Welcome to William Schnack's Ambiarchy site. I am William Schnack, a fully self-educated and independent autodidactic polymath and opponent of all forms of coercive authority. As such, and if you are not yourself privileged, I am your peer, for I am not a noble or priest. That is, I am not accredited by stately "authority" under the color of law, as with a PhD or other such state-ennobled scum. Nonetheless, owing to my own endowments and the rational exercise of my natural faculties (and much to the dismay of false authority), I function like a strange mix of independent researcher, natural folk-philosopher, radical historian, lay qualitative scientist, rational mystic, and wise man (sage). I probably best sum up as a lay, folk-philosopher, if not just a peer to question deeply, or a one-man "war" on false "authority."
This is a collection of my cross-disciplinary, multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary, and transdisciplinary philosophical and historical writings. Among other things, they are about a new theoretical approach toward society that I envision for mutualists, which I call ambiarchy, the rhetorical synthesis of "good government" and anarchy (which you may recognize as the project of Proudhon's federalism). This site also has other topics of interest to students of mutualism and pantheism, as well as to those interested in natural philosophy, qualitative science, and history more generally.
My Credentials
You may expect that someone claiming to be wise has a fanciful degree, and a whole lot of graphs and figures and charts and maths, cites only recently-published, peer-reviewed sources, and keeps his claims limited to inductions from physical reality. Well, you're wrong about that.
As a generalist and lay specialist I stand on my own two feet, my knowledge speaks for itself. I handwave no certifications or titles of nobility, appeal not to statistics to be taken on trust, and ask for no privileged recognition from academia. Neither do I restrict myself to citing unconscientious men and women who have decided to do such bad, wrong, and evil things as to gatekeep knowledge, claim special privileges, and collude with existing political authorities.
My command of knowledge is real, not nominal. Meanwhile, the credentialed must flaunt falsities and gatekeep knowledge created by the self-educated in lieu of having earned respect as a matter-of-fact to the same degree (lest their credentials serve no purpose, as they do with me, who has none). As such, they will do things like claim titles of nobility upon the foundations of my ideas (yes, a dissertation has been produced upon my ideas), while keeping me from participating in their charades (which I now am wise enough not to want to join in on), and gatekeeping knowledge, deplatforming, canceling, and censoring me indirectly by means of their cultural hysterias (peer-review, current sources, political correctness, scientism, etc.). I am better than these pirates, or else they would not have to do what they do. I refuse to join their despicable system of noble privileges on grounds of conscience. The reality of my moral existence and my independent persistence is an intellectual and ethical slap to the face of existing political "authority."
While I do make reference at times to specialized works of expertise, this is despite, not because of, privileges of expertise (not to be confused with specialty, expertise referring to legal privileges).
If you have a bad habit of taking authority at its word, or rejecting the words of those without "credentials," you can practice not doing those things, and unlearning them, here. This is a site for truth-seekers and freethinkers, not for automatons.
What to Expect
I am not claiming to be an experimental scientist or an empirical philosopher, much less an academic or expert owing to special privilege. In fact, I stand generally in opposition to these perspectives as a freedom-loving naturalist, pragmatist, and organicist with a neutral monist and psycho-physical parallelist metaphysic.
As a naturalist, I generally value qualitative science over experimental science, meaning I trust observation over reporting. Part of the reason for this is that the history and the sociology of the philosophy of science, which applies to the behaviors of scientists, has shown that scientists are subject to accreditation solely by sources approved by the state, which is a monopoly on violence, that they are often indebted to private or public interests for their schooling and so manipulable, that they will be stripped of their credentials if they speak truths before tenure, that until tenure they must only cite similarly-controlled individuals, and so-on. This does not provide a sound scientific basis for trust in data and conclusions of these individuals. The only scientific default toward these individuals is one of skepticism. Authority claims based on certifications secured by violence are nothing short of lies or manipulations. Screw that handwaving crap.
As such, I favor common sense, direct-realism, however fallible, to the philosophy of empiricism and to the franchise of scientism at-large. I also give favor to rogues and outsiders, including folk-thinkers such as myself. What you can expect, as a result, is clearly-explicated models of reality that are not clouded with unnecessary and obscuring jargon, leaps of faith in some men and their instruments, or any other such nonsense, but instead appeals rationally to your common sense understanding of the world.
