My first work, The Wisdom of Autphag, contains a number of criticisms of scientific empiricism: first, the etymological, epistemological and etiological basis for its finding, which I'd established well before the neoreactionaries took off, has its presumptions based on the purity of the analysis of data as a reliable midpoint that is completely unassailable by deliberate manipulations in the process of methodological construction of the analytical method of rubric/assessment, and that much was deliberate. The Jews during the Enlightenment were certain that they could foist scientific empiricism as a means of deliberately forging certain phenomena in society, the autism apparatus of matriarchal domination, medicalizing what was essentially a heirarchical stratification tool to degenerate them in ensuring the "destruction of patriarchy" and the usurpration of neo-matriarchalism, under the guise of a grassroots political movement like feminism, despite abudant documentation of its Judeomasonic origins. Since none of you are genuinely interested in concepts like absolute truth and genuine epistemological investigation though, I'll leave you to brew in your swill for now, sows.
