, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Today we transition back to a philosophical discussion and the “2+2=5” meme.

And as we know from our notorious BLT S.J. suffixed individual, ‘theology is TRANSRATIONAL’, i.e. doesn’t conform to the laws of math.

So first up today, more news from the War on Math front:

So as we see, that which we call TRANSRATIONALISM (as in irrational) is alive and well on the US college campuses.

Today, your humble blogger came across a post at the Zero Hedge website that illustrates how the laws of physics are also under attack. But this time, the attack comes from government bureaucrats at the CIA. The information comes via a post titled: CIA Director Met With NSA Whistleblower Who Disputes Russia’s Role In DNC Hack. The crux (not to be confused with that crappy internet polluting website, funded by the FrancisKnights of Columbus) of the matter has to do with the purported “hacking” of the Democratic National Committee servers and is as follows:

The real story, he says, is that a DNC insider stole the emails by downloading them manually from the DNC’s server onto a hard drive. Binney says he arrived at this conclusion after conducting an independent analysis of the metadata from the emails with a particular eye toward timestamps that he says indicate a download speed consistent with loading the files onto a thumb drive.

But according to our FrancisCIAOperatives, this is not the case. The Francis operatives claim that… “the Russians did it”.

And how do they know?

Well, because…

Here is that passage:

While the intelligence community has categorically disputed Binney’s theory, it has never provided a compelling explanation as to why.


Everybody knows that the laws of physics are “white privileged”.

Anyways, here is Zero Hedge’s “white privileged” summary of the situation:

However, we imagine now that the death of Rich is back in the news cycle and both the Mueller indictments plus the revelation that the ‘Trump dossier’ was financed by Democrats, the intelligence community is rapidly hurtling toward a Sophie’s choice of sorts: Admit they lied and acknowledged that Binney’s theory is at least plausible, or produce the evidence that will definitively prove that Russia-linked hackers were responsible for the DNC leaks – something we imagine might be difficult in the absence of any real conclusive evidence.

Like they say, being “mostly certain” is just an upside-down way of saying that doubts remain.

And like we say here at the Deus ex Machina blog, who needs “conclusive evidence” in the FrancisCIA where “2+2=5”, apparently?

The original story is HERE.

So why am I bringing this to your attention dear reader?

Well, as my loyal readers know, one of the threads that this humble blogger has been promulgating is what is known as the OVERTON WINDOW (OW). Here is how it makes an appearance in this post:

Binney’s views have been vigorously rebutted by the intelligence community, which has accused him of cynically advancing his theory to benefit President Trump, whom he supported during the election.

But now, it appears Binney’s theory is being discussed at the highest levels within the CIA after the Intercept reported that CIA Director Mike Pompeo met with Binney late last month under the advisement of President Donald Trump.

The meeting, as the Intercept noted, has caused something of a stir in the intelligence community, as several agents dished that they were worried Pompeo’s politics were superseding his interest in preserving our national security – an extremely serious charge to make under cover of anonymity.

So what we see above, using our OW framework, is that the CIA Director Pompeo has shifted the OVERTON WINDOW (i.e. what constitutes reasonable discourse) by meeting with the whistle-blower Binney.

The FrancisCIAOperatives are not happy.

And why?

Well, because they have no way to disprove the whistle-blowers assertions since they would need to use an OBJECTIVE scientific methodology, i.e. (rules of evidence), but “everyone” knows that the “scientific methodology” is racist due to its “white privilege”.

And in this simple summation, we can clearly see that we have reached the end of the “Age of Enlightenment”.

What we see here is complete and unadulterated reliance on SUPERSTITION.

But while we are on the subject of the Overton Window, an article appeared on the Life Site News website written by our friend Joseph Shaw. (see here) Dr. Shaw explains the significance behind the Filial Correction, and explains it as follows:

The purpose of the Filial Correction wasn’t to garner support for the Filial Correction. The purpose was to raise the level of debate about Amoris laetitia and to encourage those with misgivings about the liberal interpretation of Amoris to come forward. In this it has been staggeringly successful. Perhaps it is a coincidence, but the ‘Overton Window‘ of criticisms of the policies and (apparent) personal attitudes of a reigning Pope seems to me to have shifted more in a couple of months than it had in the previous century and a half. Whereas on the eve of the publication of the Correction I was wondering if the signatories would be able to show their faces in public afterwards, I now find myself in the company of a roll-call of distinguished figures. Something important has changed.

Yes indeed!

Something has changed.

Concluding, what we are witnessing in the above cases is the strategies of the respective camps. On the one side are the post-Modernists, on the other are what could be called the Realists (Scholastic rationalists, is my choice designation), while the neo-Modernists are caught in the middle. Like deer caught in headlights.

What the post-Modernists are attempting to do is to keep the OVERTON WINDOW in such a position, that does not allow for a rational position, i.e. of the REALIST’s to exist in the public forum.

As we can observe in the Zero Hedge post, an individual who uses an OBJECTIVE investigation methodology, is criticized because his results will help the wrong side of the public debate. 

In the post-conciliar church, we see the same strategy at work. We see a post-conciliar cleric, who reads texts and understands the words using OBJECTIVE MEANINGS UNDER A COMMON USAGE, being criticized not because he is OBJECTIVELY WRONG, but because his results will help the wrong side of the public debate. 

Furthermore, what these two examples also demonstrate is how a successful and effective strategy to combat this TRANSRATIONALISM can look. The key is to shift the OVERTON WINDOW to encompass the RATIONAL position. Once the OVERTON WINDOW is shifted, use the time tested Scholastic (Thomist) scientific methodology to debunk the TRANSRATIONAL.

It’s that simple.

And it’s working, as the above cases clearly demonstrate.

And it is this path, if followed, that will lead Western Civilization out of the irrational cul-de-sac that is has found itself in, a cul-de-sac entered into by adopting the Modernists/neo-Modernists definition of TRUTH and the reactionary post-Modernist SUPERSTITIONS invented during and derived from that period in Western history mistakenly refereed to as the “Enlightenment”.