Nietzsche's Higher Man

This is the main board for discussing philosophy - formal, informal and in between.

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Sat May 30, 2020 11:43 pm

individualized

Dude I have no idea what the fuck you're talking about.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Icon_minitimeSun Oct 30, 2016 2:51 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Hillary represents an inhuman machine of slavery, rape, death and debt. How the fuck could you want that to win?

Even when I despised Trump I never once wanted Hillary to win. I am a human after all.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Icon_minitimeSun Oct 30, 2016 4:12 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I'll ease up a bit on the throttle now.

Capable - yes, this makes sense to me, the view of random as order, and the rulebook.
Yet, I take it upon myself to write my own rulebook, precisely because there is no valid one anymore.
Of course any particular standard is technically arbitrary - and thus there is also no philosophical objection.


Sauwelios -
I dont see Clinton as standing for liberalization. She has given no signals of that - her campaign is about heavy government spending on creating more legal restrictions, and about destabilizing Europe to fuck with Russia. She is very hateful of Russia, in what seems to be a banal hysteria.

Trump has always acted as a true New York liberal, sophisticated enough to personally do business with the Chinese. He is surely the most sophisticated and knowledgeable candidate at least since JFK, but I think since FDR.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Icon_minitimeSun Oct 30, 2016 5:49 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
In further response to your wondering, Capable -
the gender theory is philosophy in that exploded dichotomy, but the theorizing about homosexuality does not fall in the same category at all.
It is merely that now that I acknowledge gender as being absolute, (which is also the very reason why people want sex changes) I can utterly reject what has been shoved down my throat, the ideology of gayness. I respond with the ideology of not-gayness, so as to neutralize my world. I was force-fed all this shit about gay people being better than heterosexual people. At least better than me, because I was not gay, as was actually expected of me. Still faggots expect it of me. Not all gay people are faggots. Just those that expect people to become gay for their pleasure or emotional comfort. It's rape.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Icon_minitimeSun Oct 30, 2016 5:54 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Heterosexual sex is "philosophical" because it is reproductive, it is seed and ground.
Homosexual sex is arbitrary, produces only pleasure. That is why so many gays have such utterly rampant sex lives. It is not, to my idea, "philosophical". Socrates as the anti-philosopher fits this picture.

I dont hate gays, but I despise gay politics. I'm fully behind Putins law against gay propaganda. The fact that gay propaganda presents this law as a law against gays points precisely to the necessity of outlawing such propaganda.

Who the hell wants to actively propagate a troublesome sexual orientation? And troublesome it is, Ive not seen exceptions. This is why the better ones become so refined, and the not so great ones so insidiously self-blind or perhaps worse, consciously deviant and devoid of conscience.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Icon_minitimeSun Oct 30, 2016 8:18 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I did not intend to draw you into this here, S - rather to discuss it in private- and that was before I went into the politics.

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2016/10/ ... p-to-them/

It is looking less and less like Clinton is going to win. The evident illegality of her operation isn't going away.
I can see willing a Clinton victory in terms of causing a violent cataclysm, but I think the result would simply be anti-politics and a kind of Terminator landscape. The Middle East is at this point far worse than that Terminator 2 opening, but Drones are the common factor. This all doubled or tripled with Clinton as SS.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Icon_minitimeMon Oct 31, 2016 1:38 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I do not consider the function of sex being to make kids. That is the biological function, purely, what sex is for for non-human animals. But for a human, sex is primarily about intimacy. The fact that sex can (but does not always) produce children is a side-effect, for us humans. Most people have sex because of the intimacy, the existential completeness and closeness between two people, the worshipping of beauty and the immersion in desire and pleasure-value, and not just to procreate.

So I have a very hard time looking at sex as if the philosophical significance of it were simply to have kids, and if having kids doesn't happen as a consequence of sex (for whatever reason) then somehow sex is supposed to not be philosophically significant... I cannot agree to that. Pleasure and desire are ends in themselves, and this isn't itself philosophical yet but leads into the territory of the philosophical. Procreation is a biological necessity, and has been hard-wired in connection to pleasure and desire simply because natural selection found this useful to connect them like that. But procreation isn't very philosophically interesting. A person's value, life, contribution, meaning, philosophical quality or whatever you want to call it, has little or nothing to do with if they have kids or not. As far as I know, none of us here has any kids, and yet our contributions and philosophical significance are immense. And if one or more of us were to have kids that would not suddenly make our contributions and philosophical significance jump up, in fact it would probably cut it down by a huge margin.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Icon_minitimeMon Oct 31, 2016 1:51 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
And Hillary Clinton is a piece of shit, can't we all just agree on one basic fact? There are only two reasons someone would like Hillary: either they haven't been paying attention, or they are brainwashed by political correctness (and these two reasons are, more or less, the same reason).

She and what she represents are a part of the history of western civilization, but by no means the most significant or primary part, more like a deranged side-effect. You (Sauwelios) can connect Hillary to that tradition of western civilization and its values and progress over time, but that is basically to nullify that tradition itself for one of its pathological and excessive elements, something that grew up within that civilization and now needs to be cut off, like pruning a tree of its dead branches to keep the rest of the tree alive.

A "will to power" grew up in western civilization, many such wills have grown up within it, but this particular will which Hillary represents is especially insane and anti-philosophical (I absolutely disagree that Socrates was an anti-philosopher, by the way; that statement saying he is, causes me a great deal of... anger, I guess I would call it), and will happily keep destroying the world if we let it. This is another problem with Nietzsche's concept of the will to power, and I an getting tired of explicating it every time the topic comes up, yet for some reason this insight has yet to really sink in: Nietzsche give no formula for distinguishing between wills to power, except to say that the "stronger" will conquers the "weaker" one, which is basically saying nothing than a truism of "whichever will ends up conquering, I am defining as the stronger one". Wow, how fucking profound (not really).

Nietzsche's view of the will to power and its values-architectural constructions is truistic like that, it is a closed loop, begs its own question, tries to define itself by what it supposedly is, a "quantum of power". Ask Nietzsche what it means to be a strong will to power, his answer is going to be: 'a strong will to power is a will to power that conquers other wills to power, that incorporates them into itself'. Ok, but that is just the definition of "will to power", and not at all a statements about what it means to be a strong will to power, what "will" and "to" and "power" actually mean here, much less what a philosophically valuable will to power might look like. No one has apparently asked the simple question of Nietzsche: when one will to power conquers another will to power, what does this really mean? What does "conquering" actually look like, how does it take place, what is conquered and why; what is the standard for success and failure? Is that standard simply whatever lives and whatever dies? Pretty much, yes, that is what Nietzsche means, and what you mean too, if you look behind the protestations of "increases of power over time" and such nonsensical truisms.

Start asking those fucking questions, already. Jesus fucking christ.

And since Clinton and what she represents is as close to a "pure will to power for its own sake" that I can imagine, I am not surprised when you (Sauwelios) support that, even and perhaps especially with the massively inhuman default of true value/valuing that Clinton et. al. represent.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Icon_minitimeMon Oct 31, 2016 5:00 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Ive made a mistake drawing Sauwelios into this, nor was it my intention, I was just, as the OP can quite well tell for itself, rather upset and emotional. I can not realistically expect after 6 years that a shared or similar taste for philosophy between you two will arise.

However, Socrates.

C - you say it angers you to hear me say Socrates is an anti-philosopher. That is interesting to me, passion means there is something to be discussed here.

Ive never liked Soc. Ive read quite a bit of his dialogue, and find that he consistently tricks people into contexts without telling them.
I disagree with most if not all of his conclusions about the Good and the State and the Conscience of man, and the nature of Life, and the fate of death, he nature of the state , of the gods, on happiness, on masculine virtue, - I think he is just a brilliant comedian. I mean that. I dont see him as a philosopher, like I see Thales as one. I do not believe that Socrates has come up with anything at all.

I know I am quite alone in this, even Nietzsche, besides calling Plato a bore and all that, and Socrates as a decadent, also compares himself to Socrates. But Ive honestly only found Socrates to scheme, and there isnt a single thing he concluded that I know of and consider to be profound. In fact I consider his entire style of philosophizing frivolous and vain.

Sauwelios has spoken of Socs great weight in preserving philosophy for philosophers. In my reading, he simply marked the end of Athenian health, and nothing more. Surely a lot of intellectual contraptions were unleashed when that health was shed - but his notions of ethics, responsibility and and happiness do not seem to have produced much of any of those things in the world he left behind.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Icon_minitimeMon Oct 31, 2016 5:19 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
This most revered bit of his philosophy is to me the absolute hollowness, as later on Bertrand Russell would exemplify it. Honestly, I can not respect this even from a 13 year old mediocre student.

From Euthydemus

Quote :
“So what follows from what we’ve said? Isn’t it this, that of the other things none is either good or bad, and that of these two, wisdom is good and ignorance bad?”

He agreed.

“Well then let’s have a look at what’s left,” I said. “Since all of us desire to be happy, and since we evidently become so on account of our use—that is our good use—of other things, and since knowledge is what provides this goodness of use and also good fortune, every man must, as seems plausible, prepare himself by every means for this: to be as wise as possible. Right?”

‘Yes,” he said.

Is this not the ultimate ruin of substantive thought? Is this not the utter negation of valuing? Is this not the perfect hollowness? Soc. invents right here the horror of the empty-universal, which from here on goes on to signify the value of man to himself - as precisely 0.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Icon_minitimeMon Oct 31, 2016 5:22 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Soc here conjures up the idea of "happiness as such" and "use as such". He instrumentalizes the world, and the human, to a hollow end. Consumerism is the direct result actually.

What a god damn moron. Now theres a guy that truly pisses me off.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Icon_minitimeMon Oct 31, 2016 5:31 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I see your points about Socrates of course, but where I disagree is that while S tricked people into contexts as you accurately point out this is precisely the birth of philosophy in a Nietzschean sense. The contexts were invisible, even to the pre-Socratics, therefore someone needed to make this fact known somehow. S asked into unstated assumptions and presumptions, which is exactly what honest philosophy always does. As for his ethics of philosophy as care for the soul (for the self, for the being which one is and how and why and what one is, which absolutely cannot be exhaustively explicated or even nearly so, thus S properly doesn't even try) I see it this way too. Philosophy originates in "the soul" (the unfathomable Self, that which one is whatever it might happen to be (usually we have no idea what it is, now luckily we at least know that it is a self-valuing, and I also happen to know something of the nature of its consciousness as I've explained elsewhere)) and it also terminates there.

The Plato/Aristotle split is one thing, but Aristotle is only possible because of Plato, as a kind of fusion-return to pre-Socratic with Plato'a Soctates. I see a very interesting dialectic or daemonic procession here: pre-Socratics allowed for a possibility of a pure questioning and invocation of context-assumptions that were previously unstated, namely Socrates; he is like a null point that emerges as the antithesis ending acts as the Sign of that for which it is antithesis. Then we have Plato's elaborating a new philosophical system and then we have Aristotle making use of that system to recoup some of the original pre-Socratic ground of assumptions to certainties, thus inventing science.

Socrates is noble in my view because he has no ax to grind, because he grinds them all and does so with the express aim of forcing more depth for its own sake upon Athenians. The fact that the Athenians cried and complained and didn't like that Depth isn't Socrates' problem, in fact that is his very point.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Icon_minitimeMon Oct 31, 2016 5:37 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Yes it is the birth of consumerism and instrumental reason or could reasonably be argued to be, but those things are truths that must be faced. Why fear (avoid) them forever? I'm not saying you do, I'm saying that Socrates shows ugly truths. We can't fault him for the fact that they are ugly. In fact the quoted text you mentions breaks down on a single unstated assumption of Socrates himself, namely that people want to be happy-- much of the time that is precisely what people do not want.

It can also be interpreted, his comments on use, that he means the simple act of values-interacting and of valuing per se. That the analytic retards like Russell don't think past "use" into value isn't really Socrates' fault, in my opinion anyway. Nietzsche certainly didn't fall into that trap.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Icon_minitimeMon Oct 31, 2016 5:52 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I can respect that meta-philosophical, or historical view, and I would think its actually related to Sauwelios' view. But I just can not respect Socrates' method of arguing and disagree that it introduces a depth - as even if it may introduce a new probing, it disregards the depth of ground that brought about the Athenian consistency, it namely disregards particularity.

And all is revealed here, in that Thales and Parmenides regard being as fundamentally happy, overflowing, positive, and aimless, Socrates regards being as fundamentally lacking, and moving towards a theoretical universal of Fulfillment. He thus represents a thirst, which in turn represents an emptiness, against the fullness of the men of the 6h century BC.

How did Aristotle develop science, in actual functioning terms? I would attribute far more of it to Pythagoras, and people like Archimedes.

To my mind Soc was the first Analytic philosopher, the first one who refused to use his senses, who actively tried to work them out of the equation of valuing. I see this as the beginning of an unparalleled catastrophe of the soul.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Icon_minitimeMon Oct 31, 2016 6:01 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I always see a pure joyfulness from Socrates. I think it was just his fate to be the anti-system builder par excellence. Nietzsche revived that tradition in the 19th century, thankfully. We absolutely need such people, but I agree with you that the primary task of philosophy is to build. With Aristotle I meant his detailed examinations of for example animals and nature, his applying firm rational objective standards to empirical inquiry, and the fact that he pushes into to many different areas. I always read Aristotle as someone who took philosophical method from the "pure thought" of someone like Plato and applied it with critical objectivity to the natural world. Aristotle values the natural world intrinsically and as a philosopher values his ideas and truths, to me that is science. But yeah you're right that others like Pythagoras contributed a lot too, before Aristotle... I just see a kind of critical objectivity and "anti-pure thought/anti-idealism" in Aristotle, that seems lacking in other philosophers who came before him and also studied nature. Mathematics for example isn't really science, it's much closer to pure thought/ideality than to empiricism.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Icon_minitimeMon Oct 31, 2016 6:04 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
In the way you see Socrates as the first analytic, I understand your distaste for him. I just don't see him like that. Maybe I need to go back and re-read him, it has been a while.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Icon_minitimeMon Oct 31, 2016 6:08 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I have the distinct idea that what Aristotle developed is precisely what science is not.
He was no empiricist, but an a-priori-ist.

From Soc via Plato to Aristotle, I see no substance being inserted - only an expansion of the hollow assumption - what later, in the Aristotelean muslims, was developed as the concept "0".

Okay, so Soc. is responsible for the western notion of "0". That makes sense. It is also respectable as an accomplishment.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Icon_minitimeMon Oct 31, 2016 6:16 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Capable wrote:
I always see a pure joyfulness from Socrates. I think it was just his fate to be the anti-system builder par excellence. Nietzsche revived that tradition in the 19th century, thankfully. We absolutely need such people, but I agree with you that the primary task of philosophy is to build. With Aristotle I meant his detailed examinations of for example animals and nature, his applying firm rational objective standards to empirical inquiry, and the fact that he pushes into to many different areas. I always read Aristotle as someone who took philosophical method from the "pure thought" of someone like Plato and applied it with critical objectivity to the natural world. Aristotle values the natural world intrinsically and as a philosopher values his ideas and truths, to me that is science. But yeah you're right that others like Pythagoras contributed a lot too, before Aristotle... I just see a kind of critical objectivity and "anti-pure thought/anti-idealism" in Aristotle, that seems lacking in other philosophers who came before him and also studied nature. Mathematics for example isn't really science, it's much closer to pure thought/ideality than to empiricism.

Well thats the thing. Socrates is incredibly joyful. And I like him a lot as a figure, I laugh when I read his dialogues - but all I conclude from the way he comes and goes is: 'this guy is such a dirty rat, lol, what an arrogant sack of shit...'

but heres the thing. The people he brings to their knees, these are all inferiors to him. They are already separate of the original philosophical impulse that was not Ahtenian but Ionian, western Turkey - Thales, Anaximander, Parmenides. These were knowers of the ontic.


POEM OF PARMENIDES
English translation : John Burnet (1892)

Parmenides wrote:


I

The steeds that bear me carried me as far as ever my heart
Desired, since they brought me and set me on the renowned
Way of the goddess, who with her own hands conducts the man
who knows through all things. On what way was I borne

5 along; for on it did the wise steeds carry me, drawing my car,
and maidens showed the way. And the axle, glowing in the socket -
for it was urged round by the whirling wheels at each
end - gave forth a sound as of a pipe, when the daughters of the
Sun, hasting to convey me into the light, threw back their veils

10 from off their faces and left the abode of Night.
There are the gates of the ways of Night and Day, fitted
above with a lintel and below with a threshold of stone. They
themselves, high in the air, are closed by mighty doors, and
Avenging Justice keeps the keys that open them. Her did

15 the maidens entreat with gentle words and skilfully persuade
to unfasten without demur the bolted bars from the gates.
Then, when the doors were thrown back,
they disclosed a widepening, when their brazen
hinges swung backwards in the

20 sockets fastened with rivets and nails. Straight through them,
on the broad way, did the maidens guide the horses and the car,
and the goddess greeted me kindly, and took my right hand
in hers, and spake to me these words: -
Welcome, noble youth, that comest to my abode on the car

25 that bears thee tended by immortal charioteers ! It is no ill
chance, but justice and right that has sent thee forth to travel
on this way. Far, indeed, does it lie from the beaten track of
men ! Meet it is that thou shouldst learn all things, as well
the unshaken heart of persuasive truth, as the opinions of

30 mortals in which is no true belief at all. Yet none the less
shalt thou learn of these things also, since thou must judge
approvedly of the things that seem to men as thou goest
through all things in thy journey."

II

Come now, I will tell thee - and do thou hearken to my
saying and carry it away - the only two ways of search that
can be thought of. The first, namely, that It is, and that it is
impossible for anything not to be, is the way of. conviction,

5 for truth is its companion.. The other, namely, that It is not,
and that something must needs not be, - that, I tell thee, is a
wholly untrustworthy path. For you cannot know what is
not - that is impossible - nor utter it;

III

For it is the same thing that can be thought and that can be.

IV





V





VI

It needs must be that what can be thought and spoken of is;
for it is possible for it to be, and it is not possible for, what is
nothing to be. This is what I bid thee ponder. I hold thee
back from this first way of inquiry, and from this other also,

5 upon which mortals knowing naught wander in two minds; for
hesitation guides the wandering thought in their breasts, so that
they are borne along stupefied like men deaf and blind.
Undiscerning crowds, in whose eyes the same thing and not the
same is and is not, and all things travel in opposite directions !

VII

For this shall never be proved, that the things that are not
are; and do thou restrain thy thought from this way of inquiry.
Nor let habit force thee to cast a wandering eye upon this
devious track, or to turn thither thy resounding ear or thy

5 tongue; but do thou judge the subtle refutation of their
discourse uttered by me.

VIII

One path only is left for us to
speak of, namely, that It is. In it are very many tokens that
what is, is uncreated and indestructible, alone, complete,
immovable and without end. Nor was it ever, nor will it be; for

5 now it is, all at once, a continuous one. For what kind of origin
for it. will you look for ? In what way and from what source
could it have drawn its increase ? I shall not let thee say nor
think that it came from what is not; for it can neither be
thought nor uttered that what is not is. And, if it came from

10 nothing, what need could have made it arise later rather than
sooner ? Therefore must it either be altogether or be not at
all. Nor will the force of truth suffer aught to arise besides
itself from that which in any way is. Wherefore, Justice does
not loose her fetters and let anything come into being or pass

15 away, but holds it fast.
" Is it or is it not ? " Surely it is adjudged, as it needs must
be, that we are to set aside the one way as unthinkable and
nameless (for it is no true way), and that the other path is real
and true. How, then, can what is be going to be in the

20 future ? Or how could it come into being ? If it came into
being, it is not; nor is it if it is going to be in the future. Thus is
becoming extinguished and passing away not to be heard of.
Nor is it divisible, since it is all alike, and there is no more
of it in one place than in another, to hinder it from holding
together, nor less of it, but everything is full of what is.

25 Wherefore all holds together; for what is; is in contact with what is.
Moreover, it is immovable in the bonds of mighty chains, without
beginning and without end; since coming into being
and passing away have been driven afar, and true belief has cast them away.
It is the same, and it rests in the self-same place, abiding in itself.

30 And thus it remaineth constant in its place; for hard necessity
keeps it in the bonds of the limit that holds it fast on every side.
Wherefore it is not permitted to what is to be infinite; for it is in need of nothing ; while, if it were infinite, it would stand in need of everything. It is the
same thing that can be thought and for the sake of which the thought exists ;

35 for you cannot find thought without something that is, to which it is
betrothed. And there is not, and never shall be, any time other, than that which
is present, since fate has chained it so as to be whole and immovable.
Wherefore all these things are but the names which mortals
have given, believing them, to be true –

40 coming into being and passing away, being and not being,
change of place and alteration of bright colour.
Where, then, it has its farthest boundary, it is complete on
every side, equally poised from the centre in every direction,
like the mass of a rounded sphere; for it cannot be greater or

45 smaller in one place than in another. For there is nothing
which is not that could keep it from reaching out equally, nor
is it possible that there should be more of what is in this place
and less in that, since it is all inviolable. For, since it is equal
in all directions, it is equally confined within limits.

50 Here shall I close my trustworthy speech and thought about the truth.
Henceforward learn the opinions of mortals,
giving ear to the deceptive ordering of my words.
Mortals have settled in their minds to speak of two forms, one of which
they should have left out, and that is where they go astray from the truth.

55 They have assigned an opposite
substance to each, and marks distinct from one another. To the
one they allot the fire of heaven, light, thin, in every direction
the same as itself, but not the same as the other. The other is
opposite to it, dark night, a compact and heavy body. Of these

60 I tell thee the whole arrangement as it seems to men,
in order that no mortal may surpass thee in knowledge.

IX

Now that all things have been named light and night; and the things
which belong to the power of each have been assigned to these
things and to those, everything is full at once of light and dark night,
both equal, since neither has aught to do with the other.

X

And thou shalt know the origin of all the things on high,
and all the signs in the sky, and the resplendent works of the
glowing sun’s clear torch, and whence they arose. And thou
shalt learn likewise of the wandering deeds of the round-faced

5 moon, and of her origin. Thou shalt know, too, the heavens
that surround us, whence they arose, and how Necessity took
them and bound them to keep the limits of the stars . . .

XI

How the earth, and the sun, and the moon, and the sky that is
common to all, and the Milky Way, and the outermost Olympos,
and the burning might of the stars
arose.

XII

The narrower circles are filled with unmixed fire, and those
surrounding them with night, and in the midst of these rushes
their portion of fire. In the midst of these circles is the divinity that directs
the course of all things; for she rules over all painful birth and all begetting,

5 driving the female to the embrace of the male, and the male to that of the female.

XIII

First of all the gods she contrived Eros.

XIV

Shining by night with borrowed light, wandering round the earth.

XV

Always straining her eyes to the beams of the sun.

XVa



XVI






XVII

On the right boys; on the left girls.

XVIII








XIX

Thus, according to men’s opinions, did things comp into
being, and thus they are now. In time (they think) they will
grow up and pass away. To each of these things men have
assigned a fixed name.








___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Icon_minitimeMon Oct 31, 2016 6:23 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
It is clear to me that I need to go back and re-read some Plato and Aristotle to have more to add here. It's been years since I seriously read either of them. I suppose now with the philosophical heights I've found since then I will come to some different insights.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Icon_minitimeMon Oct 31, 2016 6:26 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
"For it is the same thing that can be thought and that can be."




This is an immensity deeper than anything Soc. or Aristotle understood, though Plato was possessed of the idea as he was possessed of all the great logicians. I think now he possibly made Soc. up entirely.

It is also the statement that drove Wittgenstein into thinking that this means that there is such a thing as The World as an a priori logically or nominally or analytically coherent system of sorts consisting of discrete things that can /be thought /be - but that is nonsensical. Parmenides is uttering of self-valuing. He is saying that all of which we can say that it exists, is what we can say exists. He is is just saying that "being" is a thought, and at the same time thought is a form of being. He is saying the two words don't ultimately mean a different thing than the relation between them.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Icon_minitimeMon Oct 31, 2016 6:32 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
/edit
Hegel suggestion deleted
(I should stop prescribing)


Socrates will always keep merit as the genius who invented universal individualism. He is therefore responsible for all the worst shit, haha.

Before him, only true ontic individuals were individuals. After him every idiot wanted to be god. Jesus was the direct result, as this bullshit Testaments were written in Hellenic Greek as a cultural product of the lower classes of the Alexandrine world, which happened to include the Hewbrew tribes who produced such genius as no other and inevitably inspired some mysticism with their notions.




Look, this is what I consider Aristotle to be in the same category of, but infinitely lower:


300px-Tree_of_life.jpg
300px-Tree_of_life.jpg (55.26 KiB) Viewed 809 times


Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 300px-Tree_of_life

Hebrew-Egyptian ontology



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides


Last edited by Fixed Cross on Mon Oct 31, 2016 6:47 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Icon_minitimeMon Oct 31, 2016 6:39 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Yes and now that I am thinking of it, I see philosophy (the real philosophers) break down into two camps (not the false camps of continental vs. analytic, since of course only the "continental" are truly philosophers): there is the one side of pure critique and depth for its own sake without attempt to build or assert certainties, without attempt to posit ground; and then there is the other side of system-building, positing grounds and employing certainties for construction purposes. On that first side we have Socrates, Nietzsche and Wittgenstein, on the other side we have Kant, Hegel and Heidegger, for examples.

Parmenides is indeed profound. I remember being elevated into a strange place subjectively speaking, once when reading him, in my early philosophy years. Similar to what used to happen when I would read Tao Te Ching. I don't get into these sort of texts anymore, I guess I have other things to work on, or I have lost patience or perspective for them, but they certainly have their place.

In terms of those two camps of philosophy, I consider myself as striding both camps equally. To my knowledge only myself and Parodites really do that. Nietzsche sort of does, but he should have built more. He focused on building a small set of key concepts, and that was about it. He certainly never took it to a level of building systems or worlds. But most philosophers definitively fall into either camp, and I think the rules and expectations are very different for a philosopher depending on which camp one is in. For instance, Wittgenstein as builder-philosopher is pure shit, but as depth-inciter and questioner-philosopher he has much to offer (often in spite of himself, of course).

Edit: No, I absolutely do want to bring them to Hegel, and him to them.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Icon_minitimeMon Oct 31, 2016 6:58 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Yes, but with VO I have transcended the distinction entirely.

In my case, every single thought for its own sake or depth for its own sake, which is how I have come into being indeed, is now systemic. But the system is my own creation, and (thus) unfathomable to me - this was the abyss I crossed, first in 2010 through near death to VO, then in 2013 through near death back to the World of Things, which from then on I have been animated from within, from a 'thing beneath things' - my self-valuing as a philosopher taken as the all-applying absolute.

As soon as my self-valuing as a philosopher clicked into place, which was by the gift of a dwelling to a fellow philosopher, a mechanism was triggered into my greater self-valuing, at the end of which I was financially free. It was a nuclear fission that I caused in order to atomize myself, withdraw from the bigger atom.

VO is system building proof that logic only exists as lubricant. It is a clean-ness of valuing from the very peak of human valuing - I stood at the peak we call philosophy-pure and was able to turn 360 degrees (abandon my perspective) and visualize a firmament on that height and then retain my perspective and go down the mountain. But it had grown very dark below... before the light... then I replied to your Kant post, and a torch was lit.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Icon_minitimeMon Oct 31, 2016 7:13 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
So the order is first I understood, the thought clicked into place, then while in infinite bliss of certainty of being I was in the dark as to the entire content of it, except my lover and this forum and the friendships on it. As I ended the relatrionship in confusion, BTL was all that was left of the valuing that had substance as pertaining to a possible synthetic fresh start - an ontic coup d'etat. Finally, it worked. With all the work all of us produced, something of a new Plateau came into being on which I could conceive an entirely philosophical Being. In that process I began to focus my actions more in these terms and this has paid off into what logically had to follow; a purified self-valuing, more power to know myself, which is the purest power. Consider that weakness is how we usually learn about ourselves, and what this means about how power takes shape when it is purified...

to begin small to grow very great;
Spontaneous Canadian wisdom, or the way of the seed



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 2 Icon_minitimeMon Oct 31, 2016 7:20 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
To begin very small again also allowed me to re-learn the acquaintance with my friends and family --- of many of them I found that they have structurally betrayed my trust in them. I think this was a large part of the scourging desert that I went through trying for a synthesis of my approach to the world with this newly born logic. I've had to disavow quite a bunch of them, because I could simply not reconcile how they'd made it clear to regard me with what I can understand a rational or dignified self-valuing to conceive of at the same time as interacting pleasantly with me. That to me is betrayal of an ontic order, and the loathing I feel for them is part of a coin of absolute bliss. Fuck Buddhism, fuck hate, only disengaging traitors works for me. Separation is the first step of the implementation of the revaluation of all values. As for system building, a corner stone is to identify what you wish to keep out. So these things have been happening at once; financial security and an expulsion of the unworthy. Valuing my valuing as reality itself is all it took.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Arch-Native Philosophy - Sumerian Bill and Ted - The Magical Tree of Life Academy
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10533
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Sat May 30, 2020 11:45 pm

Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 3 Icon_minitimeMon Oct 31, 2016 7:27 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
To continue upon Parmenides, the thought of building a system coincided with the knowledge of how to build a system, and the actual building of that system, and it then surpassing my expectations.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 3 Icon_minitimeMon Oct 31, 2016 7:28 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
But this is what life is, the system of surpassing expectations.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Sauwelios
bowstring
bowstring
Sauwelios

Posts : 109
Join date : 2011-12-15
Age : 41
Location : Amsterdam

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 3 Icon_minitimeMon Oct 31, 2016 7:36 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Fixed Cross wrote:
This most revered bit of his philosophy is to me the absolute hollowness, as later on Bertrand Russell would exemplify it. Honestly, I can not respect this even from a 13 year old mediocre student.

From Euthydemus

Quote :
“So what follows from what we’ve said? Isn’t it this, that of the other things none is either good or bad, and that of these two, wisdom is good and ignorance bad?”

He agreed.

“Well then let’s have a look at what’s left,” I said. “Since all of us desire to be happy, and since we evidently become so on account of our use—that is our good use—of other things, and since knowledge is what provides this goodness of use and also good fortune, every man must, as seems plausible, prepare himself by every means for this: to be as wise as possible. Right?”

