german Podcasts
-
Hello Interactors,
Today is part one of a two-part exploration. I was curious as to why conventional economics continues to rely so heavily on deterministic mathematical models that assume perfect conditions even though they know such inert situations don’t exist in nature. It may tie back to the Enlightenment and the popular beliefs of Newton and Descartes who merged Christian beliefs with mathematic certainty – despite viable alternative theories they helped squelch.
As interactors, you’re special individuals self-selected to be a part of an evolutionary journey. You’re also members of an attentive community so I welcome your participation.
Please leave your comments below or email me directly.
Now let’s go…
THE SPERMISTS
Isaac Newton and René Descartes were spermists. They believed they entered this world through preformation. This theory states every future organism is wrapped up in a seed or sperm as a preformed miniature version of itself. This was the dominant belief among Europe’s most respected Enlightenment thinkers. They believed not only did a Christian god create all the plants and animals, including humans, but all the future ones too. Intercourse, they surmised, is a magical act that initiates the growth of microscopic animacules which then grow until they are fully formed. It’s easy to brush this off as a point in time lack of knowledge and excuse these brilliant minds. We might say, “They just didn’t know any better.” But it turns out there were other brilliant minds at the time who thought they were crazy.
But powerful people are not easily persuaded. They, along with the church, continued to push the idea that preformation is as elementary to evolution as mathematical axioms are to theorems. A mathematical certainty that one day seduced many scientists, and later economists, into similar deterministic expressions.
One of the early preformation influencers was the Dutch philosopher, mathematician, and theologian, Bernard Nieuwentyt (1654-1718). Three years before his death, he published a soon to be popular book, The Religious Philosopher: Or, The Right Use of Contemplating the Works of the Creator. In it he writes,
“This however is sure enough…that all living Creatures whatever proceed from a Stamin or Principle, in which the Limbs and Members of the Body are folded and wound as it were in a Ball of Thread; which by the Operation of adventitious Matter and Humours are filled up and unfolded, till the Structure of all the Parts have the Magnitude of a full grown Body.”
His book was translated into English in 1724 and its influence spread. In 1802, the English clergyman and philosopher, William Paley (1743-1805), expanded on the ‘Ball of Thread’ analogy with his infamous watchmaker analogy. Using examples of mechanistic functions of the human body like joints and muscles, he expanded the popular notion that this is the work of a supreme designer – their Christian god. He writes,
“Contemplating an animal body in its collective capacity, we cannot forget to notice, what a number of instruments are brought together, and often within how small a compass. It is a cluster of contrivances.”
But Paley wasn’t alone, nor was he the first. Both Descartes and Newton had already remarked as much. Newton once wrote, “like a watchmaker, God was forced to intervene in the universe and tinker with the mechanism from time to time to ensure that it continued operating in good working order."
The confidence of spermists was buoyed when spermatozoa was discovered by the Dutch microscopist Antoine van Leeuwenhoek in 1677. But the seed of the idea dates all the way back to Pythagoras. He believed male semen is fluid that collects and stores different elements from the body like the bone and brain. He said, “semen is a drop of the brain.” The woman provided a host and nourishment so the male semen could unfold inside her body.
Another Greek philosopher, Empedocles, refuted the Pythagorean claim 100 years later noting offspring often inherit characteristics of the mother. He proposed there was a blending of male and female root reproductive elements in plants and animals that has the potential to produce blended varieties as their offspring. Empedocles was on to something, but his theory was overshadowed by a more popular theory and powerful name, Aristotle.
THE OVISTS
Aristotle believed both men and women provided different forms of reproductive purified blood in the form of semen and menstrual fluids. Because semen appeared more pure than menstrual fluids, he surmised it must have the advantage. Therefore, the male provided the instructions, design, or blueprint for formation and the woman provided the material. The ‘blood’ metaphor is alive today despite our knowledge of genetics. J.K Rowling did her part in her Harry Potter series to perpetuate and popularize the blood metaphor with ‘pure-bloods’ and ‘half-bloods’ or the derogatory ‘mud-bloods’.
