Punk: Philosophy & Practice

Gnosis: Alternative Education for those who hate/hated (Analytic) Schools and Colleges

Written by Anand Madhu Last Updated (25 January 2015)


Since humans are the most complex of objects, the Queen of all Sciences is Anthropology, the study of various humans (chiefly, their brain types) and animals of similar psychological orientations, from the chimpanzee to the bonobo, to learn more about ourselves.






Main criticisms of the Analytic Priesthood:

Criticisms there are too many, as we'll see as we go on. Initially, only criticisms pertaining to the academic world are covered:

  1. The imperialistic, interventionist Analytic Priesthood promotes -- mostly for its own "gain" (short-sighted notions of profit) -- "good" "1-size-fits-all" "solutions" of dubious quality (e.g.: chemical pesticides) -- even though, for the most part, humans are diverse, and their environs were ideal to begin with... For example, it prescribes rote education even to Aspergian children. Their mischief in the world of social studies (in particular, economics[1]) was great.
  2. The Analytic Priesthood -- because of its excessive pollution by syllogisms owing  to the excessive presence of syllogicians in its academicistic structures -- has degraded the world of physics, as discussed by Woit, here, and Smolin, here.

[1] The economic world's corruption is discussed in "Inside Job"; an excerpt from its transcript:

Damon: "The financial industry also exerts its influence in a more subtle way; one that most Americans don't know about. It has corrupted the study of economics itself".

"Deregulation had tremendous financial and "intellectual" support.
Because, uh, uh, people argued it for their own benefit*. The economics profession was the main source of that illusion".

                                * or pseudo-benefit... that's one of the problems with capitalism; here, short-sight rules!

Damon: "Since the 1980s, academic economists have been major advocates of deregulation, and played powerful roles in shaping U.S. government policy. Very few of these economic experts warned about the crisis. And even after the crisis, many of them opposed reform.

"The guys who taught these things tended to get paid a lot of money being consultants. Business school professors don't live on a faculty salary. They do very, very well".




This paragraph discusses the reason for writing all this, the reason for why we thinkers ask for a situation of love and logic in this world -- because, to many, even asking for such a situation is illogical. The question put forth by the Priesthood's "challengist" syllogicians, is this: If competition is present in nature, why not competition in the human world? But human society is incomparable to the animal kingdom. In particular: Usual forms of "Competitive victory", in wars for example, imply usually only that the "victorious" are better at herd dynamics. Thus we ask: Is the skill of herd dynamics (which comprises many skills viz. communicative, superficial charismatic aspects etc.) -- that which humanity wants to exclusively center about and develop*? Is there no other skill in the human inventory that is more worthy of the single human experience we all get? (but there are such skills, such as the logical skill, and it is actually better, in the context of happiness). The answer is evidently "No, the herd dynamics skill is not by itself fully worthy", therefore we confront the challengists and tell them that it is not that we are shy of a challenge, but we're shy of such "challenges", or pseudo-challenges, that pit the sole individual against a numerically superior herd -- as happens in the Analytic Chantry's orthodox "competitive" conditions (nationalism, economy etc.).



* As did, among apes, most of all the chimpanzees:




Note: Below, by "logical faculty", I mean nonlinear associative thinking faculty, not linear associative thinking faculty (aka syllogical faculty).


1) Natural inter-human variations:

If the reader thinks of it, he will find it easy to regard as true the following statement: Due to natural variations in the time taken for the evolution of logical faculty in differently evolving humans in different regions – there are some people in whom the logical faculty became more developed – the "hyper-logicians" ("logicians", in short, or, roughly, "pΨs") – and others in whom logical faculty became lesser developed. But of course, in the latter types of humans, over-developed are other skills – some social and meta-communicative skills (more recently, the syllogical faculty – see chapter 21, paper 2) – a set of skills I named "RQ", which use, or maybe "exploit" – the monoconditional signalling property of dopamine – making up for this lack of logical faculty[1]. An important subset of these people are the "syllogicians" aka, roughly, "pΦs".