‘Yes,” he said.

Is this not the ultimate ruin of substantive thought? Is this not the utter negation of valuing? Is this not the perfect hollowness? Soc. invents right here the horror of the empty-universal, which from here on goes on to signify the value of man to himself - as precisely 0.

Contrary to your own, Socrates' questions are not simply rhetorical. His interlocutor agrees--as Socrates was quite positive he would--, but did Socrates himself agree with what he suggests? I think not. Also, I'm not sure who his interlocutor is in this passage, but if it's either Euthydemus himself or his brother, I suspect he only plays along with Socrates for some of the others who were present. I suspect, however, that it's one of the latter.

::

Suspicion confirmed.

The moron here is not Socrates, it's Cleinias. And what Socrates is doing in dialogues like this is teaching his fellow Sophists how to be "philo-sophers"--i.e., how to compromise with powerful morons by telling them what they don't even realize they want to hear. For the non-morons like Socrates and Euthydemus, the positive side of this compromise is that they can continue to be natural philosophers--scientists, like Thales.

Having said that, the problem with science after Aristotle, and especially modern science, is that it believes to have transcended common sense. The doctrine of the will to power is philosophical, as opposed to scientific, by embracing the heart of common sense, as I meant to indicate to the adept in this post: http://ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopic.ph ... 7#p2634017

By italicizing "induction" and following it with three periods, I referred my advanced students to section 550 of The Will to Power.

In my view of history, "classical" or "enlightenment" liberalism is only one relatively advanced stage of the Western liberalization.

"Humanity" is already an "inhuman" concept. The only "human family" is the paradoxical "philosophers clan"--Halevy's "community of robbers".
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 3 Icon_minitimeMon Oct 31, 2016 8:39 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Very good - I'd stand corrected if the larger point did not confirm my own. In any case you have defended Socrates honor with verve.

Aristotle is however lost to us -
as it was precisely in Socrates personal approach that his greater logic of philosophy continued; self-valuing in the encountered terms, the sophists. There was enough for Soc to work with, the did not generate like Thales but he transformed, and was part of a degeneration of what Homer had seen generated. The terms are those of declining Athens, and Soc. exacerbates this process, thereby indeed creating something of a conscience. But it is a bad conscience is what I maintain --- yes, because he used the gods to denounce fools, by making it seem as if the gods, or the Atheneans reverence for them, were not responsible for all the wealth these fools had. Soc. caused Athens to decline, he prevented any sort of Renaissance - he was thus a Luther.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 3 Icon_minitimeMon Oct 31, 2016 8:48 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Now I have smeared Socrates. That is a hard thing to do.

But they were in fact proponents of the exact same sort of conscience-ism, at the cost of all spring and summer like thought.
At the cost of all excess - thus at the cost of life.
But Soc was both wise, in that he enjoyed, and noble, in that he accepted death as a consequence to his contradicting the terms of life in Athens.
A scourge of the gods. Prometheus undone. After Socrates, art was impossible.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 3 Icon_minitimeMon Oct 31, 2016 8:56 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Athens was Dionysian self-enjoyment created by aristocratic rulerships and mild tyrannies in the archaic age, that flowered in a democracy of heroic politics and conquest (democracy is always warlike outwardly) in the Classical age as the Apollonian will to make the image of pride endure as beauty and hardness, and finally began to crumble into political pettiness, and sophism.

The Irony for me has always been and shall blissfully remain (as it is the very substance of comprehension of conflict) the Akropolis staring down on Socrates, and still staring down on the marketsquare, where people respect Socrates, and go to the marble as a tourist attraction. And pay money. No way in hell they'd pay to walk on the same ground as Socrates - they came for the gods. They are just too unselfvaluing to know it and enjoy it. they just feel compelled to sacrifice their money to them.

But the Greeks understand. The guards do, in the parks. I have seen it, Ive commanded them away from me in the name of the God at Delphi, and they've violently thrown out my insolent cousin who was wearing his netball shorts and his friend who pulled them down - they know rank.
Rank and marble - you dont need much more. Rank as in the capacity for deference.

Well all that, and one of the best habitats on Earth. The history of Rome is a continuation of Greece in these terms, and its decline a result of its integration of too many inferior territories. It became bland... boring. Perhaps boredom is a Roman invention. The systematization of wealth and the introduction of it in areas where it doesn't naturally spend itself. You get consumerism.

Damn it, this fucking French poet in a preface is convincing me of the inferiority of Rome in some respects. Im trying to read Perceval in its original language but I cant get through the introduction as it is disturbing me too much. Also the first line is a hailing of Phillip of Flanders, who is an absolute fascist scourge to my own nation, before it was fully formed by forever wrecking the might of the foul Spanish empire and men like this monstrous decadent Christian 'holy man' Filip. Well, in Europe. The language survived in the better people they raped.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 3 Icon_minitimeMon Oct 31, 2016 9:17 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Still, the honor of Clinton no one has even ever attempted to defend. No one tries to prove the antithesis of a lucrative law. Clinton just tries to get away with it by redefining "honor"... Obamacare and such, "removing dictators", in general gold and blood extraction. A very ancient definition.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 3 Icon_minitimeMon Oct 31, 2016 9:22 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Trump on the other hand is quite a master of Socratic method. At least the mechanism of his campaign works almost better than Socrates himself in dethroning the wealthy and their sophists.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 3 Icon_minitimeMon Oct 31, 2016 10:10 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
No one even tries to defend Clinton -- yeah exactly. Fuck her.

Fixed I see you as a builder-philosopher, definitely, and one that naturally incorporates the results of depth-inciting into the construction materials. VO is a philosophical artifact of its own kind.

Indeed Socrates doesn't "agree" with the points he forces on those who converse with him. He is forcing them around to an uncomfortable position of needing to acknowledge that they were full of shit to begin with, that they had no idea what the fuck they're talking about. That is true philosophy, man. Or at least one side of it.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 3 Icon_minitimeMon Oct 31, 2016 11:12 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
"Whoever fights monsters should see to it that he does not become a monster." --N



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 3 Icon_minitimeMon Oct 31, 2016 11:18 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I am willing to concede that it is a part of it - it certainly requires a certain skillset. But, somebody has to pit himself against him.
Let it be me this antiSocrates- I simply refrain from Socratic method (where N does not - Zarathustra is Socratic-Biblical); I do no coax agreement from fools, so as to let them feel like fools in the end - I simply say to them that they are fools and explain why. I know this may be less effective but it is also less dirty, and less tyrannical. Thus it builds a different kind of loyalty. Not one that can be broken, because adversity and contention is included in it. The loyalty commanded by a storm - by the head of Zeus, there is no higher love for me, and to follow the highest love is a wisdom which I love, etc - Socrates did right to the scum, but he did so in a city that had not long before been the jewel of the Universe - by believing in the Gods that Socrates was put to death for for denouncing - the gods and the youth, and the relation between these - he had severed it. I can never love that man. He said good bye to this world as gladly as a traitor of it would.

Shit -

I keep disvaluing him as much as I try to respect him.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 3 Icon_minitimeMon Oct 31, 2016 11:25 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
The clumsy ills of his fellows in time did not justify the ingenious ill he conjured up in retribution.

I turn out to be more radical than Nietzsche in this. That is because I walk N's path through.
Ive walked it back to Greece and take side with Apollo. Shoo, old beggard, I say to Socrates, but I will not harm him. I replace his method wherever there are pillars being built out of marble with the art of logical valuing.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 3 Icon_minitimeMon Oct 31, 2016 11:26 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Haha, fuck yeah.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Sauwelios
bowstring
bowstring
Sauwelios

Posts : 109
Join date : 2011-12-15
Age : 41
Location : Amsterdam

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 3 Icon_minitimeTue Nov 01, 2016 7:02 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Fixed Cross wrote:
He said good bye to this world as gladly as a traitor of it would.

Publicly, yes. But why did he cover himself as the effect of the poison moved up his body?

"Socrates's fear of death required that he cover his face in the presence of those he had encouraged, made courageous, by his arguments for immortality." (Lampert, The Enduring Importance of Leo Strauss, page 18.)



___________
FIAT·IVSTITIA·ET·PEREAT·MVNDVS
RECVRRAT·NATVRA·ET·EXPELLATVR·FVRCA
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 3 Icon_minitimeTue Nov 01, 2016 8:13 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I would say that rather fits his duplicity. He suffers from his method in the end, he does not, like Aleister Crowley, rejoice in both the phenomenon of the end as perfection of ones self-valuing and the possibility of a new thing. That is the only properly skeptical-and joyful attitude.

Why I prefer the Olympos over Socrates; Gods consist of valuing-pure, thus conscious and unconscious in one continuum, I believe it draws the mind into a richer soil. It has only one aim; to enrich. Marble is honest, it simply commands the highest order of men to it, by the difficulty of shaping it and its potential for hard beauty - the same goes for diamond.

Socrates was a hard material himself, against which Greece came to be shaped. However, I am his enemy, or natural adversary. His did not enrich, but impoverish; "because the Greeks no longer merited" one might say, but the fact that Rome stole predominantly the Gods and discarded most of the philosophy as inconsequential is enough to illustrate my point.

When the marble comes out, that is when things are decided, ties are cut that cannot endure, and visions of the future begin to demand sweat blood and tears without there being a war - the sap of the will begins to flow when the hammers and chisels are carried to the sacred stone. "If you build it he will come" is the law of the pagan gods.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Sauwelios
bowstring
bowstring
Sauwelios

Posts : 109
Join date : 2011-12-15
Age : 41
Location : Amsterdam

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 3 Icon_minitimeTue Nov 01, 2016 8:59 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
What do you think of the claim that all humans suffer defeat in the face of death? Death properly understood, of course: viewtopic.php?p=2577467&sid=07dc3b45ce851e1162c0718ba5fe2673#p2577467



___________
FIAT·IVSTITIA·ET·PEREAT·MVNDVS
RECVRRAT·NATVRA·ET·EXPELLATVR·FVRCA
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 3 Icon_minitimeTue Nov 01, 2016 10:05 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
IT IS TRUE

OUR VICTORY IS IN HOW WE MEET DEFEAT
IN WHAT IT IS THAT WE GIVE UP IN DEFEAT
AND HOW WE HAND IT OVER THE THE EARTH
THE NAME OF OUR BREATH IS OUR LAST

HA

SO IT IS OVERCOME
BY BREATH AS GIFT

BUT BREATHE DEEPLY
THAT A BUTTERFLY MAY BE BORN IN SEASON
AND NOT A MOSQUITO IN A DANK CORNER

FOR BLOODSUCKERS
ARE MERELY THOSE WITH SHALLOW BREATH



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 3 Icon_minitimeTue Nov 01, 2016 10:10 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
BREATH IS SPIRIT

SOCRATES IS A HERO OF A PLAY HE DID NOT UNDERSTAND
NOR DO I UNDERSTAND MY OWN PART
BUT THIS I KNOW -
!!

I KNOW THAT I KNOW NOT
WHAT SOCRATES CLAIMED IS TRUE

I KNOW IT NOT

I KNOW NOT THAT THE WORLD IS BAD OR GOOD OR EVIL
I KNOW THAT BAD AND GOOD AND EVIL ARE FEARSOME WORDS
AND THAT FEAR IS IN THE WORLD AS IS THE WORD

HA

IS THE GAME OF GOD

OR ONE MIGHT SAY SHHHVVVAH









___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Men are will to power, Women are power Men are will to power, Women are power - Page 3 Icon_minitimeTue Nov 01, 2016 10:16 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
GIVE BIRTH YE SUPERWOMEN UNDER THE EQUATOR
IN SWEET RAIN AS THE GODS GIVE IT
TRAVEL EAST AND SOUTH
IN THE WAY OF THE SUN FIND YOUR LOCUS

THEN GIVE BIRTH IN THE MUD

apes we were, and hospital wards we have become

let us make another ATTEMPT,
BUT WITH A STRAIGHT ARROW

HAIL ZEUS THE EXALTER
HAIL THE ARCHER
HAIL THE ARROW

PHILOSOPHIA IS A MANIA
THE GARDEN KNOWS IT
ITS KNOWLEDGE IS THE SNAKE

THE HOUR OF THE SNAKE IS UPON US
AS THE TITAN CREEPS TO THE BULLS EYE
SARAH CONNOR ALREADY KNOWS
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Arch-Native Philosophy - Sumerian Bill and Ted - The Magical Tree of Life Academy
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10533
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Sat May 30, 2020 11:48 pm

Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

12 types of human negation Empty
PostSubject: 12 types of human negation 12 types of human negation Icon_minitimeFri Nov 06, 2015 1:16 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Failure
Isolation
Loss
Destruction
Dispossession
False Representation
Uprooting
Shame
Sloth
Decoherence
Subversion
Defeat



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

12 types of human negation Empty
PostSubject: Re: 12 types of human negation 12 types of human negation Icon_minitimeFri Nov 06, 2015 1:22 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
From all such negating of its assumed ('noumenal') self-valuing by the consciousness, positive drives follow.

Aspects can be first marked as negatives to derive their positives by a kin of 'all great (significant) things must wear masks'-logic;

Apollon sends plague upon man in order that the hearts and minds of the great ones may attain to their antitheses, which is greatness in its various human forms.

e.g.


Accomplishment
Coordination
Romance
Will
Possession
Right Word
Ground
Pride
Diligence
Coherence
Fearlessness
Attainment



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

12 types of human negation Empty
PostSubject: Re: 12 types of human negation 12 types of human negation Icon_minitimeWed May 25, 2016 6:34 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Yes I like this. The world is a crucible in which elements are separated by their purities. And the world is large enough still that such separated things can still mingle and mix around with each other, to meta-crucible effect whereby both the high and the low can become enriched, often in spite of themselves.

It is a strange and difficult logic, the transition from the negative to the positive. So much of what we are remains unconscious even while we are using it. It was recently pointed out to me by someone that while Nietzsche's existentialism was good, his metaphysics were shit... to which I replied, Yes perhaps, but Nietzsche was already-always grounded implicitly in an upright metaphysical relationship, even though (and perhaps precisely because) he didn't or couldn't explicate that directly, coherently into his concepts, and he needed to some extent push aside metaphysics in order to focus on developing within the existentia. At which point I was accused of being a "postmodern, Marxist, jargon-user" etc etc.. Ha.

Much easier to be good than to become good. This is a formula for naturally refusing the negative. What does this say about modern humanity today, which attracts the negative at least as much as it repels it? Nietzsche was right about the great world-historical process of human transformation. Things get confused when we forget the larger scope and purview, the super-process of which individual moments in space and time are but pieces, stages toward some end/s. Maybe the individual is a microcosm.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Arcturus Descending
arrow
arrow
Arcturus Descending

Posts : 293
Join date : 2011-12-07
Location : Hovering amidst a battle of Wills

12 types of human negation Empty
PostSubject: Re: 12 types of human negation 12 types of human negation Icon_minitimeWed Nov 23, 2016 7:17 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Fixed Cross wrote:
Failure
Isolation
Loss
Destruction
Dispossession
False Representation
Uprooting
Shame
Sloth
Decoherence
Subversion
Defeat

Perfectionism would be another I think - unless that would be part of false representation.
Believing ourselves to be beyond perfect negates our humanness, our self hood.




Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Care Empty
PostSubject: Care Care Icon_minitimeSat Aug 10, 2013 7:14 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Carelessness is an essential part of life as conflict. It is a moment of battle where important things are risked with instincts. This is only possible when one can abandon care of certain things of value. Taking care is building value, defenses, in a state of control that precedes and builds the foundations of lacking care. One who has not cared is not careless, he's buzzard food.

The work of a psychology of an uebermensch, which can be a single person, a family and even a race, is the work of building carelessness.

Philosophy is distinguishing. The christian philosopher only takes care, always shuns dance and battle into dark corners, and distinguishes precisely only in a state of perpetual caring. The philosopher of battle distinguishes the areas of caring and lacking care that feed battle instincts, which are largely the same as dance and exploration instincts and seek further material for caring and lacking care.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Care Empty
PostSubject: Re: Care Care Icon_minitimeSat Aug 10, 2013 7:42 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
The philosopher of battle speaks: where must care be taken today?

The most profound foundations of our actions are proving not to correspond to a context which reveals even the greatest actions we have already taken. That God is dead means we can no longer be careless about our deepest motivations, which were God's. Since God conquered all that is human for the 2000 or so years he was alive, there is no alternative we can care for that doesn't derive from or isn't attached to him. We must carefully build this alternative, distinguish the micro levels where care can grow it to this area of profoundest goal.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Care Empty
PostSubject: Re: Care Care Icon_minitimeSat Aug 10, 2013 7:46 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
When the time comes to be careless, if care must still be taken, let it be woman who takes it.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Arcturus Descending
arrow
arrow
Arcturus Descending

Posts : 293
Join date : 2011-12-07
Location : Hovering amidst a battle of Wills

Care Empty
PostSubject: Re: Care Care Icon_minitimeMon Dec 05, 2016 4:25 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Pezer wrote:
When the time comes to be careless, if care must still be taken, let it be woman who takes it.


Why the woman? If I am understanding your use of the word "care", women can be just as callous and apathetic as can many men.
So why the woman?
It all comes down to the "individual" ~ no?

Does care to you mean treating something with integrity and value and even reverence perhaps?


Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Zen Epicurianisms Empty
PostSubject: Zen Epicurianisms Zen Epicurianisms Icon_minitimeSun Oct 02, 2016 4:31 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
When I light my first cigarette in the morning

I

Just let it burn...
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Arcturus Descending
arrow
arrow
Arcturus Descending

Posts : 293
Join date : 2011-12-07
Location : Hovering amidst a battle of Wills

Zen Epicurianisms Empty
PostSubject: Re: Zen Epicurianisms Zen Epicurianisms Icon_minitimeMon Dec 05, 2016 4:18 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I wrap my hands around the day's first very warm cup of coffee enjoying its aroma while reflecting on the snow wolf before me ~~ I postpone the moment of placing it to my lips.
Perfect zen epicurean moment.



___________
Each of our lives is a part of the lengthy process of the universe gradually waking up and becoming aware of itself.


Philosophy is the childhood of the intellect, and a culture that tries to skip it will never grow up."


"If I thought that everything I did was determined by my circumstancse and my psychological condition, I would feel trapped."

Thomas Nagel
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Zen Epicurianisms Empty
PostSubject: Re: Zen Epicurianisms Zen Epicurianisms Icon_minitimeMon Dec 05, 2016 4:28 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Pretty similar situation as I just read this holding the mornings first coffee in my hand staring out at the snow falling down over sweet boulevard de Rosemont, just as white as when I first set foot here last year and decided this my place.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Arcturus Descending
arrow
arrow
Arcturus Descending

Posts : 293
Join date : 2011-12-07
Location : Hovering amidst a battle of Wills

Zen Epicurianisms Empty
PostSubject: Re: Zen Epicurianisms Zen Epicurianisms Icon_minitimeSat Dec 10, 2016 4:20 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Fixed Cross wrote:
Pretty similar situation as I just read this holding the mornings first coffee in my hand staring out at the snow falling down over sweet boulevard de Rosemont, just as white as when I first set foot here last year and decided this my place.

I absolutely love that first snowfall. I love all snowfalls especially if they do not "stick", except for blanketing the trees.
Such a pristine landscape to me.
But the first one of the season is like welcoming an old friend back again.




___________
Each of our lives is a part of the lengthy process of the universe gradually waking up and becoming aware of itself.


Philosophy is the childhood of the intellect, and a culture that tries to skip it will never grow up."


"If I thought that everything I did was determined by my circumstancse and my psychological condition, I would feel trapped."

Thomas Nagel
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Arcturus Descending
arrow
arrow
Arcturus Descending

Posts : 293
Join date : 2011-12-07
Location : Hovering amidst a battle of Wills

Zen Epicurianisms Empty
PostSubject: Re: Zen Epicurianisms Zen Epicurianisms Icon_minitimeSat Dec 10, 2016 4:23 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Pezer wrote:
When I light my first cigarette in the morning

I

Just let it burn...

This is a very cool, laid-back kind of ambiance.
The rich glow in the dark.



individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Empty
PostSubject: Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Icon_minitimeTue Dec 27, 2016 4:04 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Or rather the "emotional" consequence of it. In The Will To Power (should have been named The Revaluation of Values instead) Nietzsche defines nihilism as "the radical repudiation of value, meaning and desirability". Yes, at the intellectual level this is nihilism but as manifest in the emotions or as our "spiritual" self, it is what is now called depression. N knew our modern and "post"-modern world was becoming more nihilistic by the day, as Christian humanism and today what we can call politically correct liberalism, along with its sister-ideology of political religious conservatism. The right and the left now both mirror nihilism within themselves.

Depression is the inability to be motivated, the inability of desire to move the self into action. Nihilism describes a process whereby the root of desire is cut out from the tree of the self, so that now that tree, removed from its proper earth and supplanted within a larger socioeconomic-ideological organism, slowly whithers and dies.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Empty
PostSubject: Re: Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Icon_minitimeTue Dec 27, 2016 4:42 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I agree with that, depression is literally a low pressure zone of will, or self-valuing. It can thus not move outward.

To have values means to be a pressure. The tension we call 'will'. And to be a negative pressure, a suction... this is what a depressed person is. He depressurizes all vulnerable pressures around him too. This climatological phenomenon of the psyche explains our society, which is basically just a contest of who is the most depressed.

Obama is grand archetype of the entitled-depressed person. Has he ever said something not ironic, cynical or sarcastic while in office? No, right? Well, some condescending remarks about human being that clearly made him very happy to say. That pathetic loser forms the central axis of the whole of nihilistic humanity, Islam as well as fascist China included. Cl****n represents the impossible state beyond nihilism, the less-than-zero, the stench of rot beyond death, which appeals to all true nihilists more than the scent even of fresh fruit or sex or anything potentiating. (I believe most happy men love the smell of all combustibles.)

Our consumerist society itself is the vessel for a people without values, the products and malls represent the full potential depth of the depression and to dive into them is to deplete oneself further, is like a massive anti-storm, a low pressure area that reacts with extreme local turmoil to any positive pressure points within it.

Nietzsche speaks repeatedly of helping the miserable to their desired end. I think we must also have this mindset, to want the nihilist institutions to perish, rather than to want to redeem or transform them. There is no use for them in a world of values. They are only devices of despair.

As N says here, all the nobility related to such institutions is expended in their creation, in the striving for them; in the phase where it matters not that they are a gross misunderstanding at best, in that phase where they are simply an ideal, an aim, and provide a tension to the bow. So I perceive my communist grandfather, as a young, passionate, perhaps even philosophical man in the resistance, whose victories accomplished many of the opposite things he fought for, and yet whose relentless will to fight set free and ennobled his personal life beyond what most attain. A strong and direct enemy is worth more than almost everything else, given that one has inborn strength. A child growing up without the awareness of enemies, in the soft protection of a modern nest, will be an aborted human.

"My conception of freedom. -- The value of a thing sometimes does not lie in that which one attains by it, but in what one pays for it -- what it costs us. I shall give an example. Liberal institutions cease to be liberal as soon as they are attained: later on, there are no worse and no more thorough injurers of freedom than liberal institutions. Their effects are known well enough: they undermine the will to power; they level mountain and valley, and call that morality; they make men small, cowardly, and hedonistic -- every time it is the herd animal that triumphs with them. Liberalism: in other words, herd-animalization.

These same institutions produce quite different effects while they are still being fought for; then they really promote freedom in a powerful way. On closer inspection it is war that produces these effects, the war for liberal institutions, which, as a war, permits illiberal instincts to continue. And war educates for freedom. For what is freedom? That one has the will to assume responsibility for oneself. That one maintains the distance which separates us. That one becomes more indifferent to difficulties, hardships, privation, even to life itself. That one is prepared to sacrifice human beings for one's cause, not excluding oneself. Freedom means that the manly instincts which delight in war and victory dominate over other instincts, for example, over those of "pleasure." The human being who has become free -- and how much more the spirit who has become free -- spits on the contemptible type of well-being dreamed of by shopkeepers, Christians, cows, females, Englishmen, and other democrats. The free man is a warrior. How is freedom measured in individuals and peoples? According to the resistance which must be overcome, according to the exertion required, to remain on top. The highest type of free men should be sought where the highest resistance is constantly overcome: five steps from tyranny, close to the threshold of the danger of servitude. This is true psychologically if by "tyrants" are meant inexorable and fearful instincts that provoke the maximum of authority and discipline against themselves; most beautiful type: Julius Caesar. This is true politically too; one need only go through history. The peoples who had some value, who attained some value, never attained it under liberal institutions: it was great danger that made something of them that merits respect. Danger alone acquaints us with our own resources, our virtues, our armor and weapons, our spirit, and forces us to be strong. First principle: one must need to be strong -- otherwise one will never become strong.

Those large hothouses for the strong -- for the strongest kind of human being that has so far been known -- the aristocratic commonwealths of the type of Rome or Venice, understood freedom exactly in the sense in which I understand it: as something one has and does not have, something one wants, something one conquers." [Nietzsche, Twilight]



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Sisyphus
Path
Path


Posts : 1647
Join date : 2016-08-06
Location : Florida

Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Empty
PostSubject: Re: Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Icon_minitimeTue Dec 27, 2016 11:53 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Ah! Some philosophy.

When I started reading Nietzsche I never thought that he was a Nihilist. Quite the opposite. He was indeed a very optimistic person; one who saw the possibility for greatness once again in the human animal.

Years later I encounter some who tried to define Nietzsche as a Nihilist and I always argued against their thoughts. Seems that all had only read what others had said Nietzsche had said but had never actually read Nietzsche at all. They all formed their opinion based on the false opinions of others.

Nihilism is a rather important concept for me as a Taoist because Taoism is very closely linked with Buddhism by many. As with Nietzsche, if Buddhism is misread it can appear to be a very Nihilistic belief system. I regularly have to get into discussions with people who think they understand Buddhism and present their thoughts in a Nihilistic manner.

And I agree that based on what I have observed of American society Americans, in general, are becoming Nihilistic. I can't speak to other societies but I would imagine the trend is nearly equal to what it is in America. And worse, I think it is something that those in power are feeding. That is, the governments and institutions.

And yes, I think that the overman has the responsibility to help these institutions and governments to commit suicide. They are nothing less than an obstacle for the overman and should be allow to die a pitiful death.

Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Empty
PostSubject: Re: Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Icon_minitimeWed Dec 28, 2016 3:15 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Yes, good thoughts. As for eastern religions, N calls these nihilistic because of how they focus on attaining "nothingness" and preach that this world is an illusion; also that they preach about an after-life. Any religion or belief system that teaches either 1) the world is an illusion, you are an illusion, 2) you should deny your desires because desiring is bad/evil/untrue, or 3) there is another life after you die, is pretty much nihilistic in the straightforward sense.

I've had good experiences with Taoist meditations, and I wouldn't degrade it as nihilistic, but if the typical eastern-religious beliefs are also included then yes it would be trending toward nihilism. N doesn't really distinguish between Christianity and Buddhism in this area, since if you're teaching any of those 1-3 above then you're basically teaching nihilism ("the radical repudiation of value, meaning and desirability" as N said) and regardless of whatever else necessity or benefits may be associated to the belief system.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Empty
PostSubject: Re: Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Icon_minitimeWed Dec 28, 2016 3:40 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I would add my own definition of nihilism to N's: the deliberate and structural-unconscious avoidance of truth. When children fantasize and imagine they aren't avoiding truth, they are seeking it. But when a person learns how to use this imaginative method expressly because truths are avoided in the psychological sense, that need is a seed of nihilism.

Nihilism makes peoole slavish, dumb, naive, lasy, and unhappy. These are all consequences of Christianity too, I've observed. I used to think that Christianity at least provided for some high values, and it's true that some high values can coexist with Christianity, but those same values can also live without Christianity and perhaps much better without it.

Philosophy properly understood is the antithesis of nihilism. And anyone who says N was nihilistic simply doesn't understand him at all. Attempting to rank-order values and meanings isn't nihilistic, so long as it is undertaken with an eye and honesty for greater value, meaning and truth and doesn't involve "self-denial" (for example, deliberately suppressing one's own desiring as occurs in Buddhism).

On Christianity specifically I would point to Parodites' insights here, that Christianity represents a stage of the development of subjectivity, and is more like a symptom than anything else. The attempt at a grand reification of the self qua self, the unification of the complex of the 'godhead' into a single image-idea in which we view ourselves negativity, as absence and longing, as lack; we are not the positive expression of nature but the negative expression of the lack of the divine, in Christianity. So interestingly Christianity is nihilistic but also potentially philosophical at the same time, or rather is like a womb from which eventually Christians are born as philosophers, leaving behind their Christianity and turning instead to truth. Christianity is a religion where even God turns upon himself and dies, it is the height of self-refutation and pregnant tension, qua system and in the psychological sense anyway. Even N observed with some fascination the deep psychological complexity of the slave-moralist, compared to that of the master-moralist.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Empty
PostSubject: Re: Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Icon_minitimeWed Dec 28, 2016 5:14 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Sisyphus wrote:
Ah! Some philosophy.

When I started reading Nietzsche I never thought that he was a Nihilist. Quite the opposite. He was indeed a very optimistic person; one who saw the possibility for greatness once again in the human animal.

Years later I encounter some who tried to define Nietzsche as a Nihilist and I always argued against their thoughts. Seems that all had only read what others had said Nietzsche had said but had never actually read Nietzsche at all. They all formed their opinion based on the false opinions of others.

Without wanting to be facetious, it is always the nihilists who think N is nihilist - I assume because he explodes in their face as pure dread.

Quote :
Nihilism is a rather important concept for me as a Taoist because Taoism is very closely linked with Buddhism by many. As with Nietzsche, if Buddhism is misread it can appear to be a very Nihilistic belief system. I regularly have to get into discussions with people who think they understand Buddhism and present their thoughts in a Nihilistic manner.

Ive always practiced Taoism, as in Shaolin, which has been my school for 20 years. It is the philosophy of Action. I hold it in the highest esteem.

Of course, there are many versions and interpretation of Taoism.
But as you say, Tao is a verb.

