s stage act into adopting what is called a belief. The horse was burdened by the ‘offended’ man into becoming his lesser being and servant. The man did so knowing that it will take hell and high water to remove this entrenched notion from the collective mind of horses thereafter. The horse will now defend this notion at all costs – the man really need do nothing further. The goal has been accomplished. The horse and his progeny will obediently plow his fields and offer a life of ease for the man, for the remainder of time.1 Such is the power of belief.2

It is never what a person says, but rather –
It is what you forbid which defines your belief.
It is what you tolerate which defines your allegiance.

The Litmus Characteristics of Belief

Now a belief is differentiated from other ideas which might be entertained in the mind of man by several distinguishing characteristics. It is critical that the ethical skeptic understand these characteristics so as to defend those researchers who are accused of being motivated by a ‘belief’, as distinct from the accuser or finger-pointer who is ironically indeed exercising a belief themself. These litmus characteristics include the following:

  • A belief is the solely tolerated alternative, so important that it sustains itself in the mind of the believer at the expense of all other ideas, science, and forms of inquiry (see: Omega Hypothesis).
  • The belief-holder seeks to debunk initial inquiry which would consider/research any alternative idea – at its very inception (see: Inverse Negation Fallacy and Debunking).
  • The belief-holder assigns labels of condemnation (woo, pseudoscience, bunk, etc.) to any competing idea and those who investigate such ideas.
  • The belief-holder implies that enormous effort went into validation of their belief sometime in the past, but somehow cannot ever provide/recite that effort.
  • The belief-holder applies this constraint to other persons aside from self, rendering their defacto conclusion an enforcement upon others and not merely a personal opinion (a debunker operates upon their belief in this manner).
  • The belief-holder enforces this by citing or implying an appeal to authority which substantiates the belief itself (even if an unacknowledged one) and justifies their actions in its enforcement upon others.
  • The belief-holder will often enforce their belief surreptitiously (not acknowledge it, rather simply enforce it as default truth or the null-hypothesis-as-truth).
  • The belief-holder constrains or undertakes actions or adopts other beliefs based upon the belief (or can be coerced into doing so).
  • The belief-holder coerces others to undertake actions or to adopt other beliefs based upon the belief – through building celebrity and an implicit threat towards others’ professional or social acceptability.
  • Belief is cultured in a petri dish called syndicate.
  • A belief always confers a burden or dissonance upon its holder, whether acknowledged or not.
  • Onerous belief is less burdensome inside a scripted life or syndicate role. An unscripted life will suffer under the imbalance of top-heavy belief.

In essence, the believer can only function under the ‘truth’ of one notion at a time. Such notion bears a hook and barb; its extraction is painful, and therefore threatening to the person contemplating departure from under its intoxication. The actual validity of that notion is indeed irrelevant, as a belief can in fact be either true or untrue. A null or even scientific hypothesis can also constitute a belief as well. Moreover, it is what belief does to the believer, and what the believer does to others, which actually serve to betray the pathos of belief itself.

The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function.

F. Scott Fitzgerald

Belief’s Contrast with Faith

One is free to ponder the realm of ideas, unshackled of oppression from those who promote their belief through an inverse negation stage act or pretense of ‘science enthusiasm’. As the ethical skeptic might notice within this Wittgenstein framing of definition, belief has nothing whatsoever to do with hunch, guess, fleeting notion, theory, hypothesis, sponsorship, investigation, consideration, research, conspiracy theory, nor even more importantly, faith.

Faith is a personally cherished idea one holds for self, despite a substantive lack of evidence for its veracity. The difference however, is that faith is not enforced upon others, because its adopter understands or acknowledges its incumbent epistemic weakness and personal context. Faith is very similar in its fabric to love, something which may be shared mutually – however, ultimately is held by only one participant alone, may stand as fully irrational, and cannot be enforced nor coerced upon others.

Whether or not such a habit as faith constitutes indeed a virtue remains a matter under heavy debate. But no one can deny that our relationship with the universe implicitly encourages the existence of faith. Willfully so? Well, that remains a matter of faith. And just like the love we share with those we hold dear, faith is part of the durable inventory we carry with us into the next realm – an asset which cannot be stolen, taxed, nor used to control. Faith, like love, is powerful – causing dark Archael to shudder and seethe with envy and hatred. Beliefs, just like job titles, credentials, material effects, and every other thing which the fool values, erode with the passing.

Wherein belief serves to enslave, therein faith is heretical, tenacious, and powerful.
Those who believe cannot exercise skepticism, no matter how much they claim its name.
Faith and skepticism in contrast, are familiar dance partners.
While the faithful investigates, the believer can merely debunk and selectively doubt.

Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

Hebrews 11:1, Bible – New King James Version

Faith – the personal choice to cherish an unproven construct as inspiring hope. Faith is the portrait one paints inside the frame of reason, a canvas upon which we are free to aspire, and hopefully also therein have the portrait come into consistency with one’s life (integrity). Faith has little to do with belief, mythology, or religion – as such things merely serve as distractions/obstacles to its incumbent work to begin with.

The Ethical Skeptic

If a person is out in the field researching an idea which you find distasteful, and your innate reaction is to attempt to debunk all that he has observed, then that person is not the believer …you are. You are the tricked, mythological horse who carries the unacknowledged burden – the exploitation and enslavement of belief.

The Ethical Skeptic, “What Constitutes Belief”; The Ethical Skeptic, WordPress, 23 Jul 2021; Web,