Aristotle’s ideas were brought to life in the 17th and 18th century by the spermists nemesis, the ovists. Ovists were rallying behind the discoveries of William Harvey (1578-1657) and Antonie van Leeuwenhoek (1632-1723) of female eggs in female bodies, the union of the sperm and egg, and the formation of an embryo which in turn unleashed the production of various parts of the body. Harvey called this cellular formation of individual parts in plants and animals epigenesis. An idea Aristotle also suggested.
But one Dutch spermist, Jan Swammerdam (1637-1680), used this to further the preformation theory, but with a twist. Evidence of the union of egg and sperm, he suggested, must mean the future organism is embedded inside the head of the sperm in miniature form waiting to become whole with the help of the egg. A century later, this prompted a Swiss scientist, Charles Bonnet (1720-1793), to offer a counter ovist preformation theory. He suggested a Christian god planted future generations not inside the sperm, but inside the egg – like nested eggs within eggs.
Meanwhile, a group of naturalist scientists opposed these Cartesian and Pythagorean, mechanistic preformation theories. The French naturalist, mathematician, and philosopher, Pierre Louise Maupertuis (1698-1759), further rejected theological explanations and believed both the male and female possess particles that come together to form unique characteristics in their offspring. He is credited with being the first to observe evolutionary hereditarian changes in organisms over time suggesting some characteristics are dominant while others are recessive.
The German physiologist Caspar Friedrich Wolff (1733-1794) expanded on this work and revived Harvey’s theory of epigenesis. By observing chick embryos, he discovered a supernatural action occurs once the sperm is implanted in the egg. This sparks what he called a vital action “vis essentialis” that culminates over the period of gestation creating a fully formed body. This is the origins of what we now call embryology.
Those in the mechanistic and theological Cartesian camp weren’t having it. They, like the church, rejected talk of indescribable, supernatural, and immaterial ‘vital actions.’ It was not only heretical, but suggested science was going backwards to embrace medieval miracles of the occult. Either way, if there were forces at work on matter, the preformation mechanists believed it too would have been preordained by a Christian god. The co-inventor of differential calculus, German polymath and theologian, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646-1716), reasoned like this,
“But if in truth an intelligible explanation is to be sought in the nature of the thing it will come from what is clearly apprehended in the thing…for the success of the whole system is due to divine preformation.”
THE NATURALISTS
Toward the middle of the 18th century the French naturalist and mathematician, Comte de Buffon (1707-1788), began publishing his work on natural history, Histoire Naturelle – an opus that amassed 36 volumes that continued to be amended even after his death. By looking at the history and evolution of the natural world, Buffon was the first to articulate patterns of ecological succession – the successive structural change of species over time. He rejected Christian Creationism and theories of the preordained mechanistic unfolding of nature and provided vivid and expertly rendered illustrations to the contrary.
He took elements of Aristotle’s blood theories, qualitative approaches to inquiry, and aspects of both spermists and ovists to merge them with empirical evidence and compelling writing to make convincing arguments for unexplainable actions vital to the creation and evolution of the natural world.
As the late professor of history and Director of Seventeenth and Eighteenth Century Studies at UCLA, Peter Hanns Reill, wrote, Buffon “emphasized the primacy of living over inanimate matter, asserted the existence of inner, active forces as central agents in nature, envisioned a world of new creation and leaps in nature, and proclaimed the ineffable quality of individuality and the manifold variety of nature.”
Through “comparison”, “resemblance”, “affinity”, and “analogical reasoning” he “revitalized and historicized nature without denying the existence of a comprehensible order.” This provided a path for science to embrace qualitative reasoning without foregoing the rigor, language, and quantitative aspects of mathematics embraced by mechanists like Newton and Descartes.