Here's my Shaolin teacher discussing the difference and overlap between Tao and Zen.

http://shaolin.org/zen/zen-and-tao.html

As anyone can see none of this relates to the despair and vanity of nihilism - it is all about reification in flux. The objective truth of Flux, which we, when our power is maximized, embody in incomprehensible joy. The cosmic dance, or the cosmic breath - the same are these, when properly attained - one can not fully breathe without dancing.

Quote :
And I agree that based on what I have observed of American society Americans, in general, are becoming Nihilistic. I can't speak to other societies but I would imagine the trend is nearly equal to what it is in America. And worse, I think it is something that those in power are feeding. That is, the governments and institutions.

Yes, I believe that too. I am not clear on how conscious they are of what they are doing - as a nihilist can be methodically extremely clever, as Capable also alludes to, and still not know what it is he is trying for, or why, or what he'll do when he succeeds at whatever his fight leads to.

I'm actually more and more convinced that it is all simply a collective compulsive neurosis. So that amounts the exact opposite to Tao.

The anti-path, which is walked collectively.

Quote :
And yes, I think that the overman has the responsibility to help these institutions and governments to commit suicide. They are nothing less than an obstacle for the overman and should be allow to die a pitiful death.

Nice.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Empty
PostSubject: Re: Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Icon_minitimeWed Dec 28, 2016 5:38 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Capable wrote:
Yes, good thoughts. As for eastern religions, N calls these nihilistic because of how they focus on attaining "nothingness" and preach that this world is an illusion; also that they preach about an after-life. Any religion or belief system that teaches either 1) the world is an illusion, you are an illusion, 2) you should deny your desires because desiring is bad/evil/untrue, or 3) there is another life after you die, is pretty much nihilistic in the straightforward sense.

The afterlife is actually not something Buddha preached. I agree with you that he is in part nihilist, I had a conversation on this with Sauwelios yesterday who linked what I said here about soft benefactors vs strong enemies and the aborted human to Buddha.

Here is what N says about Buddha.

"This [revenge is forbidden for the sick] was comprehended by that profound physiologist, the Buddha. His "religion" should rather be called a kind of hygiene, lest it be confused with such pitiable phenomena as Christianity: its effectiveness was made conditional on the victory over ressentiment. -To liberate the soul from this is the first step toward recovery. "Not by enmity is enmity ended; by friendliness enmity is ended": these words stand at the beginning of the doctrine of the Buddha. It is not morality that speaks thus; thus speaks physiology." [N, Ecce Homo]

Quote :
I've had good experiences with Taoist meditations, and I wouldn't degrade it as nihilistic, but if the typical eastern-religious beliefs are also included then yes it would be trending toward nihilism. N doesn't really distinguish between Christianity and Buddhism in this area, since if you're teaching any of those 1-3 above then you're basically teaching nihilism ("the radical repudiation of value, meaning and desirability" as N said) and regardless of whatever else necessity or benefits may be associated to the belief system.

I would say that the Buddha stands, well, sits as a crossroads. One may from him either take the path into nihilism, through the beliefs you describe, and this seems the most often traveled path. Or one may take the path of honesty, and focus on improving ones physiology, integrating it with the ways of the Earth. This, to me, is Tao, as well as Zen. Zen does it radically, by a pure decision, and I think it is the most beautiful, as well as the most painful. Zen and pain are inseparable. Zen is the beauty of pain. The eye of the storm. But Tao makes the life into a happy fire breathing dragon. Both are majestic. And both require expression in the arts of war... Neither Zen nor Tao exist without the fist next to the open palm.

Zen is in my knuckles. 30 fist pushups on gravel is my morning bliss. Tao is very much in dance and love making. The fluidity of yin however requires the iron core of yang to be stable, gracious, beautiful and wholesome.

Beauty is in the eye of the storm.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Empty
PostSubject: Re: Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Icon_minitimeWed Dec 28, 2016 5:59 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Capable wrote:
I would add my own definition of nihilism to N's: the deliberate and structural-unconscious avoidance of truth. When children fantasize and imagine they aren't avoiding truth, they are seeking it.

Good point. Very good point.

Quote :
But when a person learns how to use this imaginative method expressly because truths are avoided in the psychological sense, that need is a seed of nihilism.

It becomes a pathology.

And yet because of the methods purity, the goodness of the person is enclosed in his very pathetic-ness.... it can not be resolved through 'a bitter confrontation with reality' brought about by some cruel father. It must be lured or driven out of the pathological fixation, into what is not 'the reality principle' but a daemonism between 'bitter reality' and the nektar of imagination which has been liberated into it.

Quote :
Nihilism makes peoole slavish, dumb, naive, lasy, and unhappy. These are all consequences of Christianity too, I've observed. I used to think that Christianity at least provided for some high values, and it's true that some high values can coexist with Christianity, but those same values can also live without Christianity and perhaps much better without it.

Yes. I think Christianity is only viable when approached from the outside, as a curiosity, and that to grow up in it requires that one loathe it first. I now love Christ, but only because I had such fun in blaspheming him for 30 years and that only worked to tear veils of church and belief and patheticness away from what apparently this dude re/presented. He is a genuine badass, that should be clear. Napoleon was very clear on this too.

Quote :
Philosophy properly understood is the antithesis of nihilism. And anyone who says N was nihilistic simply doesn't understand him at all. Attempting to rank-order values and meanings isn't nihilistic, so long as it is undertaken with an eye and honesty for greater value, meaning and truth and doesn't involve "self-denial" (for example, deliberately suppressing one's own desiring as occurs in Buddhism).

To rank values entirely precludes nihilism, and nihilism is little else than the abolishing of rank, of difference in value.

(One can not rank no-value over no-value)

Quote :
On Christianity specifically I would point to Parodites' insights here, that Christianity represents a stage of the development of subjectivity, and is more like a symptom than anything else. The attempt at a grand reification of the self qua self, the unification of the complex of the 'godhead' into a single image-idea in which we view ourselves negativity, as absence and longing, as lack; we are not the positive expression of nature but the negative expression of the lack of the divine, in Christianity. So interestingly Christianity is nihilistic but also potentially philosophical at the same time, or rather is like a womb from which eventually Christians are born as philosophers, leaving behind their Christianity and turning instead to truth. Christianity is a religion where even God turns upon himself and dies, it is the height of self-refutation and pregnant tension, qua system and in the psychological sense anyway. Even N observed with some fascination the deep psychological complexity of the slave-moralist, compared to that of the master-moralist.

Parodites' view on Christianity is the most interesting one Ive seen. It certainly defeats Nietzsche's view of it, even though most Christians are far better defined by Nietzsche's analysis than by Parodites' - P shows us the heights and depths that Christianity made possible, and it is even possible to see Nietzsche in these terms. Obviously, "the antiChrist", when seen in terms of Christ-man as negativity, positively speaks volumes....



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Sisyphus
Path
Path


Posts : 1647
Join date : 2016-08-06
Location : Florida

Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Empty
PostSubject: Re: Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Icon_minitimeWed Dec 28, 2016 6:41 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
First, thanks for the link. I decided to not study Zen because in the beginning it was too Buddhist for me. But based on the little I know I agree with the person in the link.

Actually, Nietzsche wasn't as hard on the Buddhists as he was on the Christians. That was actually a surprise for me.

I doubt anyone could make a case that Taoism is Nihilistic. The Taoist Sage? Maybe apathetic but not nihilistic.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Arch-Native Philosophy - Sumerian Bill and Ted - The Magical Tree of Life Academy
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10533
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Sat May 30, 2020 11:48 pm

Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Empty
PostSubject: Re: Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Icon_minitimeWed Dec 28, 2016 8:53 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
From the point of view that N takes, any religion or belief that teaches "reincarnation of souls", for example, or escape from the karmic wheel of life into some non-entity status of pure bliss absent all desiring, is pretty textbook nihilistic. N's points here on nihilism and religions are basically: demeaning THIS world and THIS life for the sake of an imagined other (whether as heaven with Jesus, karmic reincarnation or nirvana) is nonsensical and stems from a psychological defect in the one who believes such things. Teaching people that this world/life/self is temporary and inferior to a supposed non-temporary and superior world/life/self is worse than nonsense, it is a kind of mind virus. Imagine teaching that kind of shit to a child, and then hoping that child could grow up valuing truth... no, it only happens sometimes for example in Christianity and precisely where a Christian breaks free of his Christianity.

Like N's comments about liberal institutions, these have merit only when they are being build, because they inspire war instincts; likewise, Christianity has merit only when it inspires the instincts to surpass and overcome Christianity. Yet I don't see any similr surpassing and overcoming when it comes to eastern religions.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Empty
PostSubject: Re: Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Icon_minitimeWed Dec 28, 2016 7:37 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Note that Taoism doesn't have the notion of reincarnation or afterlife.
These are Hindu notions.

Buddha, who was from India, is the end result of a very old tradition involving great majesty - a tired man with a pure heart. Not high, not low.

From his thoughts about detachment, a whole slew of ethical directions developed, so many it is impossible to count them.

"Buddhism" doesn't really exist. It refers largely to insane clown posses of spiritualistic jungle dwellers who build eerie temples with bats in them and such. It's the low forms that followed from Gautama's dangerous words. Most of it is a continuation of the 'spiritual filth' accumulated, enforced by Manu's law, by the Chandala caste. All of them yearn for absolution in an afterlife.

Nirvana is simply the experience of clarity about the physical universe manifesting (maya) (as opposed to being, 'suchness') entirely as a reflection ones nervous system, and not even permitted to the lower caste - it is a privilege of the Brahmans, the supreme caste. Even still, there are many levels of it, and indubitably philosophy is akin to some of the higher states. Not equal, but akin. Blissful not-erring. Reification of flux, in Taoisim notably through synthetic applications of the number 5.

The sole aim is health. Mans capacity for health is vastly expanded by the thousands of years of Taoist and Zen discipline. As N says, it starts with successfully bringing an end to resentment, starting by understanding it as a physiological phenomenon.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Sisyphus
Path
Path


Posts : 1647
Join date : 2016-08-06
Location : Florida

Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Empty
PostSubject: Re: Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Icon_minitimeThu Dec 29, 2016 1:38 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Capable wrote:
From the point of view that N takes, any religion or belief that teaches "reincarnation of souls", for example, or escape from the karmic wheel of life into some non-entity status of pure bliss absent all desiring, is pretty textbook nihilistic. N's points here on nihilism and religions are basically: demeaning THIS world and THIS life for the sake of an imagined other (whether as heaven with Jesus, karmic reincarnation or nirvana) is nonsensical and stems from a psychological defect in the one who believes such things. Teaching people that this world/life/self is temporary and inferior to a supposed non-temporary and superior world/life/self is worse than nonsense, it is a kind of mind virus. Imagine teaching that kind of shit to a child, and then hoping that child could grow up valuing truth... no, it only happens sometimes for example in Christianity and precisely where a Christian breaks free of his Christianity.

Like N's comments about liberal institutions, these have merit only when they are being build, because they inspire war instincts; likewise, Christianity has merit only when it inspires the instincts to surpass and overcome Christianity. Yet I don't see any similr surpassing and overcoming when it comes to eastern religions.

Nicely said. My thoughts were pretty much this way even before I first read anything from Nietzsche. I guess that is why I became so attracted to him.

Eastern religions are similar to Western religions, and mot others for that matter, in that they all teach some wonderful after life without any proof whatever that such a place actually exists. All you need is faith and nihilism.

Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Sisyphus
Path
Path


Posts : 1647
Join date : 2016-08-06
Location : Florida

Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Empty
PostSubject: Re: Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Icon_minitimeThu Dec 29, 2016 1:47 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Fixed Cross wrote:
Note that Taoism doesn't have the notion of reincarnation or afterlife.
These are Hindu notions.

Buddha, who was from India, is the end result of a very old tradition involving great majesty - a tired man with a pure heart. Not high, not low.

Very true. The roots of Taoism never talked about any kind of reincarnation or after life. That came later when Buddhism was taken to China.

And yes, Buddha was raised in the Hindu belief system. Apparently his belief was weak. Hehehe.

The practical teachings of Buddhism aren't all that bad. They teach how to live a better life in the "now" - how to decrease one's suffering.

Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Empty
PostSubject: Re: Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Icon_minitimeThu Dec 29, 2016 3:37 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
But "decreasing suffering" is part of why N condemns these systems as nihilistic. They seek to minimize reality contact where that contact is painful even if truthful; I don't know if Taoists run from pain and discomfort but I know Christians do, and it seems to me that so do Buddhists (monastic ascetics notwithstanding). N also writes somewhere about asceticism and stoicism also being suspect and not that great.

A philosopher uses his pains and sufferings and even inflicts these on himself to push his philosophy higher; philosophy is a crucible in which we burn our pains to produce truths from that fire. Philosophy as masochism, but not the kind that comes from self-hate, instead from simple necessity and the joy of truthfulness. The will to power expands in our increased strength for bearing our pains rather than running from them like a coward. That is the Lion who surpasses the Camel.

Based on what I've seen, Christians and Buddhists are definitely camels, at best, and blind stumbling unconscious camels at worst (denying the reality of their own burdens which they always seek to carry as badge of their "pride", for example the "pride" of being a victim, or as ressentiment.) I don't know any Taoists but I've read a great book on Taoist monks, they seem more joyful and earth-grounded and don't seem to shy away from pain.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Empty
PostSubject: Re: Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Icon_minitimeThu Dec 29, 2016 3:47 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Per my definition of pathology that I riff off of from Lacan a little, "needing and wanting what you despise or resist; resisting the very effects that you deliberately caused" (for a recent example think of Ariana Grande and her rant about being unhappy men see her as a sex object... yes of course they do, since that is precisely how you want them to see you (although really these sort of feminist rants are only excuses to attack men qua male)), which is very close to how I understand ideology as well, pathology is essentially an expression of nihilistic consequences. Similar to depression, being pathological or ideological is a side-effect of nihilism residing in a person's consciousness. It doesn't even neee to be intended, since if enough nihilistic experiences and ideas are put into one's memory and mind this will gradually skew consciousness in that direction, confusing it into ressentiment or Christianity for example.

A little nihilism is probably inevitable, at least until the Child appears (surpass the Lion). The world is basically still far too irrational for consciousnesses to form properly and without gross errors. Philosophy is the long slow struggle to fix this problem.

Just about everyone in the west is Christianized, this is our current threshold subjectivity type even if we aren't religious. So we naturally draw the nihilism inward, where it can be worked on to produce more fire of self and motivation (unless we kill it with psychotropics and seeing a the-rapist).



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Empty
PostSubject: Re: Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Icon_minitimeThu Dec 29, 2016 4:47 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Haha, yes psycho-the-rapist, he knows what do do with your depression.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Parodites
Tower
Tower
Parodites

Posts : 790
Join date : 2011-12-11

Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Empty
PostSubject: Re: Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Icon_minitimeThu Dec 29, 2016 8:15 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Judaeo-Christianity discovered the immanence of subjective existence, while the Greeks before them only progressed to a regard of the ontic, mirroring themselves through the logos within the image of the cosmos and vice versa. For the Greeks- and for Nietzsche, all suffering is a dispensation of fatum, and man must mirror this external imposition by the universe within his own internal will through the logos, in order to, in turn, project his internal will on the universe and reach the height of the ontos in amor fati, the love of his fate, of the whole.

But the Jews and Christians, understanding the immanent negativity of human subjectivity, and its basis in a fundamental lack that cannot mirror the cosmos or be mirrored in it, came to a far deeper psychology of man. All modern psychology is based on their insight- into the ego. Freud outlines the Ego as based in a similar lack. The whole Oedipal complex was configured in sexual terms merely due to Freud's conceptual limitation, it is really about the fundamental lack and guilt that the ego is based on:

The real meaning of the Oedipal complex, the fundamental concept in Freud, (object-relations
theory is simply an expansion of Freud in opposition to Lacan) is the following:
the true source of man's psychic power, of his very Will itself, is- guilt. Man's psychic
wound is the source of all his power, of the very dynamic force responsible for
differentiation and individuation. As sexuality is simply one of many expressions of our
power, Freud took it as a distinctively primordial expression of man's existential guilt,
which he could find no other way to configure save by an incestuous fascination with the
mother.

Becker read that primordial guilt as coming from Death-anxiety, I have my own view on it, etc. But the basic Freudian idea is the primordial guilt itself, Oedipal guilt around sexuality was merely Freud's attempt to configure it. But the truly first in history to realize this primordial guilt or lack were the Christians working off what the Jews came to understand, and they configured it with the myth of Christ.

The need to configure that lack as guilt with a schemata or myth is what I call Representation. Lacan rejected this need and developed Reflectivity. For him, the "lack" is merely the lack of a primary object of desire, desire's missing center of gravity. There is nothing to represent, we just narcissistically feed ourselves our own libido by endlessly preventing desire from arriving to its object, breaking all whole objects down into metonyms, objectifying ourselves and everyone into piles of body parts, etc. **

Having realized this, Judaeo-Christianity began to teach that all suffering was merely an outward projection of the fundamental lack, wound, and guilt that the human ego is generated by- a projection of it as impotent fury on the outside and on other people. And the reason why it is projected this way, is because people do not understand the reality of their unconscious, where this wound exists. They do not understand that all psychic power and dynamic energy for individuating the ego comes from this wound.

Thus, all suffering is merely the result of misunderstanding your own desires, complexes, and ego structure. And if people only knew the Truth, they would not suffer. Now The Christians did not have the conceptual ability to express this idea in anything other than religious terms, so they used the figure of the Cross and Christ to try and shock the merely external and phenomenal personality to make people look within, into their immanent subjectivity, in order to realize the guilt that is actually motivating them, which conceals itself through desire and the seductions of power. If they did, they would no longer misunderstand it, they would no longer project it blindly in rage on the outside as power, and thus that projection would not be continually defeated by life as it is, and thus they would not suffer anymore. The Cross is not supposed to make you feel guilty, it is supposed to shock the false constructed personality floating on top of your unconscious, so that you look within and realize the guilt, the all pervading negativity or lack, that is already there, that forms the core of subjectivity in its immanence, and which, while it is not understood, manifests itself as a furious projection of the ego on the outside, as an unrestrained dynamic force individuating the ego in all humans- as the Will to Power.


This immanent subject was necessary to develop man beyond the ontic, and the transcendent subject will be necessary to develop man beyond the immanent. That new subjectivity does not exist. Nobody has overcome Judaeo-Christianity yet. Nietzsche in many ways regressed to the ontic, he... became a Greek again. He escaped the Judaeo-Christian dialectic of spirit, but he did not overcome it.



** Lacan, Nietzsche, atheism, the whole modern complex of social forces seemingly, [feminism is for example neither an attack on men or a defense of women, it is a concealed deconstruction of the Oedipal complex and various other potential configurations of the representative function, and therefor an attack on the idea of immanence, psychic guilt,etc. As is communism and Marxism.] is eroding the fundamental ideas about the immanence of subjectivity which are necessary in furthering man's self-understanding. On this psychological front, I have advanced my own psychology, which takes into account both Freud and Lacan, to the purpose of rescuing the idea of immanence and of representation for our hyper-modernity. Those ideas are necessary to advance beyond the immanence of Judaeo-Christianity. IE, this text summarizes my defense of representation and the mother standing in as a metaphor for a primary object in the Oedipal entanglement, but not through the configurations of Freudian incestuous guilt:



Representation is related to the role of the metaphorical function, by which the mother
comes to stand for something else in the psychic entanglement of the child, that is, a
whole object in an Oedipal complex: Lacan rejects this and the whole representative
operation of love, in order to replace the Oedipal complex with an irresolvable process of
continuous substitution and postponement of desire, the metonymic operation.
Reflectivity is related to this metonymic function in Lacan, the closed circuit of
continuous substitutions, one part for the part of another, through which no complete
object is ever formed upon which desire could arrive, and through which the mechanics
of fluids never achieves the solidity of representation. Thus, for Lacan, the mother cannot
serve the foundation of a functional metaphor or representation, instead she is actually a
nonobject, a semiotic negativity, through whose abruption the anti-oedipus prevents the
stabilization of a true ego or unitary subject: the symbolic gaps in this merely reflective-ego
prevent a whole body from ever forming on the basis of a desire for a whole object,
and erogeneity just amounts to a splitting up of the body into random zones without any
primary differentiation, just an endless substitution of one partial object for another, or
metonymy, a closed circuit that spins around and around and can only, in the end, take us
back to where we started, the collapse of the phallic metonym into reflectivity, the de-erection
of the partial, fictive self, the self which can never become whole, for it wants
only a part; the collapse of desire itself, into need, or lack.

In our current presentation, however, representation or the metaphor stabilizes reflectivity or the metonym, and vice
versa. The mother becomes a representation, not by coming to stand in for another mere
object in the child's psychic entanglement- that is, for another empty object, as Lacan
reads Freud as indicating, but rather, when the infant attaches positive excitations in the
pre-oedipal stage to her, in the state of expansive oblation, so that she inaugurates the
function of the metaphor by projecting the drives discovered in the infantile metonymy
into the domain of signification; the mother becomes in this way a symbol for the era of
infantile omnipotence, for refuge, a protective shield, in which the ego hides itself from
the external world when its oblation is thwarted by trauma, so that it can continue to
safely develop through the reversal of the infantile progression in the next progression of
ego-formation, that of the child, when the traumatic register of the real is made, and this
idealization of maternal refuge is shattered- the function of the metaphor destabilized. In
turn the metonymic, or reflectivity, appears again, with the final adolescent progression,
in a closed, postponed libidinal circuit which negotiates the jouissance of the child's
descent in Holderlinian joy into tragedy and abandonment, and partitions the memory of
the lost refuge in the mother so as to form the object of the secondary representation- the
"secondary object" which is the erotic fixation in another female, which is metaphoricity
itself, the symbol of a symbol: as the primary object or mother projects the infant's pre-oedipal
excitations into symbolic space, representing safety and refuge, so the secondary
object closes off that space by projecting into it the guilt of abandonment following the
internalization of loss after that idealization is shattered, in order to represent a fantasy of
completion and integrity capable of opposing, of going beyond in Freud's language, the
reality-principle or traumatic decoupling of subject and object. The metonymy, the
shattering of subject and object as results from the traumatic dissolution of the
idealization of the mother as refuge, allows reflectivity to bring the ego toward this
fantasy of integrity and completion, that is, the beloved, without ever completely arriving
to it, without entirely de-subjectivizing need or lack, and also to pull the ego away from
that fantasy, without fully leaving it behind, without entirely de-objectifying desire. Love
is just this: love is the lack through which lack can never be made the subject of an object
to merely suffer and need- thus the lack that forces us to become whole and desire; love is
the excess through which excess can never be made the object for a subject to merely
hold and want- thus the whole that forces us to lack, to become incomplete and to need. It
is for that reason that only love is capable of holding masculinity and femininity together
without dissolving their identities. All in all: Freud focused too extensively on the
metaphoric operation, or representation, while Lacan committed the same error with the
metonymic function, or reflectivity. There exists a third category yet unexplored, beyond
metaphor and metonym, beyond symbol and sign, namely the sign-symbol of
Romanticism or the tautegory, which represents the very tension or incomplete process
which gives rise to it, as representation and reflection here give rise to the liminal
threshold, love, through which they cross one another, out of which the male creates the
female through himself and the female creates the male through herself.


And to address depression and mental suffering in general on the basis of these ideas, I wrote elsewhere:


Normally the idealization of the mother breaks down in the later stages of childhood and
reflective guilt initiates the formation of the mature ego throughout adolescence, but if it
does not properly happen that way, that is, if the life-affirming impulses are not attached
to her due to some kind of trauma or the idealization is not appropriately deflated, then
the basic sense of loss never becomes differentiated in Milner's language, so that there is
nothing to prompt the existential "search for the self" out of abandonment; such a person
is driven to look instead, desperately and often fatally, for some object in the external, for
some object in the world in which to symbolize their very reflectivity and differentiate
their guilt-object from their secondary-object or fixation, for their desire to become
nothing- their thanatos or fundamental psychic wound, cannot be recognized and
transformed into eros, as it is in the healthy individual, so as to generate, through the
Oedipal complex, a will capable of discharging the narcissistic reservoir, (roughly
equivalent to the schizoid defense before formation of the depressive position in Klein)
until they attach it to something neurotically interpreted as offending in the outside world,
a perceived threat often found in the mother, who, insofar as they admit some
consciousness of the desire to destroy her to themselves- often as a fear of their own
secret malice toward her before genuine guilt, (equivalent to Klein's paranoiac positioning
between schizoidal separation from the world and depressive submission to it) allows for
guilt to finally stabilize an, albeit stunted, primary narcissitic fantasy and motive force for
the personality, that is, a project, however compromised, for self-discovery, which could
be compared with the Lacanian sinthome following the reconstuction of a transitional ego
beyond abjection, which really means here: after the total dissolution of the functioning
ego into reflective guilt. The resultant destabilized ego will either be incredibly
vulnerable to excitation, suffering emotional states of incredible intensity, and thus
inclined to secrecy and inactivity, or insensate and inclined to hyper-activity, that is,
either schizoidal or psychopathic.

---


So I am not in "agreement" with either Judaeo-Christianity or Nietzsche and atheism, or with either Freud or Lacan, or with either Marxism or Capitalism. I have a problem and a confirmation with each of them. Each is a symptom of the other to me. I'm only in agreement with my own philosophy and psychology. My philosophy of truth allows me this liberty, as I file everything away into different truth domains. Nietzsche, along with the Greeks, speaks from the ontic episteme. Christianity from the immanent, etc.



___________
ΑΝΤΗΡΟΠΑΡΙΟΝ,
in formis perisseia mutilata in omnia perisarkos mutilatum;
omniformis protosseia immutilatum in protosarkos immutilata.

[ The Ecstasies of Zosimos, Tablet
the First.]

BTHYS TOU ANAHAT KHYA-PANDEMAI.


-- Hermaedion, in: the Liber Endumiaskia.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Sisyphus
Path
Path


Posts : 1647
Join date : 2016-08-06
Location : Florida

Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Empty
PostSubject: Re: Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Icon_minitimeThu Dec 29, 2016 12:08 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Capable wrote:
But "decreasing suffering" is part of why N condemns these systems as nihilistic. They seek to minimize reality contact where that contact is painful even if truthful; I don't know if Taoists run from pain and discomfort but I know Christians do, and it seems to me that so do Buddhists (monastic ascetics notwithstanding). N also writes somewhere about asceticism and stoicism also being suspect and not that great.

Lao Tzu doesn't even speak to the subject. Chuang Tzu does but basically what he says is that we should acknowledge "what is".
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Empty
PostSubject: Re: Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Icon_minitimeFri Dec 30, 2016 5:08 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
S - People tend to confuse India and China a lot. The idea that Taosim has to do with rejecting reality, instead of embedding oneself in ones physiology, must be blamed on the new age hippies who thought everything where you stretch your muscles and reflect on your thinking occasionally is headed for the afterlife. Where in fact, none of it is.

As I said, belief in and will to absolution in afterlife only lived among the Untouchables, the beggards, of India, as well as in the rich of California. Well, and the monotheists. About which:

Parodites wrote:
"Having realized this, Judaeo-Christianity began to teach that all suffering was merely an outward projection of the fundamental lack, wound, and guilt that the human ego is generated by- a projection of it as impotent fury on the outside and on other people. And the reason why it is projected this way, is because people do not understand the reality of their unconscious, where this wound exists. They do not understand that all psychic power and dynamic energy for individuating the ego comes from this wound."

Even regardless of whether I agree with this, as a basis for method, this is about the most potentiating psychoanalytic structure Ive seen.

Factual truth pales in comparison to true method. A method is 'objective', like a hammer, it applies itself to a fabric and then we'll see how the fabric responds. It is confident enough that it will always have its effect where there is value that meets it.

Method <=> Value



Christianity, in this definition, seeks the use the method of justification to transform the physiology of lack/resentment in a happy prospecting on the future. One may call it a collective compulsive neurosis banking on discomfort, aimed by genius at, well, more genius, depth, being.

Taosim in this definition, seeks to use the method of calming the nervous system, to transform the physiology of lack/resentment in a happy awareness of the present. This can lead to nothing very much removed from the departure point - it is a loosening of the bowstrings/wills tension.

Christianity is the phenomenal tension of the slave-will on the endless road of mastering itself.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Sisyphus
Path
Path


Posts : 1647
Join date : 2016-08-06
Location : Florida

Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Empty
PostSubject: Re: Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Icon_minitimeFri Dec 30, 2016 8:03 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Fixed Cross wrote:
S - People tend to confuse India and China a lot. The idea that Taosim has to do with rejecting reality, instead of embedding oneself in ones physiology, must be blamed on the new age hippies who thought everything where you stretch your muscles and reflect on your thinking occasionally is headed for the afterlife. Where in fact, none of it is.

Exactly. The Chinese accepted the Buddhist Religion because they had no religion. But that is the only connection. Chinese culture, including Taoism, was unchanged for a few hundred years until the Taoists wanted to make Taoism a religion. At that time it was ordered that the structure of the Taoist religion must be similar to the well established Buddhist religion at that time.

New Age folks get the Eastern religions all mixed up but that is mostly the fault of the writers who really know very little of what they are writing about.

I had some good fights with the Buddhists when I first joined the forum because they were dominating all philosophical discussions and grossly misrepresenting Taoism. The Buddhists now have their own sub-forum so that they can talk about Buddhism all they want without interfering with the Philosophical Taoist discussions. And yes, Philosophical Taoism is very different from the Buddhist Religion.

Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Parodites
Tower
Tower
Parodites

Posts : 790
Join date : 2011-12-11

Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Empty
PostSubject: Re: Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Icon_minitimeFri Dec 30, 2016 3:29 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Fixed Cross wrote:
S - People tend to confuse India and China a lot. The idea that Taosim has to do with rejecting reality, instead of embedding oneself in ones physiology, must be blamed on the new age hippies who thought everything where you stretch your muscles and reflect on your thinking occasionally is headed for the afterlife. Where in fact, none of it is.

As I said, belief in and will to absolution in afterlife only lived among the Untouchables, the beggards, of India, as well as in the rich of California. Well, and the monotheists. About which:

Parodites wrote:
"Having realized this, Judaeo-Christianity began to teach that all suffering was merely an outward projection of the fundamental lack, wound, and guilt that the human ego is generated by- a projection of it as impotent fury on the outside and on other people. And the reason why it is projected this way, is because people do not understand the reality of their unconscious, where this wound exists. They do not understand that all psychic power and dynamic energy for individuating the ego comes from this wound."