[1] Of course, there is the "nature vs. nurture" idea i.e. logical faculty can be raised by practice even in such people – but nurture was and is rare.

In the context of history, we can neglect it.


2) The History of Mankind:


2.1) The Yin and Yang:

A good chunk of humanity's history, and in any case its most central parts, can be thus summarized: PΨs trying, by persuasion or war, to modify civilization into an absolutely logical (by which we mean "objectively" logical) character, and pΦs counter-trying, by persuasion or war, to modify civilization into a syllogical or tribal-friendly (by which we mean subjectively logical) character.


2.2) The clash:

The clash, that is, the dichotomy implicit in this Yin vs. Yang phenomena, is the underlying source of nearly all major, "irresolvable" political differences, fighting, and instability in society; and we can say that the extremists of both camps are wrong. Anyhow, this clash gives to history a somewhat Hegelian characteristic, in the sense that Hegel said that there is thesis and then contending antithesis, in the historical progression, though, as there are 2 (contending) factions in mankind, such Hegelian progression is only natural.


2.3) Of course, the right type of civilization would take into account the variations between all types of people, and thus be truly objectively logical.

That is, a civilization that respects neurodiversity...




The Case for Neurodiversity: This website is concerned with the most central and fundamental realities which define mankind and its culture, and it is therefore related to the Greek γνῶσις (Gnosis), a noun which meant, to Plato, a body of higher knowledge absent in most men. The most fundamental detail that determines and defines all other details in society, is the distribution of brain types across humanity. It is a poorly understood matter, and the “new thesis” accessible on the left contains some ground-breaking new insights on this subject. The mental differences between humans (and the resulting need for a neurodiversity-based civilization) are usually ignored by establishment educationists, psychologists, and other academics. But mentally, humans are as diverse as the lemurs of Madagascar, which had started out as one species, but diversified into many physically dissimilar subtypes. Though, in the case of men, even if the species is the same as such, and the physical differences are trivial, the mental differences are profound. Remarkably the most important of these mental differences have no significant relationships with the politicized or apparent “differences” among men i.e. race, gender, ancestral origin, color, nationality etc. And the mainstream view that one of the mental types is "right" or "normal" or "ideal", and the other types are "diseased", is partially wrong, and partially an inversion of the truth. Finding some of these exotic truths have opened the doors to finding other critical truths. From our crow's nest, the great socio-economic problems of mankind become easy to solve. The solution involves flipping over architecture on its head, as we’ll see. Hopefully the reader can join me in that project! Hopefully he can sustain himself here until he gets to know the gist of what is conveyed!

Of course, reading this website and its offerings may not be as easy as, for example, eating. But readers are assumed uninformed. Verbosity shifting focus from reality into words, as seen in most analytic (popular or academic) traditions, is avoided. Though "merely logical" non-fiction may initially look hard to one whose right-brain is out of practice due to lack of exercise – if the reader is of that type -- if he persists, he will soon see a major increase in his insight and conceptual ability. Logical writings, as opposed to fiction / fiction-type (axiom-based) analytic frameworks, are thus direct components of Gnosis.




Latest Update: I've released the fourth edition of what can be called my most important book:


Lordship of the Fifth Column



Find the book here


Punk Music Beautiful Words


Well, the above picture's author got it wrong too, but it's ok; the world's best things are never easily explained. For true punk (the "Sid Vicious" brand of punk) is not so much about music at all; it's about how the people, particularly the bright-minded youth, push an international sub-culture which aims to forward a philosophy of equality and justice... This they do by comic music (to draw the crowds) as well as action and thinking (to educate the crowds); this website expedites the thinking part.


In particular, we want something, a fundamental change in civilization... we want to make civilization functional for all human beings (or indeed animals), whatever their brain type (which determines their political leaning).

Generally, this website contains stuff like:



Don't mind a rigorous* study of theoretical neuroscience here and now? Read the below ppt (and the links in it).

Do mind it?

Skip the below presentation and read on...


* (yet intellectually rewarding...)