It wasn’t only ecological communities that could be explained this way. Society and politics could too. This admission further worried mechanists and theologians. They feared any acknowledgement that mysterious random events, be it at a particle or societal level, that could lead to a ‘vital action’ creating unforeseen mutations accuses the Christian god of not understanding his own creations. It would reject both ‘divine preformation’ and ‘God’s will’.
This came at a time of social revolutions, debates, and contestations over human rights, freedoms of religion, and ‘we the people.’ Mechanists married the certainty of mathematics with the certainty of their Christian god to explain the world. If nature and society lacked the linear precession of clocks, compasses, and mathematical calculations, they feared such uncertainty would unravel societal order and unleash chaos.
Naturalists continued to point to ‘internal’ vital forces that created perceptible ‘external’ microscopic and macroscopic evolutions that countered the dominant inert, deterministic, and mechanical philosophies and beliefs. But the seduction of certainty remains with us to this day, even when we know it not to be true.
The Scottish philosopher and historian, Adam Ferguson (1723-1816), suggested as much writing,
“Our notion of order in civil society is frequently false: it is taken from the analogy of subjects inanimate and dead; we consider commotion and action as contrary to its nature; we think it consistent only with obedience, secrecy, and the silent passing of affairs through the hands of a few.”
Ferguson goes on to use a brick wall as an analogy. He continues,
“The good order of stones in a wall, is their being properly fixed in places for which they are hewn; were they to stir the building must fall: but the order of men in society, is their being placed where they are properly qualified to act. The first is a fabric made of dead and inanimate parts, the second is made of living and active members. When we seek in society for the order of mere inaction and tranquility, we forget the nature of our subject, and find the order of slaves, not of free men.”
Buffon’s new modes of inquiry transformed fields formally beholden to mechanistic dogma like medicine, physiology, and chemistry. But it seems economics remain seduced by the determinism of linear, mechanistic, mathematical approaches despite it being a branch of the social sciences. While it may have dropped religion, it has yet to fully embrace the “notion of order in civil society is frequently false.” It’s time conventional economics acknowledge there are mysterious ‘vital forces’ internal to nature and society resulting in external perturbations that propagate indeterminant permutations.
Tune in next week as I explore what that might look like.
Thank you for reading Interplace. This post is public so feel free to share it.
This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit interplace.io -
Participating in this episode are Patrik, Martin, Danijel, Linda Karlström and our guest Lady Michèle Renouf . If you enjoy and want to support our work you can send a donation to SEB 5708 35 378 01
1)Intro, Douglas Christie Thoughts on the release of Ernst Zundel https://fakeotube.com/video/4734/douglas-christie---thoughts-on-the-release-of-ernst-zundel
2)In this episode we had the honor to be joined by Lady Michèle Renouf a former beauty queen who followed her conscience and got involved in historical revisionism in the late 1990s and since then has been a strong voice for getting the message out to the public what happens if you question the official narrative in particular historical events. During her time as revisionist she has met and got acquainted with many of the famous names within this scene such as David Irving, Robert Faurisson, Ursula Haverbeck, Horst Mahler, Ernst Zundel, Sylvia Stolz, Monica Schaefer, Alfred Schaefer, Jürgen Graf and many more. During a visit in Dresden, Germany in 2018 she made an unprepared speech of 10 minutes for which she later got prosecuted and risked a 5 year prison sentence for. Fortunately the prosecuting side later dropped the case and Michèle thinks it was because during the trial she would have had several opportunities to speak her mind to a broader public and they didn’t want her to get out with her message on such a big platform. This is just a few of the topics that were covered in this 3 hour long interview.