Even regardless of whether I agree with this, as a basis for method, this is about the most potentiating psychoanalytic structure Ive seen.

Factual truth pales in comparison to true method. A method is 'objective', like a hammer, it applies itself to a fabric and then we'll see how the fabric responds. It is confident enough that it will always have its effect where there is value that meets it.

Method <=> Value



Christianity, in this definition, seeks the use the method of justification to transform the physiology of lack/resentment in a happy prospecting on the future. One may call it a collective compulsive neurosis banking on discomfort, aimed by genius at, well, more genius, depth, being.

Taosim in this definition, seeks to use the method of calming the nervous system, to transform the physiology of lack/resentment in a happy awareness of the present. This can lead to nothing very much removed from the departure point - it is a loosening of the bowstrings/wills tension.

Christianity is the phenomenal tension of the slave-will on the endless road of mastering itself.


That wound, rather it is configured by the image of the Cross in Christianity, Oedipal sexual guilt in Freud, etc. is the price paid for by civilization, namely the fall from innocence into sin, into knowledge- into death. I take it as factually existing, though it can be overcome, by moving beyond a view of man's immanent subjectivity to a psycho-philosophy of the transcendental subject. Such a philosophy does not presently exist. Rather than achieving that, Nietzsche re-discovered what the Greeks were in my view- and in his view, namely by regressing to the ontic subject and becoming a Greek. He was a necessary step backward, so that man could move forward eventually.



___________
ΑΝΤΗΡΟΠΑΡΙΟΝ,
in formis perisseia mutilata in omnia perisarkos mutilatum;
omniformis protosseia immutilatum in protosarkos immutilata.

[ The Ecstasies of Zosimos, Tablet
the First.]

BTHYS TOU ANAHAT KHYA-PANDEMAI.


-- Hermaedion, in: the Liber Endumiaskia.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Empty
PostSubject: Re: Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Icon_minitimeMon Jan 02, 2017 2:05 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Parodites wrote:
Normally the idealization of the mother breaks down in the later stages of childhood and
reflective guilt initiates the formation of the mature ego throughout adolescence, but if it
does not properly happen that way, that is, if the life-affirming impulses are not attached
to her due to some kind of trauma or the idealization is not appropriately deflated, then
the basic sense of loss never becomes differentiated in Milner's language, so that there is
nothing to prompt the existential "search for the self" out of abandonment; such a person
is driven to look instead, desperately and often fatally, for some object in the external, for
some object in the world in which to symbolize their very reflectivity and differentiate
their guilt-object from their secondary-object or fixation, for their desire to become
nothing- their thanatos or fundamental psychic wound, cannot be recognized and
transformed into eros, as it is in the healthy individual, so as to generate, through the
Oedipal complex, a will capable of discharging the narcissistic reservoir, (roughly
equivalent to the schizoid defense before formation of the depressive position in Klein)
until they attach it to something neurotically interpreted as offending in the outside world,
a perceived threat often found in the mother, who, insofar as they admit some
consciousness of the desire to destroy her to themselves- often as a fear of their own
secret malice toward her before genuine guilt, (equivalent to Klein's paranoiac positioning
between schizoidal separation from the world and depressive submission to it) allows for
guilt to finally stabilize an, albeit stunted, primary narcissitic fantasy and motive force for
the personality, that is, a project, however compromised, for self-discovery, which could
be compared with the Lacanian sinthome following the reconstuction of a transitional ego
beyond abjection, which really means here: after the total dissolution of the functioning
ego into reflective guilt. The resultant destabilized ego will either be incredibly
vulnerable to excitation, suffering emotional states of incredible intensity, and thus
inclined to secrecy and inactivity, or insensate and inclined to hyper-activity, that is,
either schizoidal or psychopathic.

I can confirm that this is correct, as some of my clients display this schizoid separation and paranoia just as you describe, under a neurotically interpreted symbolic orientation to the outside world in which the narcissistic reservoir is able to (somewhat and with structural distortions) discharge itself, if I am correct in understanding you. The image of the mother, as you say, is indeed useful here for these people. And as you say, these people are indeed very sensitive to excitation and experience an intensity of emotions, and become diagnosed with Schizoaffective and Bipolar Disorder as a result... and are inclined to secrecy and inactivity, as you say.

Another interesting one is Borderline Personality, this is where a person experiences extreme emotional instability and the emotions swing from moment to moment into extreme differences. The tiniest stimuli, like a single thought or the memory of something mundane from years ago, can trigger the reversal of the entire emotional machinery from happiness into despair, and vice versa. This condition is supposedly caused by the parents invalidating the emotions of the child, combined with an authoritarian military-like household where the child always knows what is expected and what will not be tolerated, and the child always experiences the conflicting pressure of knowing this and being forced to conform to it... because such rules are almost never spoken out loud but are left to be merely inferred. The child learns to cut down and suppress their own emotional reactions to certain things, and to fake emotions to other things, until this stabilizes as their subjective template for how feelings work for them. They become very manipulative, even when they don't want to, even to themselves; no emotion is "just an emotion", it always also includes a little kernel of extra self-awareness, the knowledge of the emotion and what caused it and why, which extra awareness was required in childhood to make sure the child was adhering to the rules of the household in such a way that didn't evoke punishment but also didn't make the parents realize the child was "acting" for their benefit.

So these people with borderline personality, as it is called, are treated with something called DBT, dialectical behavioral therapy. It aims to instantiate three dialectics of the individual, tensions they are subject to, and bring these into contrast with each other to provoke resolution. But more interestingly to me, I think these people are proto-philosophers: their hyper-awareness of their own emotional states extends not only to the emotion itself but to its how and why and where and what-if, they are extreme fantasizers and learn the subtlest routes in and out of their own emotional states, all tied into meaningful memories or experiences... for most people this causes tremendous suffering from which they cannot escape, because they lack the one thing that could teach them about themselves and how to control these extremes within them, namely they lack philosophy. "DBT" is designed to act like philosophy, to stimulate something like a philosophical project for people and therapists who are not philosophers and have basically no inclination in that direction.

Although perhaps every person with borderline personality disorder would be naturally inclined to philosophy, simply out of personal desperation to learn how to control what has happened to them.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Parodites
Tower
Tower
Parodites

Posts : 790
Join date : 2011-12-11

Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Empty
PostSubject: Re: Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Depression is the spiritual consequence of nihilism Icon_minitimeTue Jan 03, 2017 12:44 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Such personalty disorders all originate in a dysfunction of the narcissistic reservoir, either in terms of externalization or internalization, using categories I brought up some time ago and am still working out. In the terms of the text I posted, externalization and the external personality are constructed by the metaphoric function- representation, while internalization and the internal personality are constructed by the reflective function. I had also used the category of integration, which in the text I signify by the autopoiesis of the sign-symbol.

The unintegrated personality cannot defend the ego from stimuli: both positive and negative reinforcement, both positive and negative stimuli, will further compromise its integrity- such a personality will bury itself in the secrecy of internalization in desperation for an adequate ego-defense, whose neurotic manifestation is paranoia, for the reflective function will become disconnected from the symbolic construction and deteriorate into a never ending reflective circle devoid of any contact with its representable object, or it will bury itself in the fury of externalization, whereby the symbolic construction of the metaphoric function will eventually become disconnected from reality, giving the neurotic manifestation of psychopathy and delusion, hyper-inflating the behavior and response of the person.

If I were to advance a theory of treatment, I would focus on this. Without re-establishing the autopoiesis and integrity of the ego-fortification, any resolution of what are in my view two basic personalities will never hold.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Arch-Native Philosophy - Sumerian Bill and Ted - The Magical Tree of Life Academy
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10533
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Sat May 30, 2020 11:49 pm

Free Will View previous topic View next topic Go down
Author Message
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Free Will Empty
PostSubject: Free Will Free Will Icon_minitimeFri Nov 02, 2012 12:40 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
To get the obvious out of the way - I do not argue for the existence of will, "free" or not, separate of causality. To me the ontological theorizing of self-valuing commands that all causality is seen as emerging from the logic of self-valuing, and that all constitutive grounds of self-valuings are ultimately reducible to the principle of self-valuing, as operative on the smallest scale; as 'being sets itself against nothing' - as it emerges, not in a Big Bang but gradually, from this first principle mechanism. So I see self-valuing as the first type of cause, the most fundamental cause that is possible to be conceived of.

But the implications of my view on free will are as follows. As self-valuing is the principle cause to all cosmic movements, and the forces between the most basic (principal) self-valuings and between and within the non-basic ones constitute multi-layered clockwork-causality, there is a dialectic between self-valuing causation and 'objective' causation. Most of this is captured in the objective frame, but, the logic of operation that a self-valuing is constitutive of, is not accessible from any other view than the value ontological view. In other words, we can not understand all the causal relations within a self-valuing otherwise than as constituting a self-valuing. Value ontology gives us a logos to interpret the causality within a system as a whole. Self-valuing logic is basically the key to intra-systemic causality, wherein 'system' is not identified as the whole of the universe but as systems we can identify as separate from 'the whole' if there is such a thing, in any case, of 'the rest of the universe', i.e. systems that we can identify as systems, with an operational logic and measure, at all.

This reflects on the universe and free will as follows: within the universe, there are smaller and greater self-valuing-systems, which operate onto each other, in such a way that they sustain each other or one destroys, compromises and/or (in part) absorbs the other. As self-valuing is the root-cause and the primal logic of this behavior (the will to power), and causality itself is subservient to there being a root-cause, a root-consistency (see my consistency post of a year ago), and since 'will' or 'freedom' are only the measure in which a system is able to operate on it's self-valuing logic compared to the degree to which it is determined by encroaching systems, 'free will' simply means to me 'determining power'. This does not mean that there is any kind of freedom from causality at all, because self-valuing is a hard causality. But it is significant nevertheless since our consciousness is nothing but a high degree of self-valuing. Consciousness is self-valuing, which means that consciousness is, when it is focused, concentrated, a fundamental cause. As fundamental as the cause of the universe.

The trick here is of course that we can not determine our consciousness - our consciousness can not operate on our consciousness as if from outside - everything we do to focus our consciousness and to increase and strengthen it, is derived directly, causally, necessarily, from the already-operative causality from which our subjective being emerges, which includes all the forces that work on, threaten and fortify our self-sustaining logic.

Many people have no 'free' or primordial will whatsoever as they are only conscious in a social sense, plus the instinctive sense of pain and pleasure. But as soon as a human finds a logos that allows him to direct his course based on his own conscious devices, which means, as soon as he is able to discern values that apply only to him privately, he has established a causal-chord connecting his actions (reactions) directly to the logical (not temporal) cause of his being as a structural coherence; self-valuing.

When a human has attained this degree of consciousness, he is unstoppable in whatever action he takes, even by (apparently) logical impossibility of his aims. Napoleon is a strong example of such a being, so is Nietzsche or Mozart. People who defy 'reality' are drive by this 'free will' - their will being free from absolute external conditioning. Even the slightest modicum of self-determining consciousness is experienced as an ocean of freedom. But, and here is the crux - it is a freedom that compels one to a necessity - to a fate. This is the very highest form of self-valuing in humans - the connection a priori to what they will amount to - to their penultimate experience and value. All other degrees of self-valuing (pleasure, comfort, power) are made inferior and can be discarded, once the supreme self-valuing of ones role as an individual, subjective cause, determining the objective cosmos is sensed. Napoleon:

" I feel myself driven towards an end that I do not know. As soon as I have reached it, as soon as I shall become unnecessary, an atom will suffice to shatter me. Until then, all the forces of mankind can do nothing to stop me. "

" All my life I have sacrificed everything - comfort, self-interest, happiness - to my destiny.
I felt that I could abandon myself to the most brilliant dreams. "

Self-valuing requires a context. The first context can be said to be 'nothingness'. Napoleons context was the state of France, the European forces threatening to destroy France, the absence of leadership and organization (self-valuing) in post revolutionary France. In this context he was able to come to a supreme consciousness of his self-valuing, a supreme manifestation of his structural potential - an immortal destiny. So there are two logics operating on each other: reflective causality (objective, linear, inter-systemic) and deflective causality (subjective, circular, intra-systemic).

As concerns the predictive possibilities that the systemic universe provides, I agree that there are innumerable possibilities of the universe projecting itself on itself - and I would say that a proper human predictor would function as somewhat the opposite of Napoleon - someone whose self-valuing is entirely latent on the level of consciousness/will, someone whose consciousness is structurally determined by the extra-systemic forces, who reflects a larger system of which he is part in the placid waters of a very fine mind. Who is to the greatest possible measure a function of the world he is born in - versus the Napoleonic type, whose subjectivity, set in a relative power/causal vacuum, gives birth to a new world order.







___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Abstract
Oracle
Oracle
Abstract

Posts : 142
Join date : 2011-11-15
Age : 32
Location : The Moon

Free Will Empty
PostSubject: Re: Free Will Free Will Icon_minitimeTue Nov 13, 2012 8:30 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
This would seem to indicate that we do not inherently have free will but rather we can obtain free will, through i guess determination...

let me clarify something though its been a while sense dealing with your theory of self-valuing.... how did the first self-valuing occur that effectively named (in the tao te ching meaning of naming)the universe? Or would you propose that there was no first that self valuing is like the god nature of the universe that has always existed?



___________
"There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance." -Socrates
"Nature herself has imprinted on the minds of all the idea of God." -Cicero
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain an idea without necessarily believing it." -Aristotle
"I have gained this by philosophy: that I do without being commanded what others do only from fear of the law." -Aristotle
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Free Will Empty
PostSubject: Re: Free Will Free Will Icon_minitimeSun Nov 18, 2012 2:30 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Abstract wrote:
This would seem to indicate that we do not inherently have free will but rather we can obtain free will, through i guess determination...
Yes. Freedom, which is never absolute, is won by force.

Quote :
let me clarify something though its been a while sense dealing with your theory of self-valuing.... how did the first self-valuing occur that effectively named (in the tao te ching meaning of naming)the universe? Or would you propose that there was no first that self valuing is like the god nature of the universe that has always existed?
I created some thoughts on that, see below. But it's not crucial or even important to the logic itself. I say with certainty that what did in the end manage to exist, "come from nothing" logically (stand logically against the concept of nothing) and continue to exist, is self-valuing.


_____________________


- Something must exist because "nothing" excludes the active impossibility of something.

- Self-valuing is not merely descriptive of entities that can be rationally declared to exist, but it is also implied by the nature of that all that can be observed and declared to exist, including 'force' or affectance - potential to change.

- The smallest self-valuing is able only to value in terms of itself negatively. It's "valuing" is a deflection of which it is not.

- As two different self-valuings deflect nothingness, two things are created:
• Space, (the mutually deflected, mutual nothingess, rudimentary 'value')
• affectance - deflecting of positive not-selves.

-In the case of affectance, self-valuings value each other negatively in terms of their structural nature as deflectors, but they do behave similarly, and are thus perform similar actions. All deflect both nothingness, and each other.

- What comes to exist like this is any geometrical form. The simplest form to imagine is the circle: all self-valuings deflect each other "to the side", while simultaneously deflecting nothingess inward and outward. "Affectance fields" are circular, with the force distributed in the 'border'. Inward it is 'weak'.

- Such organizations of nothingness-deflectings may emerge so as the come into contact with each other. Due to the quantity of affect of such organizations, the greater things that come into each others proximity are, the more different they are from each other, and stronger they are deflected. But in some cases, the deflected negative existence of a 'sphere of affect' is so great that smaller spheres are drawn to deflect it as well, and 'join the circle', the affect-field. In that case, the affect field, a 'form', grows and is able to absorb even greater 'others'.

- The deflection of nothingness is the first priority. In the image of the deflection imprinted on itself, the self-valuing recognizes itself. This creates the terms of it's self-valuing' - it's standard of value.

- Such a standard can be recognized by other entities, and deflected (negatively valued) as well.

- Two co-deflecting self-valuings "come to terms", they positively value each other in terms of their own self-valuing (their deflecting nothingess), but as negative. They repel each other while positively 'recognizing' the object of negative valuation.

- This is why when we value in terms of our self-valuing; when we value, we 'push' - the greater the 'fight', the greater the resistance to nothingness. We seek to overpower, but first and foremost we seek to engage, that whichever 'speaks to us', is also inevitably that which has the power to absorb us.

- Survival as a form depends on capacity to translate that which is appropriated in the circle of affect in terms of the pre-existing form. "Selective forms" remain, other forms are respectively dissolved or transformed into selective forms. Sometimes selective forms are overpowered by far greater, but far less selective forms.

- The more selective a form is in what it can 'use' in terms of deflecting nothingness, the more capable it is to resist change.

- The more selective a form is, the more specific it's terms by which it values, and the more specific it's self-valuing.

- Man is a supremely selective form. The more selective man is, the more we can speak of a 'self'.

- Becoming conscious of being as self-valuing means: establishing a finalized Being. It means to have defeated the chance of being transformed by the very nature of being (deflecting non-being) itself - "imprinting being on becoming".

- From this perspective, morality is no longer a matter of adopting custom to ensure survival but risking unseen compromise of structural integrity, but of either inventing means to expand ones realm of influence (to attempt to transform the world according to ones self-value, to be able to value it more), or, where conditions allow it, simply maintaining oneself.

- Buddha realized the first nature of being - deflecting non being - nirvana as "being nor non-being", means "affect nor non being". It is however, being in the sense of deflection ("transcendental clarity"). It does not however contain the power to defend itself or resist the force of other structures from incorporating it. Kung fu has arisen to remain transcendently self-valuing and resist that which is to be valued as negative. Yoga is the simple resisting of resistance - dissolving the circle of affect (society, the roles one has to play to 'defend the family/country' etc) in order to 'face the void alone'. But it is still relatively affective, since the human body doesn't dissolve as long as all of it's atoms and subatomic instances affect independently 'attain nirvana'.

- "Spiritualized "martial" art but also dance is therefore more 'peaceful' toward the fact of existence, and more effective in maintaining structural integrity from which to deflect the void.

- All temples and religious orders represent spiritualized martial art, selectively organized deflection of the void.







___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Free Will Empty
PostSubject: Re: Free Will Free Will Icon_minitimeTue Apr 30, 2013 10:23 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I believe you over-reach in your understanding of the destructiveness of opression.

- Opression is a form, an organizational value that also happens to be able to hide much that it has no control over, like a pidgeon stretching out its feathers to appear to take more formal (as in geometrical form, like you describe) space, to deflect more nothingness and incorporate more self-valuing than it could be subjectively measured to. To over come opression often means to pat it lightly (no need to fuck up its plumage).

I also believe opression to be primarily a defense mechanism, used to scare both friends and enemies into belicose force re-direction. However, like all genetic memory, what is fine-tuned and forged to do one thing is often transformed into some greater evolutionary affectance, or many smaller ones, or more complex relationships. Quantum physics will be a silly parlor trick 1000 years from now, yet it may appear today to take up more space than is recovarable for other purposes. Its form requires this hiding, it is almost just a kind of consequence that later transforms itself into cause. There is actual, true power to a peacock's tail, and yet...
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Silenus

Silenus

Posts : 7
Join date : 2012-07-21
Age : 54
Location : Candyland

Free Will Empty
PostSubject: Re: Free Will Free Will Icon_minitimeWed May 15, 2013 4:30 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
What, the hell, is "self-valuing"?

Is it another way of saying self-conscious?

Value judgments are based on comparisons.
This also applies to self-consciousnesses, as it is preceded by consciousnesses. Consciousness of other, is returned as a reflection, as a consciousness of self, in relation to the other - as a negation of it.

"I am that which is not the other"

To value yourself you must have a standard. The standard is either a human construct (wealth, status) or it is a product of nature (beauty, symmetry, dominance).

Clarify.



___________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail http://calicantsar.blogspot.ca/ https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003741417025
screw-tin-eyes

screw-tin-eyes

Posts : 9
Join date : 2017-01-12

Free Will Empty
PostSubject: Re: Free Will Free Will Icon_minitimeThu Jan 12, 2017 12:46 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Silenus wrote:
What, the hell, is "self-valuing"?

Is it another way of saying self-conscious?

Value judgments are based on comparisons.
This also applies to self-consciousnesses, as it is preceded by consciousnesses. Consciousness of other, is returned as a reflection, as a consciousness of self, in relation to the other - as a negation of it.

"I am that which is not the other"

To value yourself you must have a standard. The standard is either a human construct (wealth, status) or it is a product of nature (beauty, symmetry, dominance).

Clarify.

My question also.

Did you clarify?
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Free Will Empty
PostSubject: Re: Free Will Free Will Icon_minitimeFri Jan 13, 2017 5:20 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
screw-tin-eyes wrote:
Silenus wrote:
What, the hell, is "self-valuing"?

Is it another way of saying self-conscious?

Value judgments are based on comparisons.
This also applies to self-consciousnesses, as it is preceded by consciousnesses. Consciousness of other, is returned as a reflection, as a consciousness of self, in relation to the other - as a negation of it.

"I am that which is not the other"

To value yourself you must have a standard. The standard is either a human construct (wealth, status) or it is a product of nature (beauty, symmetry, dominance).

Clarify.

My question also.

Did you clarify?

I suppose there are three kinds of posts: those that deserve a reply, those that do not deserve a reply, and those that deserve to be deleted.

Let's find out if you can tell the difference. This current post of mine here notwithstanding, of course, and which is more of a courtesy to you.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Sisyphus
Path
Path


Posts : 1647
Join date : 2016-08-06
Location : Florida

Free Will Empty
PostSubject: Re: Free Will Free Will Icon_minitimeFri Jan 13, 2017 11:00 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Just to state my position to the concept of free will: I am a firm holder of the concept.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
screw-tin-eyes

screw-tin-eyes

Posts : 9
Join date : 2017-01-12

Free Will Empty
PostSubject: Re: Free Will Free Will Icon_minitimeFri Jan 13, 2017 12:24 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Capable

I suppose there are three kinds of posts: those that deserve a reply, those that do not deserve a reply, and those that deserve to be deleted.
Let's find out if you can tell the difference. This current post of mine here notwithstanding, of course, and which is more of a courtesy to you.


Oh? You see, I thought philosophy is dedicated to critical thinking and this requires an independent mind, therefore the man/woman (philosopher) who purposely excludes or ignores a person or text, to me does not sound like a person who wants to pursue reasonable discourses. In fact, he sounds very much like a person who is reduced to denial, simply because those that he chooses to ignore have "what it takes".


Fearlessness is also critical in philosophy.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Free Will Empty
PostSubject: Re: Free Will Free Will Icon_minitimeFri Jan 13, 2017 12:29 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Would a philosopher, or anyone else serious, entertain a troll?

Would you?


Quote :
Fearlessness is also critical in philosophy.

Yes, absolutely.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
screw-tin-eyes

screw-tin-eyes

Posts : 9
Join date : 2017-01-12

Free Will Empty
PostSubject: Re: Free Will Free Will Icon_minitimeFri Jan 13, 2017 12:38 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
From condescension to insult.

I will take note.

Would a philosopher, or anyone else serious, entertain a troll?

Who is this troll you speak of?

Is it the original poster?

Is it me?

Is it anyone who asks you for an answer?

Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Free Will Empty
PostSubject: Re: Free Will Free Will Icon_minitimeFri Jan 13, 2017 12:44 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Stop being so 'sensitive', I was not calling you a troll. I was making the point that if a troll tries to talk to you, it would be absurd to entertain it as if it were serious or you had something to gain from the interaction. There are times when deletion of posts is necessary to keep the channels of real communication open.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
screw-tin-eyes

screw-tin-eyes

Posts : 9
Join date : 2017-01-12

Free Will Empty
PostSubject: Re: Free Will Free Will Icon_minitimeFri Jan 13, 2017 12:53 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster

Silenus wrote:
To value yourself you must have a standard. The standard is either a human construct (wealth, status) or it is a product of nature (beauty, symmetry, dominance).

Clarify.


Which one is it?

I would be interested to know.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Free Will Empty
PostSubject: Re: Free Will Free Will Icon_minitimeFri Jan 13, 2017 1:11 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
The standard is yourself. That which you are is the logical basis for how you deal in the interactions that you have.

The standard of a being's valuing itself is itself, its own existence. It is its own standard, which means that in whatever relation or interaction you want to talk about, it sets its own standard in so far as that which it already is is used to determine the measure of success or failure.

What you are determines what you "ought to" be, and what you aren't yet but are capable of being is also a part of what you 'are', since the future unfolds from the present in causal determination. Possibilities comes from necessity. Self-valuing means that whatever a thing is, it "values itself" by setting itself as the standard for interactions. The actual standard will depend on the situation and circumstances. It could be strength, or wealth, or knowledge, or beauty, or any number of other things. That depends on the situation and circumstance at hand, but regardless of whatever the circumstance and situation merit here as a meaningful value-standard, the individual itself holds itself as the measure of that standard, as the originator and terminus of any value thereof.

What is the point of strength, or beauty, or knowledge, or wealth, if this has no translation into ourselves, if it means nothing to us? If that were the case it would be impossible to values these things. And yet, even though they are valuable, they are only valuable because they are valuable to us. Why?

Why is something like strength, or beauty, or knowledge, or wealth valuable to us? Because it enhances us, provides resources material or immaterial that assist our being that which we are, and increase our range of freedoms and possibilities available to us. Beings are built from truths, human beings are built from "ideas". What we hold as valuable is what accords itself to that fact somehow, whether or not we really know it or understand how or why.

Other than all that, I will let Fixed explain the idea, since it is his idea after all.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Free Will Empty
PostSubject: Re: Free Will Free Will Icon_minitimeFri Jan 13, 2017 1:19 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
There is no such thing as a value itself, there are only values to something that is capable of having values. Food is only valuable to a being that needs to eat, and can happen to eat that particular kind of substance. Beauty is of no value to an ant, but high value to a human. A rock cannot value Mozart.

But a rock can value being a rock, in so far as "being a rock" is what a rock already is and is always doing: it holds itself as that which it is, it resists changing what it is. When a force passes through a rock the rock will resist being broken apart by that force, the molecules-in-relation and that constitute the 'rock' will try to maintain their cohesion as structure, and will do so unless the force is adequately strong enough to break that structure apart.

Everything that exists is a kind of structure, and every structure tries to hold itself as what it already is, to self-cohere, to self-value as FC calls it. Living things do that a bit differently and more complexly than non-living things, but everything does it. Existence from moment to moment is not given, it is something that is the result of the actions of beings. They act to keep themselves in existence, to resist and interpret outside forces and interactions in ways that are either beneficial or benign to themselves.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Free Will Empty
PostSubject: Re: Free Will Free Will Icon_minitimeFri Jan 13, 2017 1:28 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
screw-tin-eyes wrote:

Silenus wrote:
To value yourself you must have a standard. The standard is either a human construct (wealth, status) or it is a product of nature (beauty, symmetry, dominance).

Clarify.


Which one is it?

I would be interested to know.

Neither, as far as I can judge. You see, I didn't come up with those sophisticated terms. I dont know that wealth and status are separated categorically from beauty, dominance or symmetry.

Where it regards value ontology, to self-value means to be a standard. Where there is an "I" involved, i.e. an ego, an illusory construct, then this ego can pretty much devalue itself as it likes, but its behavior will still tend force it to be part of the selfvaluing, unless he commits suicide by holding his breath.

Breathing is rather obviously the enacting of the valuing oxygen. Oxygen is not our "self", there is no such thing as a "self", there is self-valuing. Itself-valuing, one might say. I think silhouette came up with that after I taught him the logic.

Anyway, for a human, selfvaluing, when it concerns a life-form, tends to be based on the value exchange we call breath.
We're not isolated. The Self is ones entire life including all that one touches. I dont think that amounts to "The All", that is vanity. It just means the Self extends far beyond what one is aware of or could normally endure. "Know thyself" basically means the same as "nothing in excess". Know how to know, that it is worthy of what you could become. That is one way to interpret it.

All being self-value. All posit their terms. Some are similar, some are repulsive, some are so symmetrically opposite that they become dependent, or were born of the same impulse. All of this is included for us humans, in taste. Smell, as the combination of breath and taste, is thus the most fundamental instrument of valuing.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
screw-tin-eyes

screw-tin-eyes

Posts : 9
Join date : 2017-01-12

Free Will Empty
PostSubject: Re: Free Will Free Will Icon_minitimeFri Jan 13, 2017 3:20 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Capable
The standard of a being's valuing itself is itself, its own existence. It is its own standard, which means that in whatever relation or interaction you want to talk about, it sets its own standard in so far as that which it already is is used to determine the measure of success or failure.


Is standard setting the methodology used to define levels of achievement?

Then there is the elephant in the room.

Oscar Wilde said, “Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation.”

We all have inherent value, why the need to rate ourselves, we should just be ourselves.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Free Will Empty
PostSubject: Re: Free Will Free Will Icon_minitimeFri Jan 13, 2017 4:18 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
The same reason that you can eat an orange but not a nail. "You" are defined as a capacity for consuming what is an orange but not what is a nail. When you negotiate an interaction between oranges or nails this inevitably comes into play.

Being oneself is the mosr difficult thing of all. As Hesse said, No man has ever yet been himself. But we approximate it, and that approximation is indeed somewhat amorphous and vaguely defined. And that is a good thing, it leaves room for change, exploration, growth, and mistakes. Almost all of our knowledge was arrived by accident on our part, and not linearly derived. Also, I don't think that we "rate" ourselves consciously very often, but we.do constantly do this at an unconscious or structural-psychological level.

And yes the basis for that rating can be comparisons to others and absorbing their ideas and standards, which then to an extent become our own, and also to an extent confuse the standards we already have. It's very complex, that is for sure. Most of what you are isn't what you "know", and it is primarily philosophers who test and push back the limit. But of course the limits is always there. And yet even when we are inside that limit, that which we are yet are unaware of it is still determining our values and our standards of value. This is why so much valuing is automatic-unconscious.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Arch-Native Philosophy - Sumerian Bill and Ted - The Magical Tree of Life Academy
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10533
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Sat May 30, 2020 11:49 pm

individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Forgiveness Empty
PostSubject: Forgiveness Forgiveness Icon_minitimeWed Sep 23, 2015 5:30 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
A quote I saw today said, "People need love most when they deserve it least". This is probably true.

