Koanic Soul
theo16.rssing.com

Koanic Soul was a website on the virtues of craniomentry that was popular in early-2010s neoreactionary discourse. It told of how modern humanity is a mix of Cro-Magnon, Neanderthal and Melonhead. Each has different intellects and personality types. And you can tell by just looking at them.

We lost so much (that was well worth losing) when Koanic Soul closed in 2015-ish. Amazing new slurs for unworthy skull shapes (“snake-melon”) that you just don’t hear any more.

Anyway, it turns out there are traces still remaining in rssing.com. This is just page 7 of several.

The main site was rambling delusional blog posts - the above link is just some of the RSS feed for the blogs - and a forum filled with our very good friends.

Here’s a contemporary review from r/badscience.

(There is a current substack and a current youtube of the same name which are unrelated.)

  • @zogwargEnglish
    11•2 months ago

    The 100% mathematical PROVABLY_CORRECT proof of existence of the supernatural is at least funny.

    It fails to prove dualism, which it then calls the supernatural for no adequately explained reason:

    There is nothing new under the sun. Nothing a 3-lb-brain hominid does is impressive. Everyone dies and leaves behind nothing. If no God exists, all is infinitely meaningless. Fortunately, we can prove with mathematical certainty that the supernatural exists:

    Would a 5-lb-brain hominid bring new things under the sun ? How about a 15-ton-brain corvid ? How about an acausal robot god wrought from all the ditherings found across the net ? If it is still so why are you so concerned with phrenology ?

    1. You cannot be deceived that you are conscious.

    So far so good, not too contentious, you need consciousness to be deceived, though I will note that it doesn’t prove consciousness, only use definitions tautologically.

    1. Consciousness, in itself, contains only that which you aware of.

    No ? Not necessarily, that’s overly egocentric. What about the Id ? What about collective consciousness ?

    1. Consciousness is composed of perceptions and a perceiver.

    A bit contentious, and not a very rigorous definition.

    1. Perceptions are not composed of material things. Red is not a spectrum of light, nor a retinal activation, nor an optical nerve signal, nor a biochemical process in your brain: it is only the experience the perceiver calls “red”.

    Qualia != Perceptions, but this is not the worst sin in this “proof”.

    1. The perceiver is not composed of material things. Neither quarks, nor atoms, nor molecules, nor cells, nor organs of the brain, nor the brain > itself experiences red. Associated processes happen, but only the perceiver experience red. To say that a material object “perceives” anything is a category error.

    Does a perceiver without a body even exist ? I’m not really a monist myself, but this is clearly a leap.

    1. Therefore, your consciousness undeniably exists, but it is not material.

    Again does it exist untethered from the material ?

    1. That which exists, yet is not material, is supernatural.

    Hum no ? At best preternatural, and even then if you think the natural world follows Dualism, then the spiritual is still natural. I mean yes this arguing about definitions, but by god is this silly.

    1. The supernatural exists.

    QED.