3)Outro Carl Klang, Rock them in their Ivory Towers https://bit.ly/3sAWJvp
4)Links to this episode:
1. Michèles presentation on video at the Patriotic Alternative Conference of Dr. Gunther Kümel’s Modified Sachs Plan Concept: Way Out of the Migration Disaster:
https://odysee.com/@PatrioticAlternative:f/2022_spring_conference_ladymichele:c
2. The 6 mins video filmed at Michèles Haus fireside in Germany of Berlin Attorney explaining (in German with subtitles) Michèles Dresden Trial victory:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-KDbusxopM
3. The ‘table talk’ discussion in a 48 mins video of Michèles Trial Attorney Nahrath who explains this unique victory to Gaza Flotilla hero Joe Fallisi:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akXy57vnxaY
4. Michèles Report of 93 years old Ursula Haverbeck’s Berlin Trial:
http://www.heritageanddestiny.com/ursula-haverbecks-latest-trial-lady-michele-renouf-reports-from-berlin/
5. A 12 mins video of an interview in English outside the Berlin courthouse with “Volkslehrer" Nikolai Nerling:
http://www.heritageanddestiny.com/berlin-appeal-court-confirms-12-month-jail-sentence-against-93-year-old-ursula-haverbeck/
6. Michèles DVD list:
http://www.jewishrepublic.com/cd-dvd-list-new.htm
7. On YouTube link the film Michèle made out of a surprise birthday party when she turn the tables instead to celebrate her hosts and those who kept the flame of fairness alive: “Justice in Germany”:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZYl6q6m_W4
8. Jailing Opinions website commenced by someone who liked Michèles video of the same name and wished to promote it:
www.jailingopinions.com
9. Michèles own campaign website:
www.jewishrepublic.com
10. Ernst Zundel Setting the record straight (Documentary about his trials in Canada in the 1980s) https://archive.org/details/ErnstZundelSettingTheRecordStraightFullHistoryChannelDocumentary
11. Michael Hoffmans book Judaism discovered by its own texts.
https://archive.org/details/michael-a.-hoffman-judaism-discovered
12. http://www.talmudunmasked.com/ -
Smädelserna flyger! Ledin jämförs med Lundell, Simple Minds med veckans ord off notes och veckans destilleri – Mortlach – tar slut i en orgie av brinnande hår och gummistövlar. Däremellan häcklas Hasse Nilsson och det pratas både pipetter och sampleflaskor. Och blod. Fast blod är bra.Det där med Mareld:https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/MareldMen det var ju inte High Coast utan Mackmyra som hade gett ut en Mareld: https://www.whiskybase.com/whiskies/whisky/42506/mackmyra-moment-mareldDen fuljer den inre rusten och åker längs med kusten är alltså Tomas Ledin, i låten Släpp hästarna fria. Icke Uffepuffe, som ligger David närmare om hjärtat.Vad var det i glaset då?Jeroen körde Talisker 10:https://www.systembolaget.se/produkt/sprit/talisker-41101/Mathias hade Bushmills 16:https://www.systembolaget.se/produkt/sprit/bushmills-8209801/David hade orökig Glann ar Mor och rökig Kornog PX, från samma destilleri. Han vet dock inte några batchnummer, men typ denna:https://www.whiskybase.com/whiskies/whisky/152755/glann-ar-mor-single-maltWhiskybase har bara en Kornog PX men den är fatstark så denna var det inte i Davids glas:https://www.whiskybase.com/whiskies/whisky/91482/kornog-px-finish-cask-strength-16Lite gnäll rörande den där Hasse Nilssons ord om gammal ek…Hasse Nilssons ord om Victoria och tsarfamiljen och så vidare som David hängde upp sig på hittar ni här:https://www.alltomwhisky.se/2021/10/varldens-dyraste-whisky-billig-i-sverige/Lyssnarfråga om andra fora än fejjan samt om sampleflaskorDet gamla whiskyforum hittar