Forgiveness being divine, when forgiveness has become a substance and inspirited itself within that nature from which it comes, as system and form, then we have what is called love. Love is a living self-value capable of inwardly cycling excess downward into the void and out of its own being. It occurred to me that forgiveness, not as simply an idea but as a real emotional experience, is probably one of the most significant human creations. The range of powers that are needed to forgive well, is tremendous; the excess that must be dealt with, almost compels philosophy for itself which makes me wonder what it is that ordinary people call forgiveness. Surely that must be something different.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Arcturus Descending
arrow
arrow
Arcturus Descending

Posts : 293
Join date : 2011-12-07
Location : Hovering amidst a battle of Wills

Forgiveness Empty
PostSubject: Re: Forgiveness Forgiveness Icon_minitimeSat Nov 12, 2016 7:16 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Capable wrote:

Quote :
A quote I saw today said, "People need love most when they deserve it least". This is probably true.

That might be based on christian thinking and feeling and on sentimentality. But I don't think that it is necessarily true. That would depend on the individual and the circumstances.
Is it possible that giving love in these moments might be the worst that can happen to the person?
Maybe the person who we feel deserves love the most because of our misplaced compassion is the same one who feels he/she has the right to be loved above all others, their narcissism?
In what way does love serve that one?




Quote :
Forgiveness being divine
,

Why is it divine? Because to err is human and to forgive is divine?
In christian mythology, Christ uttered the words from the cross? "Father, forgive them for they know not what they do."
Let's not forget that it was (supposedly) the flesh and blood human hanging from the cross who also said that.
Forgiveness, real forgiveness, is a human choice.




Quote :
when forgiveness has become a substance and inspirited itself within that nature from which it comes, as system and form, then we have what is called love.


What substance and what nature are you speaking about? I look on forgiveness as an ongoing human process which eventually comes to fruition - - or not --like the process of grief in a way.
But there are people who do not have to go through this process. They just the capacity to let go and to let be. This is more of a psychological leaning I think than a divine one.
The ancient gods were not such forgiving entities, were they?

Quote :
Love is a living self-value capable of inwardly cycling excess downward into the void and out of its own being
.

I don't understand this.




Quote :
It occurred to me that forgiveness, not as simply an idea but as a real emotional experience, is probably one of the most significant human creations.

It is an emotional experience and as such it is also a process. Just like grief is...denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance. We may experience all of these, I believe, on the road to forgiveness. We do also bargain with ourselves and eventually have to give up a part of ourselves in order to forgive.

How is it a significant human creation? Do you mean human evolution? I see it as the instinct for the human species' survival - whether physically or mentally/emotionally. So, yes, I agree with you here.
That instinct has evolved into compassion and forgiveness. It's quite logical in a sense because in our forgiving, we are able to move on and experience living more fully and with joy.




Quote :
The range of powers that are needed to forgive well, is tremendous
;

...like clarity, inner strength, self-honesty, seeing the whole landscape of the situation and the other person and observing it non-judgmentally though that is difficult.
For some, that power is called adhering to god's will and loving god's creations but loving god's creations is not so cut and dry.

Quote :
the excess that must be dealt with, almost compels philosophy for itself which makes me wonder what it is that ordinary people call forgiveness. Surely that must be something different.

That would depend on the individual. Some people feel they have forgiven but deep inside those waters still rage.
I think that the christian call to forgiveness and also our subjective thinking that it is the "right" thing to do at times leads to a lot of suppression and repression.

But is always forgiving the most loving thing to do?



___________
Each of our lives is a part of the lengthy process of the universe gradually waking up and becoming aware of itself.


Philosophy is the childhood of the intellect, and a culture that tries to skip it will never grow up."


"If I thought that everything I did was determined by my circumstancse and my psychological condition, I would feel trapped."

Thomas Nagel
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Forgiveness Empty
PostSubject: Re: Forgiveness Forgiveness Icon_minitimeSat Nov 12, 2016 7:30 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Ive always been known to be excessively forgiving. I simply cant manage to hold a grudge. But this is only within the realm of forgiveable trespasses; I do not believe childrape can or should be forgiven. I think it should be punished very severely so as to compromise the life of the rapist irreparably. As it makes no sense to forgive a crime committed against someone who is ruined by it. Unless that person comes to forgiveness somehow - but to forgive a humbled rapist is easier than to forgive a proud one.

In the case of people who have violated my trust in the recent years, of which there have been quite a number, forgiveness is very attainable, as all they need to do is repent, and apologize sincerely. Then forgiveness will come naturally.

A Clinton can not be forgiven, an Obama can. The former acted in full knowledge and understanding of what she destroyed, the latter, I believe, did not. I do think of Obama as having a soul. Thats basically it, a person with a soul can be forgiven.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Arcturus Descending
arrow
arrow
Arcturus Descending

Posts : 293
Join date : 2011-12-07
Location : Hovering amidst a battle of Wills

Forgiveness Empty
PostSubject: Re: Forgiveness Forgiveness Icon_minitimeSat Nov 12, 2016 8:39 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Fixed Cross,


Quote :
Ive always been known to be excessively forgiving. I simply cant manage to hold a grudge. But this is only within the realm of forgiveable trespasses;

Maybe some of those times, there really wasn't a whole lot of meaning in holding on? What I mean is maybe some of those times was just our own petty ego experiencing something which wasn't there? We do that.




Quote :
I do not believe childrape can or should be forgiven.


As a Mom I agree with you. But maybe we need a different word there, FC.
The person who will or will not forgive is the person who is wronged and that can extend to others who loves that person.
But maybe I'm wrong here. We all feel rage and pain over a child being raped.

The law doesn't forgive even though it eventually "let's go" but it also never forgets.




Quote :
I think it should be punished very severely so as to compromise the life of the rapist irreparably. As it makes no sense to forgive a crime committed against someone who is ruined by it. Unless that person comes to forgiveness somehow - but to forgive a humbled rapist is easier than to forgive a proud one.

Unfortunately, it doesn't usually compromise the life of the rapist irreparably. He gets out and rapes again.
It's not for me to forgive a humbled rapist but one who does feel remorse and wants help can be understood better, especially if he was raped as a child.

I think that one of the main things that engenders forgiveness is the realization that the other party does feel remorse, knows/understands what the other felt, and the words "I am sorry" are spoken.
To be expected to be forgiven without the caring and the changed attitude which comes from that is just plain arrogance and ego.


Quote :
In the case of people who have violated my trust in the recent years, of which there have been quite a number, forgiveness is very attainable, as all they need to do is repent, and apologize sincerely. Then forgiveness will come naturally.

But do you ever ask Why they did what they did?
Is there ever a discussion? I mean is it possible that your violated trust was simply your perception but that there was no real basis for it?
Sometimes we feel wounded where there was no intent to wound.

And does that mean that they are automatically back within your trust?


Quote :
A Clinton can not be forgiven, an Obama can. The former acted in full knowledge and understanding of what she destroyed, the latter, I believe, did not. I do think of Obama as having a soul. Thats basically it, a person with a soul can be forgiven.

I don't trust Clinton but I think in terms of forgiveness where that is concerned. But she definitely needs to be held accountable for everything.

A person with a soul? can be forgiven if he/she is sorry.



___________
Each of our lives is a part of the lengthy process of the universe gradually waking up and becoming aware of itself.


Philosophy is the childhood of the intellect, and a culture that tries to skip it will never grow up."


"If I thought that everything I did was determined by my circumstancse and my psychological condition, I would feel trapped."

Thomas Nagel
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Forgiveness Empty
PostSubject: Re: Forgiveness Forgiveness Icon_minitimeSat Nov 12, 2016 3:16 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Often Ive forgiven things that were actually deeply degenerate, just because I figured that person would not actually be that degenerate. Ive been a fool for very long about how wretched, stupid, stuned, blunt and ravaging people as a rule behave in my native country. Here in Quebec I feel only calm, pride and love, especially for the children.


It is possible to empathize with a rape victim who wants to relive the experience to get rid of it - but no. If you can forgive that, then you also forgive his rapist, and the one before that, and inevitably also the first rapist of the line. You have to judge fairly, by what you feel inside, the values you hold when you are happy, you also have to hold them when you are challenged by a bad thing. We must be strong in retribution, and not let the rapist think it is really okay because he was also raped.

Deep down he might even welcome the punishment as a justified reaction to what he has also suffered from. I am certain that childraping can not make a human happy. It violates the law of selfvaluing on all grounds but the most desperately dying, the selfvaluing of one about to dissolve can hold such urges, but I would not call the fulfillment happiness, as it does not move the rapist closer to love. It only may bring a second of homeostasis, after which the obsession is exacerbated.

I feel this is what "having a soul" means - to be able to feel about ones actions, and their results. And I dont see that HRC feels much at all except entitlement. She has 'served' 30 years and what has sahe accomplished? Name one good thing... but its easy to see how many millions of lives she ruined, and ended. She's just bad, by any human standard Ive seen. But the collapse in the van may have been caused by something maybe vaguely related to the notion of "human emotion". Also her relief at not having won was pretty palpable. They said it was her best speech.

Naturally philosophy is thinking about why people do things, so yes, I have a good idea of why a rapist rapes - it is a brutal desperation implicit in being in the context of absolute rejection. This instinct is primordial, it is present in all of us, but in most of us so minutely that we never have impulses from it. If a person is raped and raped and excluded and raped some more, what does he know but that? Still, it is hardly justified to let him perpetuate the pattern on a new human being. As the Sedona method says, wanting to understand a problem is planning to have it again.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Drops_Of_Jupiter
bowstring
bowstring


Posts : 32
Join date : 2017-02-03
Age : 59
Location : Columbus, Ohio USA

Forgiveness Empty
PostSubject: Re: Forgiveness Forgiveness Icon_minitimeFri Feb 03, 2017 5:26 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Fixed Cross wrote:
As the Sedona method says, wanting to understand a problem is planning to have it again.

Not sure what the Sedona method is. Never heard of it. Not yet sure its worth the time to investigate cause it makes little sense to me as used here. "Wanting to understand a problem" is NOT necessarily "planning to have it again." Most adults understand that we are all teachers, and we care for our young and those not capable of caring for themselves. We seek to understand problems, to prevent others from going through the same unpleasant experiences as we did. My grandmother would say, "Don't eat too many green apples or you'll have a belly ache." Now did I ever eat too many green apples? Of course! Did her wisdom go to waste? Heck no! I both learned to stop eating too many green apples and I learned to warn others of the resulting belly ache.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Arch-Native Philosophy - Sumerian Bill and Ted - The Magical Tree of Life Academy
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10533
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Sat May 30, 2020 11:53 pm

Pallas
bowstring
bowstring
Pallas

Posts : 15
Join date : 2012-07-19

the [strike that] MY Psyche Empty
PostSubject: the [strike that] MY Psyche the [strike that] MY Psyche Icon_minitimeFri Oct 14, 2016 3:56 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
If I attempt to define "PSYCHE" I am at a loss.
I think of this.

65d16366bef75198f03f012f57f6197c.jpg
65d16366bef75198f03f012f57f6197c.jpg (53.99 KiB) Viewed 809 times


the [strike that] MY Psyche 65d16366bef75198f03f012f57f6197c

Is it me?



___________
♃⚸♄⚴♅⚵☉
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pallas
bowstring
bowstring
Pallas

Posts : 15
Join date : 2012-07-19

the [strike that] MY Psyche Empty
PostSubject: Re: the [strike that] MY Psyche the [strike that] MY Psyche Icon_minitimeFri Oct 14, 2016 4:19 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
It's an image, not a thing, but it's a word, not an image.

You know what I mean?

https://i.imgflip.com/1cdl2n.jpg


the [strike that] MY Psyche 1cdl2n


https://i.imgflip.com/1cdmme.jpg

You know what I mean?





___________
♃⚸♄⚴♅⚵☉


Last edited by Pallas on Fri Oct 14, 2016 5:23 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pallas
bowstring
bowstring
Pallas

Posts : 15
Join date : 2012-07-19

the [strike that] MY Psyche Empty
PostSubject: Re: the [strike that] MY Psyche the [strike that] MY Psyche Icon_minitimeFri Oct 14, 2016 4:58 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
the [strike that] MY Psyche 1cdmme



___________
♃⚸♄⚴♅⚵☉
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pallas
bowstring
bowstring
Pallas

Posts : 15
Join date : 2012-07-19

the [strike that] MY Psyche Empty
PostSubject: Re: the [strike that] MY Psyche the [strike that] MY Psyche Icon_minitimeFri Oct 14, 2016 5:03 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
You know what I mean?





I know what I mean. I know what you mean. I know what to mean means to you. (and to me)





You know what I mean?


the [strike that] MY Psyche 1cdnew


Image

























nothing



___________
♃⚸♄⚴♅⚵☉
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Sisyphus
Path
Path


Posts : 1647
Join date : 2016-08-06
Location : Florida

the [strike that] MY Psyche Empty
PostSubject: Re: the [strike that] MY Psyche the [strike that] MY Psyche Icon_minitimeFri Oct 14, 2016 10:27 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
The finger pointing at the moon is not the moon.

Words are but a representation of our abstract thoughts at understanding reality.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pallas
bowstring
bowstring
Pallas

Posts : 15
Join date : 2012-07-19

the [strike that] MY Psyche Empty
PostSubject: Re: the [strike that] MY Psyche the [strike that] MY Psyche Icon_minitimeSat Oct 15, 2016 6:17 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
No one trusts words.

We only talk to distract from other peoples words.


in bad taste we opine & mingle with words identical to our own which are not [though the typo says mot, french for word, I say not mot, not you overconfident weasel] our own at all but simple truth so we sigh to those that dont say the same, but a slightly different thing...
in good taste we seek out the words most remote from our own
to insulate from the power of words...
then, we learn to speak

speak Being

beyond speaking of being



all until then are incarnate

Designer-pain


in the beginning was the word
the word turned to flesh

easier said!
than fleshed out.

l o fucking l



___________
♃⚸♄⚴♅⚵☉
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Sisyphus
Path
Path


Posts : 1647
Join date : 2016-08-06
Location : Florida

the [strike that] MY Psyche Empty
PostSubject: Re: the [strike that] MY Psyche the [strike that] MY Psyche Icon_minitimeSat Oct 15, 2016 11:07 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Neat response Pallas.

Sad that words include so many lies.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pallas
bowstring
bowstring
Pallas

Posts : 15
Join date : 2012-07-19

the [strike that] MY Psyche Empty
PostSubject: Re: the [strike that] MY Psyche the [strike that] MY Psyche Icon_minitimeTue Oct 18, 2016 2:49 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Emotions


thought l feeling
memory l foresight l pain l pleasure





___________
♃⚸♄⚴♅⚵☉
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Sisyphus
Path
Path


Posts : 1647
Join date : 2016-08-06
Location : Florida

the [strike that] MY Psyche Empty
PostSubject: Re: the [strike that] MY Psyche the [strike that] MY Psyche Icon_minitimeTue Oct 18, 2016 10:02 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Emotions: Some Buddhists tell us we should eliminate our emotions.

I don't accept that concept. I think that emotions are a very important part of our natural life.

And I feel it is important that we understand our emotions as well as we possibly can. Most have their roots in our subconscious mind. Understanding the roots (triggers) will help us to avoid conditions that arouse negative emotions and seek out conditions that arouse positive emotions.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pallas
bowstring
bowstring
Pallas

Posts : 15
Join date : 2012-07-19

the [strike that] MY Psyche Empty
PostSubject: Re: the [strike that] MY Psyche the [strike that] MY Psyche Icon_minitimeWed Oct 19, 2016 6:55 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
The truth is an ancient man.
The truth is a boy,

The truth is a little kid,

The truth is a mouse, running

The truth is a cosmos.

The truth is this cup of tea
being far beyond truth

being well poured in fact!




___________
♃⚸♄⚴♅⚵☉
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pallas
bowstring
bowstring
Pallas

Posts : 15
Join date : 2012-07-19

the [strike that] MY Psyche Empty
PostSubject: Re: the [strike that] MY Psyche the [strike that] MY Psyche Icon_minitimeWed Oct 19, 2016 7:05 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Sisyphus wrote:
Emotions: Some Buddhists tell us we should eliminate our emotions.

NO!! Evil Buddhists. You will never take away my the [strike that] MY Psyche 200



The Psyche must get angry before it is too late...!!!







Quote :
I don't accept that concept. I think that emotions are a very important part of our natural life.

And I feel it is important that we understand our emotions as well as we possibly can. Most have their roots in our subconscious mind. Understanding the roots (triggers) will help us to avoid conditions that arouse negative emotions and seek out conditions that arouse positive emotions.

We must tell our world what we want to feel.

https://media.giphy.com/media/ya5zR5fOLvSxO/giphy.gif


https://media.giphy.com/media/CsX2sqtFlV55e/giphy.gif

the [strike that] MY Psyche Giphy

It will tell us what we need to feel.

the [strike that] MY Psyche Giphy



___________
♃⚸♄⚴♅⚵☉
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pallas
bowstring
bowstring
Pallas

Posts : 15
Join date : 2012-07-19

the [strike that] MY Psyche Empty
PostSubject: Re: the [strike that] MY Psyche the [strike that] MY Psyche Icon_minitimeWed Oct 19, 2016 8:49 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster

the [strike that] MY Psyche Giphy



___________
♃⚸♄⚴♅⚵☉


Last edited by Pallas on Wed Oct 19, 2016 9:48 pm; edited 4 times in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pallas
bowstring
bowstring
Pallas

Posts : 15
Join date : 2012-07-19

the [strike that] MY Psyche Empty
PostSubject: Re: the [strike that] MY Psyche the [strike that] MY Psyche Icon_minitimeWed Oct 19, 2016 9:23 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
When you ask to pass the salt but the food is already really salty

the [strike that] MY Psyche Giphy



___________
♃⚸♄⚴♅⚵☉
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Sisyphus
Path
Path


Posts : 1647
Join date : 2016-08-06
Location : Florida

the [strike that] MY Psyche Empty
PostSubject: Re: the [strike that] MY Psyche the [strike that] MY Psyche Icon_minitimeWed Oct 19, 2016 11:13 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Ah, yes, anger management. Some of us don't do very well at that.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Arcturus Descending
arrow
arrow
Arcturus Descending

Posts : 293
Join date : 2011-12-07
Location : Hovering amidst a battle of Wills

the [strike that] MY Psyche Empty
PostSubject: Re: the [strike that] MY Psyche the [strike that] MY Psyche Icon_minitimeThu Nov 10, 2016 6:29 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Sisyphus



Quote :
Most have their roots in our subconscious mind. Understanding the roots (triggers) will help us to avoid conditions that arouse negative emotions and seek out conditions that arouse positive emotions.

We have to dig deeper than that - deeper than the triggers unless that's what you meant by understanding them.

What are their origins? Whether they go far back to our individual beginnings or were just born yesterday.






___________
Each of our lives is a part of the lengthy process of the universe gradually waking up and becoming aware of itself.


Philosophy is the childhood of the intellect, and a culture that tries to skip it will never grow up."


"If I thought that everything I did was determined by my circumstancse and my psychological condition, I would feel trapped."

Thomas Nagel
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Arcturus Descending
arrow
arrow
Arcturus Descending

Posts : 293
Join date : 2011-12-07
Location : Hovering amidst a battle of Wills

the [strike that] MY Psyche Empty
PostSubject: Re: the [strike that] MY Psyche the [strike that] MY Psyche Icon_minitimeThu Nov 10, 2016 6:31 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Pallas wrote:
If I attempt to define "PSYCHE" I am at a loss.
I think of this.

the [strike that] MY Psyche 65d16366bef75198f03f012f57f6197c

Is it me?

Some call it the Self - some call it the soul.
It's all of you included.



___________
Each of our lives is a part of the lengthy process of the universe gradually waking up and becoming aware of itself.


Philosophy is the childhood of the intellect, and a culture that tries to skip it will never grow up."


"If I thought that everything I did was determined by my circumstancse and my psychological condition, I would feel trapped."

Thomas Nagel
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Sisyphus
Path
Path


Posts : 1647
Join date : 2016-08-06
Location : Florida

the [strike that] MY Psyche Empty
PostSubject: Re: the [strike that] MY Psyche the [strike that] MY Psyche Icon_minitimeThu Nov 10, 2016 9:15 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Arcturus Descending wrote:
Sisyphus

Quote :
Most have their roots in our subconscious mind. Understanding the roots (triggers) will help us to avoid conditions that arouse negative emotions and seek out conditions that arouse positive emotions.

We have to dig deeper than that - deeper than the triggers unless that's what you meant by understanding them.

What are their origins? Whether they go far back to our individual beginnings or were just born yesterday.

Agree. Are they there from personal experience or are they things we were taught that we never questioned?

There are a lot of things happening because of the info that is in our subconscious mind. We should try to understand what's going on in our brain.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

the [strike that] MY Psyche Empty
PostSubject: The Soul the [strike that] MY Psyche Icon_minitimeTue Jan 24, 2017 1:24 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Think of your soul as a diamond, and every waking moment a spark of light tracing one of the ridges between two facets, or dwelling at a crossroads.

How many roads, and how many one chooses to travel - this is depending on the soul and the personality respectively.

Do you have the courage to your own soul?
That not only depends on the type of person you are, but also on what the consequences can be, if you do.

"We rarely have the courage for what we truly know" said Nietzsche.
But there comes a time when the rare will determine the fate of all mankind.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Sisyphus
Path
Path


Posts : 1647
Join date : 2016-08-06
Location : Florida

the [strike that] MY Psyche Empty
PostSubject: Re: the [strike that] MY Psyche the [strike that] MY Psyche Icon_minitimeWed Jan 25, 2017 12:28 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I hold to both the concept of soul and of spirit.

However, for me, the soul is our subconscious mind and our spirit is our Chi energy.

When our body dies our soul dies as well. However, our spirit returns to the total energy of the universe.

The soul is from where our spontaneous inspirations arise.

Yes, a good question: Do we have the courage to follow our soul's desires?
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

the [strike that] MY Psyche Empty
PostSubject: Re: the [strike that] MY Psyche the [strike that] MY Psyche Icon_minitimeSat Feb 04, 2017 8:08 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Yoga is actually largely about anger.

http://sarahprout.com/spiritual-people- ... 43cc6e0219

"Things got really ugly and my energy went berzerko (AKA batshit crazy). It’s a space I don’t usually allow myself to enter into, but my energy was so out of whack that I succumbed to the dark side."

What you do in Kryia Yoga is fast burning of karma. So it is that they see it, I mean. It is a very aggressive style of dealing with Earths imperfections.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Sisyphus
Path
Path


Posts : 1647
Join date : 2016-08-06
Location : Florida

the [strike that] MY Psyche Empty
PostSubject: Re: the [strike that] MY Psyche the [strike that] MY Psyche Icon_minitimeSun Feb 05, 2017 12:20 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Yes, anger management is important. Too few are good at that.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Arch-Native Philosophy - Sumerian Bill and Ted - The Magical Tree of Life Academy
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10533
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Sat May 30, 2020 11:56 pm

Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Psychiatry talk (the Philosophers) Empty
PostSubject: Psychiatry talk (the Philosophers) Psychiatry talk (the Philosophers) Icon_minitimeSat Feb 11, 2017 11:53 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster




___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides


Last edited by Fixed Cross on Fri Apr 28, 2017 2:17 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Psychiatry talk (the Philosophers) Empty
PostSubject: Re: Psychiatry talk (the Philosophers) Psychiatry talk (the Philosophers) Icon_minitimeSat Feb 11, 2017 12:12 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Fuck yes.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Psychiatry talk (the Philosophers) Empty
PostSubject: Re: Psychiatry talk (the Philosophers) Psychiatry talk (the Philosophers) Icon_minitimeTue Feb 14, 2017 8:01 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Pezer is a genius.



Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Taste & Appetite Empty
PostSubject: Taste & Appetite Taste & Appetite Icon_minitimeWed Mar 22, 2017 2:04 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Taste reflects values, appetite power.

Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

To trust a woman Empty
PostSubject: To trust a woman To trust a woman Icon_minitimeThu Jan 26, 2017 5:37 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Ive come to the conclusion that "a man" (basically, I qua man) can only afford to trust one woman at a time. And this woman must be the women that gives herself to me. I don't think woman is capable of being trustworthy for the sake of it. She has no mind of such consistency - what I can trust a woman with is her feelings, and if these feelings run toward me and my satisfaction, spiritually and physically in love, then this is worth the highest of all trust, as high as the trust between a man and his god, which exceeds his trust in himself; trust in a value higher than himself in his own terms.

This means that often a man will not be able to trust any woman. I do not think one can trust ones mother, on general principle. Of course one must love ones mother and honor her, and be trustworthy to her, but one can never know her. You cant know the woman that knew you since you were nothing. She can never look at you as an equal, she can never fully submit to your will, not in equality. One has to overcome ones mother, and in this way one rewards her, and puts her heart at ease. But this must be done outside of her sphere of trust - generally with another woman.

As a man I can trust many men. I understand them, and can predict their behavior to not cross through certain limits. If Ive seen a man repeatedly prove himself noble, I trust that man, and such trust has never been betrayed. I know at least 5 such men, and I know I'll always be able to trust them. But this trust means something different from the trust I give a woman. I don't abandon myself to men, I don't give myself in their hands, I don't take their lives in mine. To trust a woman means to let go of all expectations, and put all trust in trust itself.

In this way, the universe of ones values is overturned. All things that were trusted out of tradition, custom, they become old and grey and fall apart like ashes. The birth of a child or a philosophy is a natural result.

Trust for its own sake -
much like Depth for its own sake.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Sisyphus
Path
Path


Posts : 1647
Join date : 2016-08-06
Location : Florida

To trust a woman Empty
PostSubject: Re: To trust a woman To trust a woman Icon_minitimeThu Jan 26, 2017 5:49 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Having been married and divorced three times I likely wont have much to say in this thread.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

To trust a woman Empty
PostSubject: Re: To trust a woman To trust a woman Icon_minitimeThu Jan 26, 2017 5:58 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Since you're here, Id still like to ask you a question.
Did any of these women merit your trust at one point, and did you gain anything in your heart or mind from trusting her?

My point is perhaps also about trust itself, about what it can do for us, even beyond the situation we find ourselves in with one we trust.

In fact, to trust a woman as Ive said, may very well mean that ones trust includes all sorts of untrustworthiness. To trust in a womans duplicity, to trust her not despite of it, but with it -

Come to think, Id never want to be with a woman behind whose eyes I didn't suspect a whole web of intrigue. It's that which in her reflects life, as directly as a lions growl reflects it.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Sisyphus
Path
Path


Posts : 1647
Join date : 2016-08-06
Location : Florida

To trust a woman Empty
PostSubject: Re: To trust a woman To trust a woman Icon_minitimeThu Jan 26, 2017 11:42 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Fixed Cross wrote:
Since you're here, Id still like to ask you a question.
Did any of these women merit your trust at one point, and did you gain anything in your heart or mind from trusting her?

That happened with the third one. She never questioned me and I never questioned her. Sad thing was that she became an introvert and I was left out of her imaginary world. No reason to remain together.

Yes, if trust is there, there will be no reason for questions regarding trust. One less trouble on the mind.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Arcturus Descending
arrow
arrow
Arcturus Descending

Posts : 293
Join date : 2011-12-07
Location : Hovering amidst a battle of Wills

To trust a woman Empty
PostSubject: Re: To trust a woman To trust a woman Icon_minitimeSat Apr 29, 2017 9:14 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Fixed Cross


[quoteAs a man I can trust many men. I understand them, and can predict their behavior to not cross through certain limits. If Ive seen a man repeatedly prove himself noble, I trust that man, and such trust has never been betrayed. I know at least 5 such men, and I know I'll always be able to trust them. But this trust means something different from the trust I give a woman. I don't abandon myself to men, I don't give myself in their hands, [/quote]

Couldn't you say in a sense that you have "abandoned" yourself to these male friends of yours, based on their behavior in the past or so far?

Quote :
I don't take their lives in mine. and put all trust in trust itself.

How does one put all trust in "trust" itself?

Quote :
To trust a woman means to let go of all expectations,

I have learned that it is not an easy thing to let go of all expectations. It might even be lying to one's self.
Is that trust then? Sounds more like futility to me. lol

Quote :
In this way, the universe of ones values is overturned. All things that were trusted out of tradition, custom, they become old and grey and fall apart like ashes. The birth of a child or a philosophy is a natural result.

You mean you begin to see things with different "eyes" you become renewed and changed.

Quote :
Trust for its own sake -
much like Depth for its own sake.

Is that even possible?



___________
Each of our lives is a part of the lengthy process of the universe gradually waking up and becoming aware of itself.


Philosophy is the childhood of the intellect, and a culture that tries to skip it will never grow up."


"If I thought that everything I did was determined by my circumstancse and my psychological condition, I would feel trapped."

Thomas Nagel
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

To trust a woman Empty
PostSubject: Re: To trust a woman To trust a woman Icon_minitimeSat Apr 29, 2017 10:02 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Good day Arc, nice to see this thread revived. I accidentally edited your post instead of quoting it, no content was lost as I put it back together but some form may have, if so I apologize.

Quote :
Fixed Cross


Quote :
As a man I can trust many men. I understand them, and can predict their behavior to not cross through certain limits. If Ive seen a man repeatedly prove himself noble, I trust that man, and such trust has never been betrayed. I know at least 5 such men, and I know I'll always be able to trust them. But this trust means something different from the trust I give a woman. I don't abandon myself to men, I don't give myself in their hands,

Couldn't you say in a sense that you have "abandoned" yourself to these male friends of yours, based on their behavior in the past or so far?

Parodites, Capable, Sauwelios and Pezer are my friends that you know, and none of them has ever not merited my friendship, and all of them contributed to my happiness significantly. Someone who doesn't have an 11th house Aquarius Sun wouldn't feel this as powerfully perhaps, and someone with less of a Leo influence might not feel the need to exult it as much.

Quote :
Quote :
I don't take their lives in mine. and put all trust in trust itself.