Academia compartmentalizes and defers to "lanes" of presumed authority, established upon the epistemology of agonistic contest, being the epistemology of "trial by battle" between charmisatic claimants. But you will find the alternative approach here, of comparative disciplines not only scientific, but also religious, philosophical, and historical, with a view to ecclecticism. My epistemology is not "trust me, bruh, I'm a PhD and I have been given favor by the state to gatekeep." It is, "don't trust me, check my reasoning for correlation, congruence, and coherence, and establish your own authority on the matter."
My articles are not written to impress, to make appeals, or create a spectacle. By extension, they may not be fun to read. While I pride myself as a wordsmith in moments of my spiritual and sometimes social writings, this rarity arises more from the splendor of Nature Zherself than it does from any skills of rhetoric on my part. My style is dry and my delivery a strange mix of Victorian prose and contemporary jargon. But because there are few who can get past the drudgery, those who can consistently do so will almost certainly become elite thinkers. There is no other place on the internet to get the information and conclusions presented on this website. It's not just another "glance and go" site. To get anything from it, you'll have to put in some effort.
Mutualism and Ambiarchy
With regard to mutualism, I am the author of The Book of Mutualism: An Encyclopedic, Natural Moral History with Philosophical Interjections and Appendices. I am also a founding thinker with respect to geo-mutualism, the idea that mutualism and Georgism can be harmonized or synthesized. I would later fuse geo-mutualist anarchism, which already had syndicalist and agorist characteristics, with panarchism in the project of geo-mutualist panarchism, which eventually matured into the project of ambiarchy. I am further the founding thinker with respect to paleo-mutualism, which is a remodernist aim to re-establish classical mutualism at it was before it got caught up with fin de siecle and postmodern culture, and upon foundations that the classical mutualists themselves had forsaken from the Radical Enligthenment, Radical Reformation, and Renaissance.
Pantheism and Ambitheism
Regarding pantheism, I am a founding thinker with respect to the formalization of dualist pantheism, the belief that God is Nature, which contains a duality of body and spirit. This worldview would mature into ambitheism, the belief that the Universe can be considered from so many angles as to produce the myriad of belief systems that inhere within it as a natural consequence. Much as ambiarchy reconciles opposites such as capitalism and communism, anarchism and statism, ambitheism reconciles the various approaches to atheism and religion.
Natural Philosophy, Qualitative Science, and History
Other topics I explore are wide-ranging, indeed, and include matters of cosmology and metaphysics, geology, biology, psychology, anthropology, sociology, economics, "political" philosophy, history, and religion. Some of the important background or peripheral topics that I write about include matters relating to the theory of time, oscillating or cyclic cosmology, expanding-and-contracting Earth geology, convergent volution and henogenesis, history of human and societal development, physical economics, and so on. From out of these interests I have developed qualitative scientific theories, namely Witnessing Shell Theory with Henogenic Volution Out of Everywhere. I also develop social principles and methods including the Principle of Fair Regard, conagnition, Executive Consensus, Rapid Roles, and amoibaiosis, as well as an ethical dieting and mutualist lifestyle philosophy, antapodism.
A Theory of Everything? Evolution of Consent?
Altogether, the natural philosophical, historical, and theoretical scientific work on this site constitutes a qualitative theory of everything and a comprehensive worldview. This model differs drastically from the mainstream, and is well worth getting a full grasp on.
This blog used to be called The Evolution of Consent, because my work focused, and still focuses, on voluntary and consensual human relationships, limitations imposed on them, and what consent has to do with evolutionary processes and cosmology, among other things!
Reach Out!
I am not trying too hard to popularize this site, and it is not designed to appeal to the multitude. If you like what you see here, bookmark it and revisit it often, because, also owing to censorship, you probably won't come across it again and it's the only place you'll get this powerful, new, theoretical worldview based in mutualism. If you have any questions or would like to talk, visit the forum! I'd be happy to answer questions, to chat, or even to make new friends. Oh, and because I'm going oldskool, consider this site to be under permanent construction and keep your security settings high. Okay? Righteous! Let's do some philosophizing!