ni här:https://www.whiskyforum.se/Sedan bör vi ju lägga till reddit till Insta och Twitter som David nämnde.Nordicpack:https://www.nordicpack.com/Ampulla (men tilltrasslat big time av Brexit…):https://www.ampulla.co.uk/Dryckesglas:https://www.dryckesglas.se/whiskytillbehor/sampleflaskor/Veckans destilleri: Mortlach, äntligen! Det finns mycket att länka om Mortlach. Se till exempel:The whisky professor, ”The Mortlach conundrum”, 21/10 2015:https://scotchwhisky.com/magazine/ask-the-professor/7498/the-mortlach-conundrum/För den som behärskar tyska: Peter Moser, ”SRT19: Mortlach, die Wee Witchie und eine 2,81-fache Destillation”, 7/7 2019:https://fosm.de/srt19-mortlach-die-wee-witchie-und-eine-281-fache-destillation/Teemu Strengell, ”Triple distillation in Scotland”, 18/3 2012: https://whiskyscience.blogspot.com/2012/03/triple-distillation-in-scotland.htmlMortlachs hemsida:https://www.malts.com/en-row/brands/mortlachDram good whiskys Mortlach:https://www.whiskybase.com/whiskies/whisky/73683/mortlach-1998-ct…och då hann vi inte ens prata om Wee witchie, Mortlachs mest kända panna…!Veckans ord: off notesExempel på off notes som produktionsfel, från Davids bokmanus: ”Ett exempel på ett ämne som inte ska finnas i whisky och som ger kraftiga off notes även vid låga koncentrationer är naftalen, som innebär en smak av malkulor. Geosmin, som ger toner av unken jord och som härör från malt som ansatts av svampinfektioner under lagringen, är ett annat exempel. Ett tredje exempel är trikloranisol (TCA), som ger unkna och mögliga toner. TCA kan härröra både från dåliga fat och från korkskada. Listan av kemiska substanser som utgör off notes kan göras lång.”Pär Caldenby skrev 2013 en bra kort text om off notes på Smögens whiskyblogg, sedermera borttagen från den hemsidan. Men vi har koll och använder wayback machine för att läsa vi:https://web.archive.org/web/20151001061527/http://www.smogenwhisky.se/2013/11/off-notes/”Tysk indian” av Olle Ljungström, från albumet Världens räddaste man:https://open.spotify.com/track/6wyUs0IJRu3RMt5kyqz4g9?si=025f46008eef4d6cDavid citerade Micke Tidermans ord om doft och smak på den där Springbanken som doftade helt totalt skogstokigt. Inte 100% korrekt men så var det ju fritt ur minnet också. Läs vidare här:http://tjederswhisky.se/springbank-12-yo-blackadder-raw-cask/Avslutningsvis, fantastiskt roliga smaknoter från Rasmus ChristensenVi har varit inne på hans blogg Skotskt Taake tidigare just för hur underbart han dissar dålig whisky men här är de igen, de roligaste dissningarna i whiskyvärlden:Om en kambodjansk whisky, bland annat dessa ord:”SmakMen inni helvete da! For det første: Noen må da ha pisset i dette en eller annen gang i løpet av produksjonsprosessen?”http://skotsktaake.com/?p=6254”Liker du lukten av epleeddik, våt papp og halvråtne kirsebær? Da kommer du til å elske lukten av Drumguish!”http://skotsktaake.com/?p=3060Om Jacks whisky:”Lukt:Ja, dessverre lukter den.”http://skotsktaake.com/?p=3956Om Drum oak aged whisky:”Einerbær, halvråttent sitronskall, sure sokker, brent plast, Vademecum, hermetisk mais og eiketanniner.”http://skotsktaake.com/?p=4699…och så den med Nickelbackreferensen, om Säntis cask strength peated:”Enda verre: Jeg har registrert at det finnes mennesker der ute som liker den, noe man umulig kan gjøre uten å også tilhøre andre perversiteter som scientologikirken, IS eller fanklubben til Nickelback.”http://skotsktaake.com/?p=5328Och här ligger Mortlach:Här når du oss:En trea whisky på Facebook (https://ww.facebook.com/entreawhisky)Maila till oss på [email protected] blogg tjederswhisky.se (https://www.tjederswhisky.se)