How does one put all trust in "trust" itself?

I must have meant something but I cant recall what it was.
Ah - I meant that if one cant trust at all, then one... can trust no one. If you cant trust that trust is ultimately validated, then you cant trust at all.

Hence, I suppose, God. The image of the humans trust in trust, her faith in the justification of her trust.

Quote :
Quote :
To trust a woman means to let go of all expectations,

I have learned that it is not an easy thing to let go of all expectations. It might even be lying to one's self.
Is that trust then? Sounds more like futility to me. lol

Or a catharsis.

Quote :
Quote :
In this way, the universe of ones values is overturned. All things that were trusted out of tradition, custom, they become old and grey and fall apart like ashes. The birth of a child or a philosophy is a natural result.

You mean you begin to see things with different "eyes" you become renewed and changed.

Yes, veils of pale shadows and spider webs fell away from before my eyes.

Recently, Ive been at a reception of Dutch people. I was reminded instantly of the veil.

Quote :
Quote :
Trust for its own sake -
much like Depth for its own sake.

Is that even possible?

At a cost.





Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Death and Taxes Empty
PostSubject: Death and Taxes Death and Taxes Icon_minitimeTue May 23, 2017 9:09 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Is the particularly human capacity for debt related to his particular knowledge of death?

If so, how?

The death-drive is bullcrap, what we see in Freuds cases of study is rather the drive to avoid knowledge of death -
and this is precisely what occurs in Zizek, and in Stalin, who simply denied the fact of the existence - and thus also of the death - of his victims.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Death and Taxes Empty
PostSubject: Re: Death and Taxes Death and Taxes Icon_minitimeTue May 23, 2017 9:17 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
We can successfully negate the absoluteness of death in many ventures as humans - as animals we do it breeding, as scientists we do it conceiving of truth and modulating reality thereby, and as artists we simply create creatures of passionate valuation that roam throughout humanity's sphere of knowledge... of death and debt, of chase, guilt, punishment, reward, overcoming the enemy who did wrong - making things right - the positivist drive that brings forth such ideas as justice, this is what the knowledge of death bestows on the human race.

Many animals know of death, clearly... elephants and vultures are good examples. They must thus also possess some rudiment of philosophic thought, of positivism - which reminds me that Pezer showed a great appreciation of the vulture.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Sisyphus
Path
Path


Posts : 1647
Join date : 2016-08-06
Location : Florida

Death and Taxes Empty
PostSubject: Re: Death and Taxes Death and Taxes Icon_minitimeTue May 23, 2017 11:49 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Taxes are getting higher. Death is still the same.




Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

The ugliness of ignorance coupled with "excitement" Empty
PostSubject: The ugliness of ignorance coupled with "excitement" The ugliness of ignorance coupled with "excitement" Icon_minitimeSun May 07, 2017 7:59 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Arg.
I just saw a link to an article titled "what if a meteor hits the Earth at light-speed?"
The idea of people clicking that link and chattering about it excitedly somehow is as nauseating to me as anything.
The abuse, rape of scientific terms to satisfy the idiotic sensationalist brains of the postmodern hordes.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

The ugliness of ignorance coupled with "excitement" Empty
PostSubject: Re: The ugliness of ignorance coupled with "excitement" The ugliness of ignorance coupled with "excitement" Icon_minitimeSun May 07, 2017 8:21 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Lol.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Sisyphus
Path
Path


Posts : 1647
Join date : 2016-08-06
Location : Florida

The ugliness of ignorance coupled with "excitement" Empty
PostSubject: Re: The ugliness of ignorance coupled with "excitement" The ugliness of ignorance coupled with "excitement" Icon_minitimeSun May 07, 2017 11:21 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Yeah, "What if" questions are valid but they should always be based in reality. A meteor cannot travel at light speed. But they do hit Earth now and then.


Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

The ugliness of ignorance coupled with "excitement" Empty
PostSubject: Re: The ugliness of ignorance coupled with "excitement" The ugliness of ignorance coupled with "excitement" Icon_minitimeSun Aug 06, 2017 9:44 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I didn't know where to post this, but realized this thread would actually fit. Imagine the terribly ugliness of this much ignorance being coupled with the "excitement" of the SJW type...

Also, I have worked in elementary schools before, and I can tell you that this is not entirely far off... logically this is the future, if the leftist marxists win.





___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Sisyphus
Path
Path


Posts : 1647
Join date : 2016-08-06
Location : Florida

The ugliness of ignorance coupled with "excitement" Empty
PostSubject: Re: The ugliness of ignorance coupled with "excitement" The ugliness of ignorance coupled with "excitement" Icon_minitimeSun Aug 06, 2017 11:13 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I have had enough negative thoughts regarding the American education system. I don't need any more negative reinforcement.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

The ugliness of ignorance coupled with "excitement" Empty
PostSubject: Re: The ugliness of ignorance coupled with "excitement" The ugliness of ignorance coupled with "excitement" Icon_minitimeMon Aug 07, 2017 3:45 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I was tempted to post that video on Facebook, but I think most of my um "friends" on it would actually agree with the teacher.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Arch-Native Philosophy - Sumerian Bill and Ted - The Magical Tree of Life Academy
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10533
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Sat May 30, 2020 11:59 pm

individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

"Cultural appropriation", and sexual preference/mate selection Empty
PostSubject: "Cultural appropriation", and sexual preference/mate selection "Cultural appropriation", and sexual preference/mate selection Icon_minitimeSat Aug 12, 2017 8:13 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster










individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Narcissistic encirclement Empty
PostSubject: Narcissistic encirclement Narcissistic encirclement Icon_minitimeMon Aug 14, 2017 4:18 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Just want to coin a new term for the barrier between self and 'other'. By narcissistic I do not mean "bad", I mean self-refractive like two mirrors facing one another, or like a pond surrounded by the shoreline. What I like is how we can navigate inside and also at the edge, and even peek out of the edge and glimpse the total difference of what is like outside the encirclement.

I think children (very young, as in age 4 and below) don't have a narcissistic encirclement yet and so basically live in the outside world as a proxy of it. What madness they must experience! But also a kind of simple purity of action and willing, not confused by differences between inner and outer. But then "the self" forms, a personality can develop due to narcissistic encirclement, and also this thrusts upward being into new heights as dis/agreements are now needed to be negotiated rather than simply responded to.

A philosopher is someone whose narcissistic encirclement is very intense, the boundary is severe, but the 'pressure' of the inner space is so extreme that it forces expansions outside the encirclement boundary. When Nietzsche went mad he didn't simply collapse with that horse and then lose his mind and stop speaking, no-- he collapsed and then went for a few days in a sort of in between state, alternating lucidity and madness, drawn aloft from himself into the world and without recognizing the boundary between himself and others (for example, didn't understand how outside events were affecting him or focused on him), and then would switch to being trapped inside himself and unaware of the outside world and entirely passive in terms of it. I think the pressure of his narcissistic encirclement blew out the 'ring' boundary around himself, and he was forced to exist only by pure force of his own gravity of self, but without a boundary that isn't possible to do and still maintain what we call sanity. There's a nice epilogue in my book of his Letters that explains details from his last few days before being committed, and then a brief overview of some of his commitment.

Building up the inner pressure of our self requires a stronger boundary between oneself and the world. A philosopher is one who feels the heat and fire of the world so intensely that he is forced to augment his boundary, his narcissistic encirclement, in order to protect himself, and this reinforcement allows for much more inner self-pressure to develop. In fact the self-pressure must increase if the boundary is becoming harder and thicker, otherwise one feels that oneself is shrinking into oneself and liable to vanish.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Narcissistic encirclement Empty
PostSubject: Re: Narcissistic encirclement Narcissistic encirclement Icon_minitimeMon Aug 14, 2017 6:29 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Of course this isn't entirely accurate, since even infants have a personality from day1.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Narcissistic encirclement Empty
PostSubject: Re: Narcissistic encirclement Narcissistic encirclement Icon_minitimeMon Aug 14, 2017 7:00 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Thats a very good concept though.

I think philosophy requires that one periodically or continuously break open the encirclement so as to let it fall into place at a further horizon - to include as much empirical reality as possible into the sphere without having it lose its narcissistic integrity - its symmetry to itself, which is the self-valuing principle I suppose as it sets itself against other instances of itself in difference and opposition. Heraclitus statement of the river is still a fixed identifier, the flux has become a fixed center to which man relates as changeling.
This the pain of philosophy and of honourably self-valuing I general, as it may be painful for a flower to open to the sun.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Sisyphus
Path
Path


Posts : 1647
Join date : 2016-08-06
Location : Florida

Narcissistic encirclement Empty
PostSubject: Re: Narcissistic encirclement Narcissistic encirclement Icon_minitimeMon Aug 14, 2017 11:55 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
My personal life has boundaries. I have established these boundaries. The universe has no boundaries. Now and then I get to leave my domain and enter the domain of the universe.

Why do we establish our boundaries? Survival.



individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Why I hate academics Empty
PostSubject: Why I hate academics Why I hate academics Icon_minitimeMon Aug 28, 2017 9:25 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
These brain dead idiots do not know how to think, they do not even know that thinking exists. They are religious-ideological, pathological "thinkers" who are only interested in forcing everything to conform to the terms of their already given conceptual frameworks. Then they use those terms alternatively, switching between categories, in order to avoid more logical reconciliations and deductions.

Case in point, some cunt trying to refute my explanation of evolutionary epistemology, by saying that "necessity is a metaphysical term, not an epistemological one". This cunt quite literally cannot think that our epistemological capacity derives from the necessities that pushed us to need to conform to natural selection in order to even fucking exist at all. The fact that if we could not judge visual distances accurately enough to successfully navigate the environment in a way that allows us to survive to reproduce then we would not even be here, then the capacity of visual identification would not even exist, is not something he can understand... he literally cannot grasp this.

He also claimed that evolution was prescriptive and ends-focused. I asked him how that works exactly, and he said the question "how?" was irrelevant because of the phenomenological explanation that renders evolutionary epistemology "merely descriptive". Lol. I explained that evolution had no intentions and no goals, it is simply a blind after the fact process whereby random mutations and situational contingent circumstances lead some organisms to survive while others do not, and the surviving ones are the ones that end up passing on their structure through reproduction. Again, he rejected this not because he could refute my point, but by saying "there is a better explanation, that such and such property just exists and is a function x." Yeah, I am not even making this up.

I fucking hate these insane idiots.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Why I hate academics Empty
PostSubject: Re: Why I hate academics Why I hate academics Icon_minitimeMon Aug 28, 2017 11:30 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I don't know how you put up with them. They don't even exist.
Hating them is already too much. They aren't there. Thats literally the case, they aren't entities self valuing toward you, they are literally just part of the environment, "saying things" like a brick emits a certain color.
You can talk to the brick but it won't change its color. Just as little as academics will be able to change their mantras.

Indeed there can be no thought behind any of these uttering, and indeed thought is wholly unknown to them - all this is factual. they have heard these terms from a professor or read the in a book, and now these words have become what they are. In ten years they will be saying some other random crap, and they will still not exist, not any more than a brick exists as a self valuing.

They have been construed for certain purposes, they did not emerge on their own accord - their bodies did, but these are merely the hosts to the Academic Anti-Mind, which is collectivistic.

They are literally just another brick in the wall. At that, it is the Berlin Wall, and this is 1989.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Why I hate academics Empty
PostSubject: Re: Why I hate academics Why I hate academics Icon_minitimeMon Aug 28, 2017 11:41 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Fixed Cross wrote:
I don't know how you put up with them. They don't even exist.
Hating them is already too much. They aren't there. Thats literally the case, they aren't entities self valuing toward you, they are literally just part of the environment, "saying things" like a brick emits a certain color.
You can talk to the brick but it won't change its color. Just as little as academics will be able to change their mantras.

Hahaha, yes exactly.

Quote :
Indeed there can be no thought behind any of these uttering, and indeed thought is wholly unknown to them - all this is factual. they have heard these terms from a professor or read the in a book, and now these words have become what they are. In ten years they will be saying some other random crap, and they will still not exist, not any more than a brick exists as a self valuing.

Lol. Yes.

I am glad you decided to reply here. I was beginning to lose hope but now I realize that hope is the antithesis of these non-beings, so fuck em.

Quote :
They have been construed for certain purposes, they did not emerge on their own accord - their bodies did, but these are merely the hosts to the Academic Anti-Mind, which is collectivistic.

They are literally just another brick in the wall. At that, it is the Berlin Wall, and this is 1989.

They exist only as subentities entirely passive to that which overvalues them. Yes. I like this.

Thus they do not matter, and I am free to not concern myself with their filth.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Sisyphus
Path
Path


Posts : 1647
Join date : 2016-08-06
Location : Florida

Why I hate academics Empty
PostSubject: Re: Why I hate academics Why I hate academics Icon_minitimeMon Aug 28, 2017 11:47 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
While reading Fixed's post a song came to my mind. It's a Rock-A-Billy song.

The words that came to mind are:

I looked into her eyes and there was nobody there.

I'm beginning to believe in Zombies.

Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Why I hate academics Empty
PostSubject: Re: Why I hate academics Why I hate academics Icon_minitimeMon Aug 28, 2017 11:49 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Sisyphus wrote:
While reading Fixed's post a song came to my mind. It's a Rock-A-Billy song.

The words that came to mind are:

I looked into her eyes and there was nobody there.

I'm beginning to believe in Zombies.


Haha. Yeah man.

Zombie apocalypse, here we come. Need to get some Woody Harrelson over here.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Arch-Native Philosophy - Sumerian Bill and Ted - The Magical Tree of Life Academy
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10533
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Sun May 31, 2020 12:03 am

800px-MaslowsHierarchyOfNeeds.svg.png
800px-MaslowsHierarchyOfNeeds.svg.png (29.76 KiB) Viewed 805 times



Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

The Hierarchies of Human Values Empty
PostSubject: The Hierarchies of Human Values The Hierarchies of Human Values Icon_minitimeThu Sep 07, 2017 11:59 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I am transferring a discussion I was engaging Sauwelios in on his Facebook page to here, as I can no longer guarantee my emotional stability without completely avoiding my former network there.

I will first post his OP and then my response to it.

Sauwelios wrote:
"Let us begin by noting certain facts about the society in which we grew up, facts which every youngster learns in the course of his early life. The first fact we must know is that people differ with respect to their social status. By status we mean such things as the amount of money a man earns, the kind of education he has had, or which he can afford for his children, the kind of house he lives in, and the part of the town in which he lives, his accent, the kind of people he mixes with, and so on and so forth. [...] In addition to status, which is an objective fact which can easily be ascertained with regard to any particular person, we have another concept which is much more subjective in character, but which is also of considerable importance in our analysis. That is the concept of social class. Whatever their objective status may be, people in the democratic countries tend to think of society as being grouped into various classes, and they tend to consider themselves as belonging to one or other of them. [...] While the concept of class is subjectively dependent on each individual's private opinions and beliefs, it does, in fact, have a strong factual relation to social status. The Av+ [status] group tends to think of itself as upper and upper-middle class; the Av group tends to think of itself as middle class; while the Av- group, and more particularly the very poor, tend to think of themselves as working class." (Hans Eysenck, _Sense and Nonsense in Psychology_ (1957), "Politics and Personality".)"]

The Hierarchies of Human Values 800px-MaslowsHierarchyOfNeeds.svg
Maslows Hierarchy of Needs

In principle, everyone in the West can be sure to have their physiological needs and their need for safety met. The other three categories define, in my view, the three natural classes of human beings (as identified by, e.g., Plato and Nietzsche): 3. Those for whom love/belonging is the highest good. Among drug users, this is the XTC crowd. 2. Those for whom esteem is the highest good. Among drug users, this is the coke and amfetamines crowd. 1. Those for whom self-actualization is the highest good. Among drug users, this is the psychedelics crowd. "Love gives the greatest feeling of power. To grasp to what extent not man in general but a certain species of man speaks here. [...] Here is the happiness of the herd, the feeling of community in great and small things [...]. Being helpful and useful and caring for others continually arouses the feeling of power [here.]" (Nietzsche, _The Will to Power_, section 176, Kaufmann translation.)"]

Ive always disagreed with such pyramids. For example, I think that physiological needs are the most difficult to meet (the true issue of evolution, progress), and that this difficulty is cause of the most insidious problems like sociopathy, which I see as ruling Northern Europe almost entirely. when I look at pictures of Northern European cities, I see a species in severe decay, with nervous systems that don't really connect to the higher functions of the brain anymore - out of pure despair.

For a man, physiological needs can not be met in complacency, in the harmful "safety" of a European city - such cities destroy natural physiology, which is, I believe, the reason for "transgenderism", which is really nothing more than a mask for voluntary castration, the self-chosen end of a genetic line -- pure physiological failure.

I would argue that consumerism relies on the never-being-fulfilled of the physiological passion.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Sauwelios
bowstring
bowstring
Sauwelios

Posts : 109
Join date : 2011-12-15
Age : 41
Location : Amsterdam

The Hierarchies of Human Values Empty
PostSubject: Re: The Hierarchies of Human Values The Hierarchies of Human Values Icon_minitimeThu Sep 07, 2017 6:57 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
What you say reminds me of what Zarathustra tells the despisers of the body at the end of his speech of the same name:

"No longer can your Self do that which it desireth most:--create beyond itself. That is what it desireth most; that is all its fervour.
But it is now too late to do so:--so your Self wisheth to succumb, ye despisers of the body.
To succumb--so wisheth your Self; and therefore have ye become despisers of the body. For ye can no longer create beyond yourselves.
And therefore are ye now angry with life and with the earth. And unconscious envy is in the sidelong look of your contempt.
I go not your way, ye despisers of the body! Ye are no bridges for me to the Superman!
Thus spake Zarathustra." (Common translation.)

All the needs Maslow lists are individual needs, and it's only the highest kind of need, the need for self-actualization, that he essentially connects to self-transcendence. I think he is right in this, though I probably differ from him content-wise. But formally, I tend to agree.

The need for sex is an individual need. (Asexuals supposedly do not have this need, but you may rank these among transgenders and the like.) The pleasurability of sex has evolved because, other things being equal, individuals who want sex more tend to have more sex, and individuals who have more sex tend to have more offspring. The individual need have no awareness of this mechanism in order for it to work.

Moreover, it does not always work, because other things are sometimes very unequal. Take the example of bees. Worker bees do not procreate themselves. Genetically, they do not need to, for their "strategy" is much more successful: by working, fighting, and even dying for their sister the queen, their genes are much better represented in the next generation than if both they and their sister each just procreated modestly for themselves. And again, it's highly improbable that they are aware of this mechanism. The modern-scientific view, at any rate, is that such behavior was just selected, passively, because of its evolutionary success. Countless different kinds of behavior were weeded out, even though they were no more irrational.

Now I do think modern science, and (thereby) modernity in general, are relatively sociopathic. It seems almost impossible to be successful in the higher echelons of business and politics without being a sociopath. The Machiavellian (i.e., modern) political-philosophical strategy has been precisely to give free reign to such people, letting them curb themselves by appealing to their psychology in the form of public praise/blame and monetary reward/punishment ("ignominy and fines", as Bacon called the negatives). I say "relatively", by the way, because I suspect it was always somewhat like this. I think tyrants have always been sociopaths or psychopaths.

Also by the way, here are a couple of strong literary connections between sociopathy and psychopathy on the one hand, and cocaine use on the other. The contemporary view of Sherlock Holmes, as depicted in the BBC series Sherlock, is as a "high-functioning sociopath"; and Conan Doyle's original was a notorious cocaine user. My other example is American Psycho, which I surely don't need to explain. Trump, by the way, was Bateman's hero, and he's certainly moved in those circles for most of his life, though this doesn't mean he's a sociopath. As I said, it seems almost impossible to be successful in the higher echelons of business and politics without being a sociopath. But if Trump is a Caesar, as I believe you think, it's still true that there are tyrannical as well as royal Caesars.

Anyway... Modern science is sociopathic because it rejects the soul of Aristotelian science--the formal and final cause--, leaving only the body--the material and efficient cause. The way I understand (adopt) Maslow's hierarchy of needs, self-actualization is nothing else than the final cause of man--that which makes him human, truly human. Compared to normal, subhuman so-called humans, this is indeed the Superman. But this does not need to consist in, or even involve, physical procreation. Thus Nietzsche writes:

"O afternoon of my life! What did I not surrender that I might have one thing: this living plantation of my thoughts, and this dawn of my highest hope!
Companions did the creating one once seek, and children of his hope: and lo, it turned out that he could not find them, except he himself should first create them.
Thus am I in the midst of my work, to my children going, and from them returning: for the sake of his children must Zarathustra perfect himself.
For in one's heart one loveth only one's child and one's work; and where there is great love to oneself, then is it the sign of pregnancy: so have I found it." (Zarathustra, "Involuntary Bliss".)

As far as we know, most of the great philosophers did not physically, genetically procreate; but so much the more spiritually, memetically! In fact, I think what's genetically inherited, for example the brain, is only the environment in which memes may survive and flourish--memes being ultimately nothing else than electromagnetic activity such as occurs in the brain. (In this view the ouroboros I sport as my avatar image is as such not a meme; only insofar as it's perceived (seen, remembered, etc.) is it a meme.)

::

At this point I lost the vibe I was writing this in (I was at work). I could think of more to add, but I think it's enough for now.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

The Hierarchies of Human Values Empty
PostSubject: Re: The Hierarchies of Human Values The Hierarchies of Human Values Icon_minitimeFri Sep 08, 2017 3:46 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I largely agree. What I would note is that in consumerist western society it is very hard for a large segment of the male population to find sexual partners, and that this is largely due to the behaviour of woman in large populations, where they gravitate to wealth and material security, which is so superabundant in certain circles that it becomes hard for the lower echelons to acquire a mate. Since women more often than not gravitate toward money, and society evolves to economically exalt sociopaths, I would say it is n fact harder in western society for any people to get their physiological needs met than it is in say, the jungle of Africa or poor Favela towns in Brazil. Which of course is very much the West, but still.

Consumerism is perhaps a sociopathy stimulating economic model, and it certainly thrives on dissatisfied males, perhaps more even on dissatisfied females. Dissatisfied people simply tend to constantly want to consume stuff. For this and for other reasons I believe that western societies propagate the unsatisfied physiological state, and make sure that a good segment of the population is always in need.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Sauwelios
bowstring
bowstring
Sauwelios

Posts : 109
Join date : 2011-12-15
Age : 41
Location : Amsterdam

The Hierarchies of Human Values Empty
PostSubject: Re: The Hierarchies of Human Values The Hierarchies of Human Values Icon_minitimeFri Sep 08, 2017 9:04 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
But is it really so hard for a large segment of the male population to find sexual partners? There's also a hierarchy among the female population, and the sociopathic male elite will only accept the top of that hierarchy: "hardbodies", to speak with American Psycho. It's a question of standards: a male can always wait in a bar on Saturday evening, till it's getting late and all the pretty girls have already gone home with someone. (I don't know this from personal experience, but thanks to a certain cynic.) Also, there's prostitution, of course, not to mention sex without a partner: the whole porn and sex toy industry. Of course, the latter is not the same as a real female body, but I think that, as soon as it's no longer just about such a body (an object) but also about the soul or spirit or whatever (the subject), we no longer find ourselves in the physiology department but now in the love/belonging department (note by the way that there's no sharp distinction between the departments, and in between those two is the safety department: e.g., feeling safe, comfortable with someone).

As for the three upper departments, I think the love/belonging one is the highest with which the herd type is really familiar, and the esteem one the highest with which the "warrior" (serial killer) type is really familiar. As such, they do feature a form of transcendence, yet these forms don't really transcend the individual. In Platonic terms, the love/belonging (eros/epithymia) level tends to involve seeking personal immortality through one's offspring, but one's offspring is just a partial genetic and memetic image (nature and nurture) of oneself; likewise, the esteem (thymos) level tends to involve seeking personal immortality through fame, but what's famous is just a distorted memetic image of oneself. Only on the level of self-actualization (logos/nous) can real transcendence be achieved, for this is concerned not with immortality but with eternity.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

The Hierarchies of Human Values Empty
PostSubject: Re: The Hierarchies of Human Values The Hierarchies of Human Values Icon_minitimeFri Sep 08, 2017 9:23 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
It is curious to hear you say that, as I think you personally know quite a few males for whom this has been a serious problem.
And I know this cynic you relate of, he is to my eyes always been an utter fool, he has never really made a lot of sense to me.
I know from experience that it does not work the way he says. Everybody has to make quite a controlled effort to find a mate. That the cynic is himself a bottom feeder does not mean that every individual can lower himself to that standard, that he is physiologically able of deriving satisfaction from that. And masturbation is definitely not a substitute for a human body. I think even that homosexuality is result largely of not having the prospect of a satisfying partner of the other sex. The numbers for the US suggest that about 70 percent of people have had sex the past year, which is to say far less than that woud be sexually satisfied, as the sexual need is a permanent affair, and need to be satisfied at least weekly, I would say, to be considered in the range of satisfaction. I would thin the number of people who attain that ratio is far lower in the west than it is in the south. It is lowest in Japan, which even though hit is Far East it could be said to have become a pioneer in western standards, to be the most advanced country in western terms. That country is dying of its populations inability to find even the hope of physiological satisfaction.

I rather count physiological satisfaction as the final, the top of the pyramid, as it represents the main criterium that matters in evolution. Mate-selection is the game with the highest stakes, and the most dramatic rate of failure.

Procreation is of course not the same as having sex, but it obviously requires it, the two belong to the same "value-physics" - external selection, which is a very tricky and/or violent affair in most sexual species and perhaps most of all in mankind. I think the structural lack of satisfaction in western societies is the driving force of the modern economy. To want to watch porn, I would hold, one must already be unsatisfied. Especially if one watches it with a sexual partner, real physiological satisfaction appears to be very hard to attain.

By extension, Id suggest that the populations average power to be sexually satisfied is dependent on cultural vigour. In a declining culture, people are just horrid, and they make do with defining specimens. For example, I was calling to my embassy today, the voice of the automated menu was so degenerate, I had to hold the phone away from my ears as I made my way to a person. That person was endurable in this case, but I have found that in Holland it has been nearly impossible for me to find a woman of Dutch origin with who I would want to mate. I would say I met, in the last ten years of my being there, one girl that seemed psychologically fit enough, but she was 19 and the absolute top league and I wasn't doing too well at the time, living on my own attic above my cousin, having broken up with the very un-Dutch and very traditional and old fashioned, even Patrician K.

I know a to of people find partners. But I doubt that they are physiologically very satisfied. Our dear cynic certainly will never attain such satisfaction, given the standards he sets for himself, which are truly retarded, the standards of a spiritual leper.

I personally have enjoyed more the game of scaring the beautiful and amusing the most beautiful of the truly simple ones, thats a game that is always appreciated by the heart, and sometimes this resulted in an unexpected conquest. But it is only here, in the preserved wild of Quebec, that I find women truly agreeable as beings. And only here did I find complete physiological satisfaction coupled with belonging. The tongue - la langue - is to me the most physiological of things...
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Arch-Native Philosophy - Sumerian Bill and Ted - The Magical Tree of Life Academy
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10533
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Sun May 31, 2020 12:04 am

Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

The Hierarchies of Human Values Empty
PostSubject: Re: The Hierarchies of Human Values The Hierarchies of Human Values Icon_minitimeFri Sep 08, 2017 9:38 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I just realized that I don't think any of these values are attainable without all of the others.

For safety one needs belonging, as otherwise one isn't sure to not be expelled and only esteem gives true safety. Esteem is dependent on a degree of self actualization, which is basically power.
One also needs the physiological, and one needs tone self-actualized to not be a slave or an idiot, which aren't safe thing to be.

One must be safe to be satisfied, safe at least in ones proper context of power; a general is safe in the military.




___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

The Hierarchies of Human Values Empty
PostSubject: Re: The Hierarchies of Human Values The Hierarchies of Human Values Icon_minitimeFri Sep 08, 2017 9:42 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
It will always be misleading to look at what the Dutch say of themselves.
They have ranked themselves in various surveys as the happiest on the planet.

But they have to say this, as they are so utterly desperate that to not rank themselves supreme in happiness (All you need is positivity-style) would mean a complete collapse. Think what would happen to our cynic if he would admit to himself the station at evolutionary life he is, all things considered.

One must be supremely dissatisfied to treat ones values the way he does - a state of dissatisfaction that Ive thankfully never had to endure. It means the absoute knowledge of never being able to satisfy ones true needs - only that would generate such a self-evident justification of an abusive personally that claims for itself the standard of happiness and peaceful cohabitation.

Arie is perhaps the only physiologically satisfied Dutchman Ive ever been sure to have encountered. Thats what I liked about him most. It was reflected perfectly in his cooking and joint-rolling - and in his visceral dislike of our cynic. It would be a bit weird to assume that intellect was what repulsed him, given that he invited me to live in his own house, and I don't think anyone but the cynic himself would suggest that the cynic ever outranked me intellectually by any measure.

I aways had to take it supremely easy on him. He take it supremely on himself, as his sexual game demonstrates, and which is reflected in his relief to be able to have a woman without having his genes spread.

He is a form of a great disease, for which islam ma be the only cure; decadent slavishness. Islam could take away the decadence, and cover up what doesn't really tolerate daylight anymore - which by and large is what once was the Netherlands.

Holland will, due to the natures of the like of our cynic and them managing manifest as a standard of wisdom and experience for better people, turn further and further into a slavish, intellect-less province of Germany. Only when this process is complete is there a chance for cultural revival - but within the Germanic, Continental spirit, where Northern Italy, Switzerland, Obedient France, Bayern and Austria will return our continent back to a new type of its former form, the holy Roman Empire of Pharma-Technocracy.

A scenario that seems hard to avoid, anyway.

The Netherlands can be summarized by its head of media: Matthijs van Nieuwenkerk, a completely feminine neurotic, aiming only ever to please, and to shriek his own being-pleased. He is the Jimmy Fallon of the Netherlands, but with us he must pass for a real man.

Lastly - the physiological satisfaction of my type is impossible in the Netherlands no tin the least because of the intense war that comes from the sexual competition - in me, the Dutch have always found a common enemy. This doesn't work very well on the sexual market, as it is far beyond being a "bad boy" - it is being an outcast. It seems in general that Western Europe isn't too favourable for me, I solicit only animal responses, which are in principle what you want form a woman, and how I got by, but it is impossible to relate to the society of people in general, as all men conspire behind my back, especially those calling themselves my friends, and among them, especially my family members.

But of all of them, I know not one who appears physiologically satisfied, as all of them were utterly and wholly neurotic. I appear neurotic because I am not too neurotic to deal with it. Our cynics personality is just a figment of a collective neurosis.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

The Hierarchies of Human Values Empty
PostSubject: Re: The Hierarchies of Human Values The Hierarchies of Human Values Icon_minitimeFri Sep 08, 2017 10:08 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
The degree to which the wealthy and sexually superabundantly provided with - "stars" - succumb to drug overdoses and suicides is indication enough that the west is physiologically structurally under satisfied.

If its ideals of satisfaction can't even find satisfaction... but the very fact that the one man in that crowd that definitely did find satisfaction and still does wrote down those very lines is also telling - it is honesty that leads to satisfaction. Not the dominant pretence of already being satisfied.

Look at a lion that hasn't eaten for a while.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

The Hierarchies of Human Values Empty
PostSubject: Re: The Hierarchies of Human Values The Hierarchies of Human Values Icon_minitimeFri Sep 08, 2017 10:23 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Ive read and heard many accounts of one night stands wrought in cafes in Amsterdam, and they invariably amounted in the astonishing conclusion of disgust. And I can concur - the one time I truly "ended up" with someone - where I had been entirely passive - I was indeed disgusted afterwards. Thats the only manner in which sex ever disgusted me, it not being the result of my very deliberate choice of a female, and the resulting will to make a sacrifice, which is the true aphrodisiac of the soul that advances toward the comprehensive psyche, the physiology as an order, a microcosm.

Apollo is not simply a tyrant, he is The Artist Tyrant.
His son Da(r)w(i)n shed some light on the methods.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

The Hierarchies of Human Values Empty
PostSubject: Re: The Hierarchies of Human Values The Hierarchies of Human Values Icon_minitimeFri Sep 08, 2017 11:37 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Real women are still common enough in America. Glad Canada is on that level too, or at least Quebec.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Sauwelios
bowstring
bowstring
Sauwelios

Posts : 109
Join date : 2011-12-15
Age : 41
Location : Amsterdam

The Hierarchies of Human Values Empty
PostSubject: Re: The Hierarchies of Human Values The Hierarchies of Human Values Icon_minitimeFri Sep 08, 2017 2:43 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Quote :
It is curious to hear you say that, as I think you personally know quite a few males for whom this has been a serious problem.
And I know this cynic you relate of, he is to my eyes always been an utter fool, he has never really made a lot of sense to me.
I know from experience that it does not work the way he says. Everybody has to make quite a controlled effort to find a mate. That the cynic is himself a bottom feeder does not mean that every individual can lower himself to that standard, that he is physiologically able of deriving satisfaction from that.

I didn't mean to suggest that they can, but you wrote: "it is very hard for a large segment of the male population to find sexual partners, and that this is largely due to the behaviour of woman in large populations, where they gravitate to wealth and material security, which is so superabundant in certain circles that it becomes hard for the lower echelons to acquire a mate."

Sure, they gravitate to the rich and powerful, but the latter will repel most of them. So there are male and female hierarchies, based (simply put) on wealth and beauty, respectively, and only the most beautiful--according to the reigning standard of beauty, with which I've always only partly agreed (I value natural beauty infinitely higher than glitter, plastic surgery, etc.)--will gain access to the most wealthy. So both men and women will have to settle for someone of more or less the same status or lower, and if it's more or less the same it will be at least somewhat tricky, yes.


Quote :
I rather count physiological satisfaction as the final, the top of the pyramid, as it represents the main criterium that matters in evolution. Mate-selection is the game with the highest stakes, and the most dramatic rate of failure.

There's different levels of satisfaction, or there's a difference between needs and desires. Eating shabby food will fulfill the basic need for nutrition, but it probably won't satisfy you. Maslow's pyramid is about needs, not desires. I'm pretty sure we've discussed the difference in the past, though I don't remember the outcome. So here's a quote instead...

"Against the theory that the single individual has in view the advantage of the species, of his posterity, at the cost of his own advantage: that is only appearance.
The tremendous importance with which the individual takes the sexual instinct is not a consequence of its importance for the species: but procreation is the genuine achievement of the individual and consequently his highest interest, his highest expression of power (naturally not judged from consciousness, but from the center of the whole individuation)." (Nietzsche, Will to Power 680 whole, Kaufmann trans.)

The first sentence is in agreement with contemporary Darwinism. The second is not (sex has evolved to be considered so important in accordance with the mechanism I described above), but even if it's true, it's only about individual achievement. Nietzsche called, e.g., Schumann a German event and Goethe a European event; he himself may in that light be regarded as a planetary event. Procreation was not or would not have been their highest expression of power.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

The Hierarchies of Human Values Empty
PostSubject: Re: The Hierarchies of Human Values The Hierarchies of Human Values Icon_minitimeSat Sep 09, 2017 2:51 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I can attest to the fact that one smokes (or drinks) usually because one lacks physiological and psychological security/wellbeing. The occasional times when I do have that security for a while I have no urge to smoke or drink. But reality always intrudes on heightened states, and I am thrown back into the need for cigarettes and drink. Others use hard drugs or cheap sex/porn as vices, but the need is always the same, I think.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

The Hierarchies of Human Values Empty
PostSubject: Re: The Hierarchies of Human Values The Hierarchies of Human Values Icon_minitimeSat Sep 09, 2017 3:32 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Yes, human collective consciousness (math, history, politics, language, art, culture - anything that has come to be over many generations and is not physically embedded inn the genetic body) is a chemical experiment, and thrives on somewhat ill health - on a state of suspended satisfaction.

When I am in nature for a few days, I don't read a word except a runic one I carve in a tree, I don't have the urge to listen to music,let alone to read or watch a story - all I want to do is breathe, and walk. The furthest thing from my mind is drugs and sex is not as much of an urge as nature constantly provides with a lot of what we need sex for.

In this sense, I think that human culture is absolutely impossible without bad habits, drug-use and vice. It is all the result of our looking for something more than what is plentifully given and on an important level entirely sufficient.

We can not be "in humanity" - concerned with the world - without wine, tobacco, weed, opium, LSD, whatever. Anyone who does not ever use any of such means is always, always, aways going to be very superficial and thus deluded, a slave - or a savage.

I would never be able to trust someone who isn't familiar with drugs when it comes to politics, for example. That would be completely absurd to me - such people can be very noble but they are guaranteed to be naive when it comes to human nature.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

The Hierarchies of Human Values Empty
PostSubject: Re: The Hierarchies of Human Values The Hierarchies of Human Values Icon_minitimeSat Sep 09, 2017 3:43 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Fixed Cross wrote:
Yes, human collective consciousness (math, history, politics, language, art, culture - anything that has come to be over many generations and is not physically embedded inn the genetic body) is a chemical experiment, and thrives on somewhat ill health - on a state of suspended satisfaction.

When I am in nature for a few days, I don't read a word except a runic one I carve in a tree, I don't have the urge to listen to music,let alone to read or watch a story - all I want to do is breathe, and walk. The furthest thing from my mind is drugs and sex is not as much of an urge as nature constantly provides with a lot of what we need sex for.

In this sense, I think that human culture is absolutely impossible without bad habits, drug-use and vice. It is all the result of our looking for something more than what is plentifully given and on an important level entirely sufficient.

We can not be "in humanity" - concerned with the world - without wine, tobacco, weed, opium, LSD, whatever. Anyone who does not ever use any of such means is always, always, aways going to be very superficial and thus deluded, a slave - or a savage.

I would never be able to trust someone who isn't familiar with drugs when it comes to politics, for example. That would be completely absurd to me - such people can be very noble but they are guaranteed to be naive when it comes to human nature.

Yes, I agree. These are really good insights.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

The Hierarchies of Human Values Empty
PostSubject: Re: The Hierarchies of Human Values The Hierarchies of Human Values Icon_minitimeSat Sep 09, 2017 3:51 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Sauwelios wrote:
Quote :
It is curious to hear you say that, as I think you personally know quite a few males for whom this has been a serious problem.
And I know this cynic you relate of, he is to my eyes always been an utter fool, he has never really made a lot of sense to me.
I know from experience that it does not work the way he says. Everybody has to make quite a controlled effort to find a mate. That the cynic is himself a bottom feeder does not mean that every individual can lower himself to that standard, that he is physiologically able of deriving satisfaction from that.

I didn't mean to suggest that they can, but you wrote: "it is very hard for a large segment of the male population to find sexual partners, and that this is largely due to the behaviour of woman in large populations, where they gravitate to wealth and material security, which is so superabundant in certain circles that it becomes hard for the lower echelons to acquire a mate.

Sure, they gravitate to the rich and powerful, but the latter will repel most of them. So there are male and female hierarchies, based (simply put) on wealth and beauty, respectively, and only the most beautiful--according to the reigning standard of beauty, with which I've always only partly agreed (I value natural beauty infinitely higher than glitter, plastic surgery, etc.)--will gain access to the most wealthy. So both men and women will have to settle for someone of more or less the same status or lower, and if it's more or less the same it will be at least somewhat tricky, yes.

Thats not possible though, if one needs to gravitate to the same status or lower, the other needs to gravitate to the same or higher.

But the thing is that an increasingly small percentage of the male population "consumes" the majority of the young, normatively attractive female population, these days. Like with lions. Whereas it is not the case that an increasingly small percentage of the female population consumes or wants to consume such segments of the male population.

So the relations are very skewed, the "sexual market" is not equal for men and women.
This has a lot to do with the nature of power as it differs in men and women. A man can get rich overnight and get himself a harem of very desirable women, a woman can never get that much more attractive over night.

Quote :
Quote :
I rather count physiological satisfaction as the final, the top of the pyramid, as it represents the main criterium that matters in evolution. Mate-selection is the game with the highest stakes, and the most dramatic rate of failure.

There's different levels of satisfaction, or there's a difference between needs and desires. Eating shabby food will fulfill the basic need for nutrition, but it probably won't satisfy you. Maslow's pyramid is about needs, not desires. I'm pretty sure we've discussed the difference in the past, though I don't remember the outcome. So here's a quote instead...

Thats the problem with that pyramid, isn't it. There are only two real needs in there.
On top of that, in human beings, desires not infrequently trump needs, which is the cause of our complicated collective consciousness, our culture, which in no way is "necessary" and in no way provides us with necessities.

Quote :
"Against the theory that the single individual has in view the advantage of the species, of his posterity, at the cost of his own advantage: that is only appearance.
The tremendous importance with which the individual takes the sexual instinct is not a consequence of its importance for the species: but procreation is the genuine achievement of the individual and consequently his highest interest, his highest expression of power (naturally not judged from consciousness, but from the center of the whole individuation)." (Nietzsche, Will to Power 680 whole, Kaufmann trans.)

The first sentence is in agreement with contemporary Darwinism. The second is not (sex has evolved to be considered so important in accordance with the mechanism I described above), but even if it's true, it's only about individual achievement. Nietzsche called, e.g., Schumann a German event and Goethe a European event; he himself may in that light be regarded as a planetary event. Procreation was not or would not have been their highest expression of power.

This is a different subject, though. We are not here discussing what is the highest expression of power.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

The Hierarchies of Human Values Empty
PostSubject: Re: The Hierarchies of Human Values The Hierarchies of Human Values Icon_minitimeSat Sep 09, 2017 3:58 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Maslow's pyramid was made in the spirit of an empirical reductionist materialist non-philosophical bullshit paradigm in science. No real scientist like Newton or Einstein or Darwin would take it seriously. At best it is a guide, which can be said to be generally true more or less in certain limited contexts. But as Fixed points out, the bottom should really be on the top. The positivist idea that we can somehow draw a straight line from body needs to emotional needs to social needs to mental needs (or whatever) is embarrassingly naive.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

The Hierarchies of Human Values Empty
PostSubject: Re: The Hierarchies of Human Values The Hierarchies of Human Values Icon_minitimeSat Sep 09, 2017 4:21 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
From an old ILP post:

Fixed Cross wrote:
Faust wrote:
I think that the urge to screw should not be interpreted as an urge to preserve the species.
Correct. The causal logic of evolution-theory as actions (such as sex) leading to results (such as survival of the gene pool), is misinterpreted often as an active motivation operative in the species or organisms "will".

Animals don't do what they does to attain an evolutionary goal. If the tendencies of a species with a certain type of tendencies happen to result in procreation, obviously these the tendencies are what survives any continuation of this species. What has survived in general is not any species, but the tendency to engage in sexual activity.

More basically, what has survived is the type of organism to which sexual activity is pleasurable.

I'm sorry for stating the totally obvious, but it seemed to be lost in the teleological terminology so often mistakenly used to contextualize evolution and sexuality.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Sauwelios
bowstring
bowstring
Sauwelios

Posts : 109
Join date : 2011-12-15
Age : 41
Location : Amsterdam

The Hierarchies of Human Values Empty
PostSubject: Re: The Hierarchies of Human Values The Hierarchies of Human Values Icon_minitimeSat Sep 09, 2017 8:53 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Fixed Cross wrote:
Sauwelios wrote:
Quote :
It is curious to hear you say that, as I think you personally know quite a few males for whom this has been a serious problem.
And I know this cynic you relate of, he is to my eyes always been an utter fool, he has never really made a lot of sense to me.
I know from experience that it does not work the way he says. Everybody has to make quite a controlled effort to find a mate. That the cynic is himself a bottom feeder does not mean that every individual can lower himself to that standard, that he is physiologically able of deriving satisfaction from that.

I didn't mean to suggest that they can, but you wrote: "it is very hard for a large segment of the male population to find sexual partners, and that this is largely due to the behaviour of woman in large populations, where they gravitate to wealth and material security, which is so superabundant in certain circles that it becomes hard for the lower echelons to acquire a mate.

Sure, they gravitate to the rich and powerful, but the latter will repel most of them. So there are male and female hierarchies, based (simply put) on wealth and beauty, respectively, and only the most beautiful--according to the reigning standard of beauty, with which I've always only partly agreed (I value natural beauty infinitely higher than glitter, plastic surgery, etc.)--will gain access to the most wealthy. So both men and women will have to settle for someone of more or less the same status or lower, and if it's more or less the same it will be at least somewhat tricky, yes.

Thats not possible though, if one needs to gravitate to the same status or lower, the other needs to gravitate to the same or higher.

True. I did realize that after posting my post, but I didn't change it, because I was also talking about status, not class. So yes, I should have left the "or lower" part from my argument, except that I was wrong in the first place. The only men and women who will have to settle for someone of more or less the same status are those whose prospective partners and themselves give a hoot about status to begin with!


Quote :
But the thing is that an increasingly small percentage of the male population "consumes" the majority of the young, normatively attractive female population, these days. Like with lions. Whereas it is not the case that an increasingly small percentage of the female population consumes or wants to consume such segments of the male population.

Sure, I never meant to suggest that it's a one-to-one equal distribution. But we're still only talking about young, normatively attractive females.


Quote :
So the relations are very skewed, the "sexual market" is not equal for men and women.
This has a lot to do with the nature of power as it differs in men and women. A man can get rich overnight and get himself a harem of very desirable women, a woman can never get that much more attractive over night.

Well, the nature of political power. As Zarathustra says:

"Just see these superfluous ones! Wealth they acquire and become poorer thereby. Power they seek for, and above all, the lever of power, much money--these impotent ones!
See them clamber, these nimble apes! They clamber over one another, and thus scuffle into the mud and the abyss.
Towards the throne they all strive: it is their madness--as if happiness sat on the throne! Ofttimes sitteth filth on the throne,--and ofttimes also the throne on filth." ("The New Idol", Common trans.)


Quote :
Quote :
Quote :
I rather count physiological satisfaction as the final, the top of the pyramid, as it represents the main criterium that matters in evolution. Mate-selection is the game with the highest stakes, and the most dramatic rate of failure.

There's different levels of satisfaction, or there's a difference between needs and desires. Eating shabby food will fulfill the basic need for nutrition, but it probably won't satisfy you. Maslow's pyramid is about needs, not desires. I'm pretty sure we've discussed the difference in the past, though I don't remember the outcome. So here's a quote instead...

Thats the problem with that pyramid, isn't it. There are only two real needs in there.

No, I disagree. They're all needs.


Quote :
On top of that, in human beings, desires not infrequently trump needs, which is the cause of our complicated collective consciousness, our culture, which in no way is "necessary" and in no way provides us with necessities.

True, desires may trump needs; but only needs that are higher on the pyramid. For example, the desire for more esteem may very well trump the need for self-actualization.


Quote :
Quote :
"Against the theory that the single individual has in view the advantage of the species, of his posterity, at the cost of his own advantage: that is only appearance.
The tremendous importance with which the individual takes the sexual instinct is not a consequence of its importance for the species: but procreation is the genuine achievement of the individual and consequently his highest interest, his highest expression of power (naturally not judged from consciousness, but from the center of the whole individuation)." (Nietzsche, Will to Power 680 whole, Kaufmann trans.)

The first sentence is in agreement with contemporary Darwinism. The second is not (sex has evolved to be considered so important in accordance with the mechanism I described above), but even if it's true, it's only about individual achievement. Nietzsche called, e.g., Schumann a German event and Goethe a European event; he himself may in that light be regarded as a planetary event. Procreation was not or would not have been their highest expression of power.

This is a different subject, though. We are not here discussing what is the highest expression of power.

Well, if we suppose that one's highest expression of power gives one the highest feeling of power, it's very much what we're discussing. The highest satisfaction.

::

Thrasymachus wrote:
Maslow's pyramid was made in the spirit of an empirical reductionist materialist non-philosophical bullshit paradigm in science. No real scientist like Newton or Einstein or Darwin would take it seriously.

Er, isn't Newtonian mechanics the epitome of empirical reductionist materialist non-philosophical bullshit science? And Einstein rejected quantum mechanics because "God does not play dice", i.e., it isn't classical mechanics. And Darwin, too, reduced evolution to mechanisms.


Quote :
At best it is a guide, which can be said to be generally true more or less in certain limited contexts. But as Fixed points out, the bottom should really be on the top.

Well, I don't agree with Fixed on that.


Quote :
The positivist idea that we can somehow draw a straight line from body needs to emotional needs to social needs to mental needs (or whatever) is embarrassingly naive.

Okay.

::

Here's something I wanted to say. Maslow considered all four needs below self-actualization mere "deficiency needs". This reminds me of the following:

"It is a common opinion that the human activity called philosophy is neither necessary nor useful, and the prevalence of this belief compels philosophy to justify itself. The justification often involves asking, first, about what is necessary and useful for man, and eventually about the nature of man himself. One way to approach the question 'What is man?' is to look at man's place in the world and speculate about the things that might distinguish men from other beings that one sees or imagines. The question comes down to this: Is man's reason or intelligence something different from the rest of the world of nature and from those other parts of man's being that he shares with the higher animals? Or is man's reason simply a more complex mental mechanism than those of other animals, merely an extension of, or an improvement on, animal faculties--one that serves to satisfy the same needs, desires, and passions that animals experience, but in a more efficient and perfect fashion? This question is inseparable from the question of what constitutes politics." (Muhsin S. Mahdi, Alfarabi and the Foundation of Islamic Political Philosophy, page 16.)

On the next page, Mahdi formulates the second alternative as "the view that the proper aim of political life and of man himself is to gain greater efficiency in attaining ends that are not specifically human but are more elaborate versions of ends pursued by certain animals--pleasure, wealth, honor, and so forth." (op.cit, page 17.) I've always found that intriguing: do animals pursue wealth and honor?

Now I know both of you reject the kind of "humanism" to which Mahdi seems to point. But even if the traditional view of "animals" as opposed to "human beings" is wrong, in the sense that it does justice to neither "non-human animals" nor to "human beings", it may still be correct in a different sense. It may do justice to the difference between the many subhuman members of our species and the few veritably human ones. Mahdi also writes:

"Islamic philosophy shared the ancient view that man is a special kind of being; that his ability to reason--his power to know himself and the whole--is the activity that marks him as different from other animals; and that reasoning is therefore the ultimate purpose of his existence." (op.cit, page 16.)

That ancient view is the Aristotelian view. But compare the "power to know himself and the whole" to Being and Time:

"Dasein is an entity which, in its very being, comports itself understandingly towards that being. [...] The previous disclosure of that for which what we encounter within-the-world is subsequently freed, amounts to nothing else than understanding the world--that world towards which Dasein as an entity always comports itself."

The difference between the (sub)human and the (super)human may then be the difference between inauthentic and authentic Dasein. To be sure, though, Strauss writes:

"The plebeian character of the contemporary scholar or scientist is due to the fact that he has no reverence for himself and this in its turn is due to his lack of self, to his self-forgetting, the necessary consequence or cause of his objectivity; hence he is no longer 'nature' or 'natural'; he can only be 'genuine' or 'authentic.' Originally, one can say with some exaggeration, the natural and the genuine were the same (cf. Plato, Laws 642c 8-d 1 777d 5-6; Rousseau, Du Contrat Social I. 9 end and II. 7, third paragraph); Nietzsche prepares decisively the replacement of the natural by the authentic. That he does this and why he does this will perhaps become clear from the following consideration. He is concerned more immediately with the classical scholars and historians than with the natural scientists (cf. aph 209). Historical study had come to be closer to philosophy and therefore also a greater danger to it than natural science. This in turn was a consequence of what one may call the historicization of philosophy, the alleged realization that truth is a function of time (historical epoch) or that every philosophy belongs to a definite time and place (country). History takes the place of nature as a consequence of the fact that the natural--e.g. the natural gifts which enable a man to become a philosopher--is no longer understood as given but as the acquisition of former generations (aph. 213; cf. Dawn of Morning aph. 540)." (Strauss, Studies in Platonic Political Philosophy, "Note on the Plan of Nietzsche's Beyond Good and Evil".)

The genuine philosopher "must reinstate nature or assign limits to its conquest" (Lampert, Leo Strauss and Nietzsche, page 105). Nietzsche did so by teaching the eternal recurrence; Heidegger, by teaching our mortal dwelling with things. As I wrote near the end of my "Note on the First Chapter of Leo Strauss's Final Work":

"As in Heidegger's work, so in Nietzsche's the room for political philosophy is occupied by gods or the gods: Dionysus and Ariadne (cf. paragraph 15 of the central chapter)."
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

The Hierarchies of Human Values Empty
PostSubject: Re: The Hierarchies of Human Values The Hierarchies of Human Values Icon_minitimeSun Sep 10, 2017 2:30 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Quote :
Quote :
Maslow's pyramid was made in the spirit of an empirical reductionist materialist non-philosophical bullshit paradigm in science. No real scientist like Newton or Einstein or Darwin would take it seriously.

Er, isn't Newtonian mechanics the epitome of empirical reductionist materialist non-philosophical bullshit science? And Einstein rejected quantum mechanics because "God does not play dice", i.e., it isn't classical mechanics. And Darwin, too, reduced evolution to mechanisms.

I'm genuinely confused why you would equate "mechanism" with positivism and "empirical reductionist materialist non-philosophical bullshit paradigm."

Quote :

At best it is a guide, which can be said to be generally true more or less in certain limited contexts. But as Fixed points out, the bottom should really be on the top.

Well, I don't agree with Fixed on that.


Quote :
The positivist idea that we can somehow draw a straight line from body needs to emotional needs to social needs to mental needs (or whatever) is embarrassingly naive.

Okay.

Okay.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

The Hierarchies of Human Values Empty
PostSubject: Re: The Hierarchies of Human Values The Hierarchies of Human Values Icon_minitimeSun Sep 10, 2017 2:32 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Attempting to understand something in terms of underlying systems and mechanics does not automatically make one a positivist or a "materialist" (which is already a stupid and hopeless term). Logic does not preclude... logic.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

The Hierarchies of Human Values Empty
PostSubject: Re: The Hierarchies of Human Values The Hierarchies of Human Values Icon_minitimeSun Sep 10, 2017 5:22 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Sauwelios wrote:
True. I did realize that after posting my post, but I didn't change it, because I was also talking about status, not class. So yes, I should have left the "or lower" part from my argument, except that I was wrong in the first place. The only men and women who will have to settle for someone of more or less the same status are those whose prospective partners and themselves give a hoot about status to begin with!

Sexual status would largely be defined as appeal, though - and everyone cares about that.

Quote :
Quote :
But the thing is that an increasingly small percentage of the male population "consumes" the majority of the young, normatively attractive female population, these days. Like with lions. Whereas it is not the case that an increasingly small percentage of the female population consumes or wants to consume such segments of the male population.

Sure, I never meant to suggest that it's a one-to-one equal distribution. But we're still only talking about young, normatively attractive females.

Well, "only" is a bit out of place, as that is the center of the "market" - almost all masculine seductive resources, (powers, moneys, charms, etc) go into obtaining the favours of that group.

This is tired to my entrap point, that sex is not just a personal matter, it is what drives economies, and has driven them since time immemorial.

Quote :
Quote :
So the relations are very skewed, the "sexual market" is not equal for men and women.
This has a lot to do with the nature of power as it differs in men and women. A man can get rich overnight and get himself a harem of very desirable women, a woman can never get that much more attractive over night.

Well, the nature of political power. As Zarathustra says:

"Just see these superfluous ones! Wealth they acquire and become poorer thereby. Power they seek for, and above all, the lever of power, much money--these impotent ones!
See them clamber, these nimble apes! They clamber over one another, and thus scuffle into the mud and the abyss.
Towards the throne they all strive: it is their madness--as if happiness sat on the throne! Ofttimes sitteth filth on the throne,--and ofttimes also the throne on filth." ("The New Idol", Common trans.)

Do you mean to equate monetary power to political power? I don't think they are the same thing.
I think ven that N here alludes to the same distinction as Frank Underwood does in season 1 of House of Cards.

Quote :
Quote :
Thats the problem with that pyramid, isn't it. There are only two real needs in there.

No, I disagree. They're all needs.

That would mean one can't exist without them. I strongly disagree.
I don't think self-realization, to begin with, can be called a need.

Quote :
True, desires may trump needs; but only needs that are higher on the pyramid. For example, the desire for more esteem may very well trump the need for self-actualization.

By now the system has been shown to be a random hodgepodge of terms. At least to be far too inefficient to be dealt with logically. It needs tone conditioned, amended, we need to debate what is a need and what is not - it is completely inexact. And intact things piss me off to no length if they make claims to being a system.

Quote :
Quote :
This is a different subject, though. We are not here discussing what is the highest expression of power.

Well, if we suppose that one's highest expression of power gives one the highest feeling of power, it's very much what we're discussing. The highest satisfaction.

It is not what we have been discussing at all, which is whether or not we can identify with some exactitude and logical consistency satisfaction, need, desire, and power, in terms of such a neat pyramid and in terms of such neatly separated categories, which I must conclude has been proven to not be the case. This pyramid is a remarkably feeble pretence to order. Seeing as you, as its defender, have had to amend it to be able to keep discussing it.

Quote :
Thrasymachus wrote:
Maslow's pyramid was made in the spirit of an empirical reductionist materialist non-philosophical bullshit paradigm in science. No real scientist like Newton or Einstein or Darwin would take it seriously.

Er, isn't Newtonian mechanics the epitome of empirical reductionist materialist non-philosophical bullshit science? And Einstein rejected quantum mechanics because "God does not play dice", i.e., it isn't classical mechanics. And Darwin, too, reduced evolution to mechanisms.

Ah - I misread this. This is in part true. Einstein ejected the implications of the uncertainty principle because they would not allow for the universe to be regarded as a Newtonean mechanism.

Goes does not play dice mean: there is no uncertainty in the mechanism of physics.
In short, he didn't have VO. He didn't see that the logic on both scales (QM and GR) is the same, though the manifestations form a dichotomy of sorts.

Having said this, obviously Newtonean mechanics apply completely and totally to this universe. I don't know why anyone would call them bullshit or reductionist. Newton certainly never reduced anything. He observed some exact certainties. That we can't apply Newton to what isn't technically matter does not make Newton reductionist.

f=m.a. Is that to be regarded reductionist bullshit now? Postmodernism is really aggressive.

Adding: I do not think there is a coherent system called "Darwinism". I think there is Darwin, who observed a sublime mechanism, but never reduced anything to mechanistic views at all. Im rereading the Origin of Species at the moment. Darwnism is the least Darwin-like thing there is. Just like most Nietzscheanism tends to be a bitter embarrassment to Nietzsche, as we see on ILP. There is Nietzsche, thats it.

(I am certain that VO is the proper continuation of his project of transvaluation toward the Earth and the superman, but this does not give me any claims to Nietzsche himself.)

I thank you sincerely for showing up here again at my request - what this exchange between the three of us has done though is demonstrate to me that I really need to stop this public philosophy - it doesn't attribute the proper value to any of our minds. If anything is reductive bullshit, it is the way we are having to reduce ourselves to make sense to each other now. Or quite as bad, reduce each other.

More pride. More power. More realism.
That is the new paradigm.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

The Hierarchies of Human Values Empty
PostSubject: Re: The Hierarchies of Human Values The Hierarchies of Human Values Icon_minitimeSun Sep 10, 2017 5:57 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Darwin did not reduce evolution to mechanics. He discovered evolution. He posited a logic. Yeah, logic has a mechanistic aspect. Is now everything that has a mechanism a reductionist bullshit? This is going very far in the wrong direction, very fast.



We really need a lot more respect for thought. To begin with, that means no longer sharing it for free.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

The Hierarchies of Human Values Empty
PostSubject: Re: The Hierarchies of Human Values The Hierarchies of Human Values Icon_minitimeSun Sep 10, 2017 6:16 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Fixed Cross wrote:

We really need a lot more respect for thought. To begin with, that means no longer sharing it for free.

Agreed.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Arch-Native Philosophy - Sumerian Bill and Ted - The Magical Tree of Life Academy
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10533
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Sun May 31, 2020 12:07 am

___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Sauwelios
bowstring
bowstring
Sauwelios

Posts : 109
Join date : 2011-12-15
Age : 41
Location : Amsterdam

The Hierarchies of Human Values Empty
PostSubject: Re: The Hierarchies of Human Values The Hierarchies of Human Values Icon_minitimeSun Sep 10, 2017 2:56 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
As I start writing this, I haven't read anything since posting my last post.

I had this further thought. According to Spiral Dynamics, there have been six first-tier ages or stages, and only two second-tier ones. Likewise, according to Maslow, there are four deficiency needs and only one non-deficiency need. Now according to Spiral Dynamics, there will ultimately also be six second-tier ages or stages, which are the higher-tier equivalents of the six first-tier ones.* Perhaps then Maslow's "self-actualization" or "self-transcendence" really consists of the non-deficiency equivalents of the four deficiency needs!

* Something similar is the case in (Western) astrology, where the first six signs are something like the "I" or "Self" signs, whereas the other six are something like the "You" or "Other" signs.


Thrasymachus wrote:
Quote :
Quote :
Maslow's pyramid was made in the spirit of an empirical reductionist materialist non-philosophical bullshit paradigm in science. No real scientist like Newton or Einstein or Darwin would take it seriously.

Er, isn't Newtonian mechanics the epitome of empirical reductionist materialist non-philosophical bullshit science? And Einstein rejected quantum mechanics because "God does not play dice", i.e., it isn't classical mechanics. And Darwin, too, reduced evolution to mechanisms.

I'm genuinely confused why you would equate "mechanism" with positivism and "empirical reductionist materialist non-philosophical bullshit paradigm."

Mechanism reduces everything to the mechanical parts (unities, particles--or even units, quanta) it posits as given to experience (empiria).

::

Thrasymachus wrote:
Attempting to understand something in terms of underlying systems and mechanics does not automatically make one a positivist or a "materialist" (which is already a stupid and hopeless term). Logic does not preclude... logic.

I agree, but then those systems and mechanics (logic) mustn't be understood in terms of givens, as all (modern) science does (it does not think, beyond them).

::

Fixed Cross wrote:
Sauwelios wrote:
True. I did realize that after posting my post, but I didn't change it, because I was also talking about status, not class. So yes, I should have left the "or lower" part from my argument, except that I was wrong in the first place. The only men and women who will have to settle for someone of more or less the same status are those whose prospective partners and themselves give a hoot about status to begin with!

Sexual status would largely be defined as appeal, though - and everyone cares about that.

Sure, but appeal to whom? Social status is status in the eyes of society at large. Sexual status, i.e., social status with regard to sex appeal, is then only about sex appeal to society at large; not to individuals whose self-classification is not in accordance with their social status. To be sure, as that passage from Eysenck says, "the Av group tends to think of itself as middle class" etc. I connect this to Heidegger's concept of falling into the They-self (what "they" say determines what one thinks).


Quote :
Quote :
Quote :
But the thing is that an increasingly small percentage of the male population "consumes" the majority of the young, normatively attractive female population, these days. Like with lions. Whereas it is not the case that an increasingly small percentage of the female population consumes or wants to consume such segments of the male population.

Sure, I never meant to suggest that it's a one-to-one equal distribution. But we're still only talking about young, normatively attractive females.

Well, "only" is a bit out of place, as that is the center of the "market" - almost all masculine seductive resources, (powers, moneys, charms, etc) go into obtaining the favours of that group.

This is tired to my entrap point, that sex is not just a personal matter, it is what drives economies, and has driven them since time immemorial.

I'm not contesting this, but for me the key word is "normatively" (see above). Now as I said before, I have always partly agreed with that norm, that standard of beauty or attractiveness. Recently however I've finally had the insight that such females can never be "mindmates" to a philosopher. Since childhood my main concern was with "love/belonging" in that respect (including sex, of course, but then the position of sex in Maslow's hierarchy is controversial, and indeed: can one be dying from lack of sex as one can be dying from hunger? I think not); now, I think it should rather be with "esteem".


Quote :
Quote :
Quote :
So the relations are very skewed, the "sexual market" is not equal for men and women.
This has a lot to do with the nature of power as it differs in men and women. A man can get rich overnight and get himself a harem of very desirable women, a woman can never get that much more attractive over night.

Well, the nature of political power. As Zarathustra says:

"Just see these superfluous ones! Wealth they acquire and become poorer thereby. Power they seek for, and above all, the lever of power, much money--these impotent ones!
See them clamber, these nimble apes! They clamber over one another, and thus scuffle into the mud and the abyss.
Towards the throne they all strive: it is their madness--as if happiness sat on the throne! Ofttimes sitteth filth on the throne,--and ofttimes also the throne on filth." ("The New Idol", Common trans.)

Do you mean to equate monetary power to political power? I don't think they are the same thing.
I think ven that N here alludes to the same distinction as Frank Underwood does in season 1 of House of Cards.

I suppose then it's not even the nature of political power. Of what power is it, then?


Quote :
Quote :
Quote :
Thats the problem with that pyramid, isn't it. There are only two real needs in there.

No, I disagree. They're all needs.

That would mean one can't exist without them. I strongly disagree.
I don't think self-realization, to begin with, can be called a need.

That's not what "need" means here;

"The most fundamental and basic four layers of the pyramid contain what Maslow called 'deficiency needs' or 'd-needs': esteem, friendship and love, security, and physical needs. If these 'deficiency needs' are not met--with the exception of the most fundamental (physiological) need--there may not be a physical indication, but the individual will feel anxious and tense." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27 ... #Hierarchy)

Only the physiological needs are needs in the sense you mean, and only insofar as not meeting them directly results in one's demise.


Quote :
Quote :
True, desires may trump needs; but only needs that are higher on the pyramid. For example, the desire for more esteem may very well trump the need for self-actualization.

By now the system has been shown to be a random hodgepodge of terms. At least to be far too inefficient to be dealt with logically. It needs tone conditioned, amended, we need to debate what is a need and what is not - it is completely inexact. And intact things piss me off to no length if they make claims to being a system.

Quote :
Quote :
This is a different subject, though. We are not here discussing what is the highest expression of power.

Well, if we suppose that one's highest expression of power gives one the highest feeling of power, it's very much what we're discussing. The highest satisfaction.

It is not what we have been discussing at all, which is whether or not we can identify with some exactitude and logical consistency satisfaction, need, desire, and power, in terms of such a neat pyramid and in terms of such neatly separated categories, which I must conclude has been proven to not be the case. This pyramid is a remarkably feeble pretence to order. Seeing as you, as its defender, have had to amend it to be able to keep discussing it.

Quote :
Thrasymachus wrote:
Maslow's pyramid was made in the spirit of an empirical reductionist materialist non-philosophical bullshit paradigm in science. No real scientist like Newton or Einstein or Darwin would take it seriously.

Er, isn't Newtonian mechanics the epitome of empirical reductionist materialist non-philosophical bullshit science? And Einstein rejected quantum mechanics because "God does not play dice", i.e., it isn't classical mechanics. And Darwin, too, reduced evolution to mechanisms.

Ah - I misread this. This is in part true. Einstein ejected the implications of the uncertainty principle because they would not allow for the universe to be regarded as a Newtonean mechanism.

Goes does not play dice mean: there is no uncertainty in the mechanism of physics.
In short, he didn't have VO. He didn't see that the logic on both scales (QM and GR) is the same, though the manifestations form a dichotomy of sorts.

Having said this, obviously Newtonean mechanics apply completely and totally to this universe. I don't know why anyone would call them bullshit or reductionist. Newton certainly never reduced anything. He observed some exact certainties. That we can't apply Newton to what isn't technically matter does not make Newton reductionist.

f=m.a. Is that to be regarded reductionist bullshit now? Postmodernism is really aggressive.

Well, I did say "Newtonian" whereas pseudo-Thrasymachus said "Newton". And yeah, consider what I said about systems and mechanisms (logic) above.

f=m*a may not have been superseded, but p=m*v has: it turns out it's really (rather) p=γ*m*v. It's just that gamma is virtually 1 except at tremendous speeds.
γ*m is what's been called "relativistic mass".


Quote :
Adding: I do not think there is a coherent system called "Darwinism". I think there is Darwin, who observed a sublime mechanism, but never reduced anything to mechanistic views at all. Im rereading the Origin of Species at the moment. Darwnism is the least Darwin-like thing there is. Just like most Nietzscheanism tends to be a bitter embarrassment to Nietzsche, as we see on ILP. There is Nietzsche, thats it.

Well, I don't mean to be facetious, but Nietzsche is dead. What there is is the writings of Nietzsche and interpretations of those writings. My interpretation is most indebted to the interpretations found in Lampert's Leo Strauss and Nietzsche, which is in great part Lampert's interpretation of Strauss's interpretation of Nietzsche's interpretation of--being...


Quote :
(I am certain that VO is the proper continuation of his project of transvaluation toward the Earth and the superman, but this does not give me any claims to Nietzsche himself.)

I thank you sincerely for showing up here again at my request - what this exchange between the three of us has done though is demonstrate to me that I really need to stop this public philosophy - it doesn't attribute the proper value to any of our minds. If anything is reductive bullshit, it is the way we are having to reduce ourselves to make sense to each other now. Or quite as bad, reduce each other.

More pride. More power. More realism.
That is the new paradigm.

::

Thrasymachus wrote:
Fixed Cross wrote:

We really need a lot more respect for thought. To begin with, that means no longer sharing it for free.

Agreed.

But that is what the Sophists did. To demand money (or goods) for one's thoughts means that one presents one's thoughts as wise. "Receiving my thoughts will be good for you." Receiving a grant is different, for then one is enabled to spend more time and energy on the thinking that one already shared for free. I think it's unwise to present one's thoughts as wise. The less intelligent or developed may actually believe it and do the most foolish things on that basis. I will not teach my thoughts without teaching that they're at least on some level wishful.

"Unlike most thinkers of this century, [Heidegger] was clear that neither his country, nor her universities existed or have any right to exist apart from the resolve to have them. Consequently he despised any allegiance which assumed that its object exists independently of the will that it be. Self-assertion, the willing of its self, is the only existence moral or communal things can have. Heidegger, therefore, rejected Hitler's claim that Aryan superiority over Jews exists by nature apart from will or self-assertion. He traced Hitler's error to 'fishing in the murky waters of values and universals,' that is, to what Spinoza called superstition. For Hitler wanted his biologists to prove his racial theories scientifically.
Heidegger despised Hitler for this 'Platonic' enslavement to the common sense need for independently existing moral standards. The lesson of 1933 was responsible for Heidegger's liberal contempt for politics. It taught him that Hitler's enslavement to superstition was no exception, but the necessary hallmark of political or moral life." (Neumann, Liberalism (1991), "Illiberalism or Liberalism?")

"Being is Self-Valuing", as I put it in my Value Philosophy signature, means Being unconceals itself as self-valuings. But Being conceals its unconcealing, which means it may reveal itself differently at some point. Now Lampert writes:

"Nietzsche cannot and does not magically dispense with nature, transporting himself into some radical historicism that supposes it can solve the problem of nature by treating nature as a conceptual fiction. Nietzsche does not conquer nature conceptually, denying its sway and affirming the modern fiction of our radical power to make ourselves whatever we fancy. Nor does Nietzsche surrender to nature under another name, affirming the radical subjection of our minds to the shifting power of what is given, to Being, say." (Leo Strauss and Nietzsche, page 104.)

The former temptation is what Heidegger came to fear most:

"The possibility that we might become mere resources, Heidegger explained in an interview in 1969, is an even more dangerous consequence of technology than weapons of mass destruction: 'I think about what is developing today under the name of biophysics. In the foreseeable future we would be in the position to make man in a certain way, i.e. to construct him purely in his organic being according to how we need him: as fit and unfit, clever and stupid' (Wisser, p. 36). For many, of course, the prospect of biological engineering is one of the great promises still to be realized in technology. For Heidegger, it would remove the last obstacle to completely reducing us to a resource. At the point that we can create ourselves in whatever way we see fit, there will no longer be room to acknowledge any constraints on us or any demands on us that we need to respect. We will no longer encounter anything which can provoke us to find new ways to be human." (Mark Wrathall, How to Read Heidegger, final chapter.)

But the latter temptation, to conceive nature or Being as something that eludes even the greatest possible grasp of transhumanism, does not suffice. What we need is natures, plural, for example human nature. Provoked by this problem of nature, the will to the recurrence is the new, current way to be human, the way to be human in the Nietzschean age. It's a self-actualization, a peak, on the level of Homer, Plato, Machiavelli, and their peers. At least that's how I see it, and want to see it.

::

In the meantime I've jogged and thought of two things I still want to address. The first is that the philosophers who opposed the Sophists did of course also make the less intelligent or developed--the natural victims of sophists--believe that they were wise and do the most foolish things on that basis. The difference was the difference between the short term and the long term. The way I see it, the Sophists had short-term bad influence whereas the Socratics had short-term good influence and long-term bad influence. The Platonic age was the aeon whose word, according to Crowley, was AIO (I just looked this up): the Logos, the Demiurge, the God of the philosophers. In this it was a continuation of the Homeric age. The Machiavellian and Nietzschean ages are the aeon whose word, according to Crowley, is Thelema, the Will.

At this moment I'm entertaining the thought that the Demiurge is what Heidegger criticized as the conception of Being (To Be) as one being (entity) among others, albeit the highest. In any case, the second thing I still wanted to address is VO's being a logic. I've basically been insisting that it be a "thelemic". The novelty of the Nietzschean age is, in my Lampertian reading, that the setting for philosophy has changed, under the influence of Christianity and the Enlightenment, so that it's no longer a viable strategy for political philosophy to pass off as truth what is "in truth" semblance. I'll conclude with a Picht quote (note that the phrase by Picht I was just thinking of reads "to pass off as Being what in truth is semblance"):

"The truth is not outside of creating, it is rather the carrying-out of creating itself. The truth is the composing [Dichten, "poetizing"] of truthful semblance. Since however the composer of this semblance is himself only a dream, only the mask which Dionysianly conjures the omnipresence of the horizon of the millennia, the composer becomes transparent to himself as the steward of the dream of history on which the whole past continues to compose. He is the dreamer who knows that he's dreaming, that he's being carried, led, formed, guided and composed by a power which eludes his own control. Hence 'Joyful Wisdom' 54 begins with the statement: 'How marvelously and newly and at the same time how horrifically and ironically do I feel disposed towards the entirety of existence with my cognition!' (V 2, 90) The marvel is the discovery that, through the inversion of the statement 'God is dead' and through the cognition of truthful semblance, the appearance of the world beams forth in a divine radiance. The new is the discovery of the future, the horrific is the shattering of the subjectivity of the subject, is the cognition that the subject is nothing else than the embodiment of past and future history, thus, as I've said, the mask in which the omnipresence of history is conjured in the creative moment. This discovery is horrific for this reason, that through it the principium individuationis [principle of individuation] shatters, that man becomes aware of the fact that his own existence, too, is only a dream, only semblance, only a designing-oneself in new possibility, only a hovering without support. The irony, finally, is in the fact that the man who has attained to the cognition of this truth is like a dreamer who knows that he's dreaming, like a creator who no longer creates unconsciously but sees through his own creating at the same time. In this way existence becomes perspectival in the dual sense that it's conscious of the historical limitedness of its own horizon and at the same time knows that, precisely through this limitedness, it provides and possesses insight into the contradictory structure of the Being of being as a whole. The dreamer who knows that he's dreaming is a symbol which sees through itself as a symbol." (Georg Picht, Nietzsche, page 319, my translation. The earlier phrase is from page 282.)

I've decided to go a little further after all. The first of the following two passages reminded me of the second:

"For Heidegger, by contrast, the primary worry about technology is not that we are becoming dependent on machines to supply us with the necessities of life, nor that machines hold more power to destroy life than the world has ever before seen. The real danger is that technology will deprive us of our essence as human beings: 'Human being is, according to its essence, compelled to always new experiments [on ways to be human]!' But in the technological world, 'the danger stands that man is completely delivered over to technology and one day will be made into a controlled machine' ('Aus Gesprächen mit einem buddhistischen Mönch', in Reden, p. 590)." (Wrathall, ibid.)

"For philosophy, Kant's knowledge that reason only has insight into what it itself brings forth in accordance with its design can, if finite reason is historical, only mean that thinking, in an ever-revolving change, makes its own designing of the design the object of its knowledge. If the knowledge however is to be true nonetheless, then absolute spirit must manifest itself in every finite form of reason. For a thinking which radically carries out the change of consciousness, the self-knowledge of reason in the act of its designing becomes a 'phenomenology of spirit', that is to say a doctrine of the forms in which the absolute essence of spirit appears as finite. Now Nietzsche carries out a change which puts into question even the fundamental presupposition of Hegel's: that the absolute in and for itself is already with us. Kant's doctrine 'that reason only has insight into what it itself brings forth in accordance with its design' is taken so radically that it now comes to light how reason itself has been brought forth in history by man, in accordance with his own design. The force which brings forth and determines both reason and the principle of identity that constitutes it bears the name 'the will to power'. Thinking, knowing and acting is now interpreted out of the historic carrying-out of designing, that is to say out of value-determination. Whereas in Kant the apriority of reason is condition of the possibility of designing, through the change carried out by Nietzsche the design becomes the condition of the possibility of reason. The model from which the essence of the design can be read, however, is still the experiment. Hence philosophy as a whole must now emerge as an attempt, for the attempt is the design of the open horizons for the future forms of thinking and acting. The attempt is the design of the possibilities of the future history of mankind. [...]
If the attempt is understood as the design of the future possibilities of historic existence [Dasein--Picht had just mentioned Heidegger], the experiment carried out here can no longer be interpreted as if the experimenter stood toward the experiment he conducts as an impartial observer. In this design he designs his own possibility. The carrying-out of his own life [or living--Leben] is the attempt. [...]
This is the total sublation [Aufhebung] of the traditional distinction between theory and practice. Since Nietzsche, every thinking is reactionary which does not venture to accomplish the entire life of him who thinks as an experiment of the knower, as a designing [Entwerfen, lit. "unthrowing oneself"] into the future possibilities of human history." (Picht, op.cit., page 72.)

Sorry for quoting at such length. Also, it wouldn't surprise me if this Picht stuff is precisely what VO teaches. I am still missing, in both Picht and VO, the connection between the will to power and the eternal recurrence I've found in Strauss, though.


Last edited by Sauwelios on Mon Sep 11, 2017 6:48 am; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : Corrected one word in a quote.)
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

The Hierarchies of Human Values Empty
PostSubject: Re: The Hierarchies of Human Values The Hierarchies of Human Values Icon_minitimeSun Sep 10, 2017 4:02 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
As long as it is clear that Maslovs pyramid is not a logical system of any sort, neither relies on nor offers a method of science, but rather has the criteria and substance of a new age sort of model. "The individual will feel stress" ... heh. Its nicely evocative and associative, and you can draw it with rainbow colouring. It has (beyond the quoted marijuana prescription) no syntax to connect its terms though, which makes it logically null and void, as Im sure we can all agree.

Yes, at tremendous speeds, energy ceases to behave as mass, the mass disintegrates into force and even less "substantial" self-valuing; thus doesn't apply to Newtons laws about mass.

Note that Newton had no laws for light. He does not enter that equation, he does not construe gravity mathematically from another value, he rather uses it as a standard for his applied mathematics. He doesn't describe the quantum universe, but the Newtonean one - the one described by his three laws. This universe is the standard for all practical science, as well as for the sets of calculations that amount to the relativistic one, as well as the quantum one. We might say that Einstein was simply overambitious, and that GR does not apply necessary to the whole of the cosmos but simply to the universe of mathematical reference frames built from empirical data of astrophysics.

Like the Nietzschean universe is that which is described by the will to power.

You ask what kind of power money is -- I am not sure if that is not a sophism on your part, if it really has you puzzled, it is certainly an interesting question to ponder - as most lives surely revolve for a good deal around acquiring monetary power to obtain sustenance. What makes power different from money?

That is a question for the Federal Reserve.




Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

The Hierarchies of Human Values - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: The Hierarchies of Human Values The Hierarchies of Human Values - Page 2 Icon_minitimeSun Sep 10, 2017 4:53 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Does Nietzsche turn into a sophist when someone pays for his work? I am sure I do not follow that logic. Especially since people are actually buying his work, since unlike ours it is in book-form, and since no doubt he was paid when he lectured at the university.
Im sure you are kidding. Unless you are referring to my playful call to sophism here.

Quote :
Sorry for quoting at such length. Also, it wouldn't surprise me if this Picht stuff is precisely what VO teaches. I am still missing, in both Picht and VO, the connection between the will to power and the eternal recurrence I've found in Strauss, though.

Picht tends to make a lot of sense to me. It also makes sense that VO does not imply the eternal recurrence of the same, as of course the only thing that implies such a thing is Nietzsches hypothetical ad-absurdum calculation with 19th century speculative physics - but what VO does show is how affirmation of the ER indeed characterizes a strong state of being, a self-comprehensive valuing.

We see thus that to believe in a fiction can be a very real strength, if that fiction can't be disproven. And it can't be disproved if one doesn't listen to argument. That is how religion works, and how belief in the ER should work.

"The ER is real, therefore blah blah blah", rather than "blah blah, therefore the ER is real."
But anyway I don't believe in it. I think it's a bunch of bullshit, myself.

Considering the style of the chapter wherein it is celebrated, I also severely doubt that Nietzsche managed to believe in it. Ive often mentioned this, but the time I read it in German, which happened to be in the Alps, it made me nauseous with pity. Nausea perhaps because pity is the very last thing I want to feel with respect to Nietzsche - but more likely because of how the verses were wrought.

The artifice isn't sublime, not forest-like, referring to your psychedelic German encounter that started all of this. No, it is his least Nietzschean writing. And yet, the idea itself still does him justice, as an ornament. He sacrificed a bit of his philosophership to also be an initiator of a religion. But Im not in that particular sect.

I do think there is very much sense in it as a metaphor, that applies to various different orders of being and exactitudes of recurrence. For example, it can easily be argued that time revolves around actions, rather than that actions take place in time. That would allow certain types of action to stand beyond time, as first causes of paradigms, worlds, theoretically even universes.

Central logic is again VO - against the Mechanistic universe - only the empirical instance of pure being forms the hub of the axes that designate the context where we can speak of being; this is Dasein - but Heidegger wasn't explosive enough to fully explicate the world-shaping power of this primordial phenomenon of mind.

It occurs to me that VO is prescribing Dasein even through how one reasons with it - constantly going through the process, forming cycles of time with the mind.

Future patterns...
A game of chess, self-valuing as the king, VO is the board.
the rules are daemonic. The game is speculative ethics.
the winner is... king, self-valuing. The other is not only disproven king, but disproven existent. Failure to self-value. Disclosure, indeed, but not only - the game itself is the self-valuing we are speaking about really. King vs king, wave vs wave. Which collapses into which? It is always clear. A stalemate is a mutual collapse.
Whether the game itself self-values depends on the players - if they both exceed the sum of their own parts engaging the other as a valuable resistance, then the game might draw both players into itself and perform a magic, bring one of them immortal victory, in which he transcends himself completely into the greater order of Chess - or War, or Science -- or you name it, as long as it is Great.
That is positivism, to me - the positing through the will to power in a limited environment manifested as intelligence. Creative intelligence, to be more precise. Its not mere deriving - it can't derive down, into lesser orders, it must explode itself into a greater order, or perish.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Sauwelios
bowstring
bowstring
Sauwelios

Posts : 109
Join date : 2011-12-15
Age : 41
Location : Amsterdam

The Hierarchies of Human Values - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: The Hierarchies of Human Values The Hierarchies of Human Values - Page 2 Icon_minitimeMon Sep 11, 2017 2:57 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I didn't mean that, if the world is the will to power and nothing besides, the eternal recurrence must logically/necessarily be a fact. What I meant is that, if the world is the will to power and nothing besides, viewing the world as such must mean willing it as such. But precisely if it is, it cannot be willed as such.

My first formulation of this problem, before I found it explicitly in Strauss, reads thus:

I wrote:
Nietzsche's philosophy is the philosophy of the eternal recurrence [i.e., not of the will to power] [...] for the following reason. Nietzsche defines philosophy as the most spiritual will to power which prescribes to nature what or how it ought to be ([BGE] 9). Nietzsche's philosophy prescribes to nature that it ought to be will to power and nothing besides. However, this means prescribing to it that it ought to be what it most probably is. In other words, commanding it that it be what it most probably is. But how could something not be what it is? How could I command a miserable wretch about nihilism to be a miserable wretch about nihilism? He could not do otherwise if he wanted to! So that's not much of a command. Therefore, the command must be, "remain what you are". But of the essence of what nature is is change. Nietzsche does not command nature to stop changing. What he does is, he commands it to keep changing to all eternity. But change is not all there is to nature; it is a series of specific forms. What Nietzsche does is, he commands nature to be that series of specific forms to all eternity. In other words, he commands it to eternally recur. This is why Nietzsche's philosophy is not simply the philosophy of the will to power, but the philosophy of the eternal recurrence of the will to power: Nietzsche's philosophy prescribes to nature, not that it be what it most probably is, but that it recur eternally as what it most probably is. In other words, he does not prescribe to nature what it ought to be, so much as how it ought to be:

"The determination 'will to power' replies to the question of being with respect to the latter's constitution; the determination 'eternal recurrence of the same' replies to the question of being with respect to its way to be." (Source: Heidegger, Nietzsche, Vol. II, Chap. 26, trans. Krell.)

In the meantime, I've reformulated it several times, but can't readily find those formulations right now. Strauss's explicit formulation, or at least the part of it that I saved, is this:

"We start again from the premise that reality is will to power, and there is no essential difference between men and brutes; there is no nature of man strictly speaking. Given this premise, the doctrine of eternal return, which means, subjectively, transformation of the will into acceptance, is the only way there can be knowledge, as acknowledging of what is, and it is the only way in which there can be nature; that is to say, that which is by itself and not by being willed or posited. But precisely because acceptance is transformed will, will survives in the acceptance, in the contemplation. Contemplation is creative." (Lecture transcript of May 18, 1959.)

And in my book draft, I've formulated it as follows:

Quote :
"Where is innocence? Where there is will to procreation. And he who seeketh to create beyond himself, hath for me the purest will." (Thus Spake Zarathustra, "Immaculate Perception", Common translation.)

The will to create beyond oneself is the pure form of the will to power. But this will is present even in perception. Perception necessarily "maculates", that is, re-creates its object. All perception involves interpretation. And this does not just apply to sense perception, but to intellection as well. Thus the word translated as "perception" by Common is Erkenntnis, "cognition" or "knowledge". Cognition is necessarily maculate, for knowledge is a mental image of something else--not of itself...

Now Leo Strauss rightly discerned a problem within the doctrine of the will to power:

"Precisely if all views of the world are interpretations, i.e. acts of the will to power, the doctrine of the will to power is at the same time an interpretation and the most fundamental fact[.]" (Strauss, Studies in Platonic Political Philosophy, page 178.)

The doctrine of the will to power is the doctrine that all occurrences are acts of the will to power. Thus Nietzsche wrote:

"I recognized the active force[,] that which creates[,] in the midst of the coincidental
--coincidence is itself only the colliding into each other of creating impulses" (Nietzsche, Notebooks Winter 1883-1884 24 [28] = section 673 of The Will to Power.)

But the word translated as "recognized" is erkannte, "cognized"; the doctrine of the will to power is not a discovery through immaculate cognition, but itself a creation, an imposition, a violation of the way things are. It therefore cannot simply be the most fundamental fact. The "recognition" that all occurrences are acts of the will to power is a willful re-creation of those occurrences.

Now we can only know what happened in the past. As Crowley says:

"[W]e can never know what is happening, but only what has just happened, even when most actively concentrated on what we call 'the present'." (Crowley, Little Essays, "Memory".)

Yet we cannot will into the past. The will is directed into the future. And we cannot will things to be exactly what they are or were, for then it's not a case of willing at all. In order to see all--past--occurrences as acts of the will to power, therefore, we must will them to be what they were--but now in the future! We must will them to recur, as acts of the will to power. This is the necessary connection between the doctrine of the will to power and the idea of, nay the will to, the eternal recurrence.

[...]

Now even if we limit our acceptance of the will to power doctrine to cognition, the necessary connection to the eternal recurrence still holds. In order to see all--past--acts of cognition as acts of the will to power, we must will them to be what they were, but now in the future. We must will them to recur, as acts of the will to power.

I will probably delete this last quote soon. For now I'll add, though, that if all acts of cognition are acts of the will to power, all cognition must be a willing into the future. I'm reminded:

"Said ye ever Yea to one joy? O my friends, then said ye Yea also unto all woe. All things are enlinked, enlaced and enamoured[.]" (Zarathustra, "The Drunken Song".)

Perhaps cognition itself is always a joy, even if what is cognized is woeful. Compare:

"We cannot exert our understanding without from time to time understanding something of importance; and this act of understanding may be accompanied by the awareness of our understanding, by the understanding of understanding, by noesis noeseos, and this is so high, so pure, so noble an experience that Aristotle could ascribe it to his God. This experience is entirely independent of whether what we understand primarily is pleasing or displeasing, fair or ugly. It leads us to realize that all evils are in a sense necessary if there is to be understanding. It enables us to accept all evils which befall us and which may well break our hearts in the spirit of good citizens of the city of God." (Strauss, "What Is Liberal Education?")

The realization that cognition is will to power is the noesis that noesis is poiesis. As such, it's not just a realization, but also an actualization. Self-actualization.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

The Hierarchies of Human Values - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: The Hierarchies of Human Values The Hierarchies of Human Values - Page 2 Icon_minitimeMon Sep 11, 2017 4:13 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Excellence. Lets hope WL and Bill are lurking.

Ill be contemplating this for a while, as your book quote finally made me understand why one would from an analytic perspective find it necessary to affirm the Eternal Recurrence of the Same.
I admit it is far deeper, more demanding, more Heideggerian than I had figured.

I can easily accept it without feeling I have missed things I shouldn't have though, because it is also clear to me that VO is a means to affirm the recurrence "grammatically", syntactically. Selfvaluing logic is a picture of itself, thereby it is a knowledge that forges a unity knowledge and being - (a unity - and it claims that there is no the unity) and thus destroys the difference between ontology and epistemology.

I am glad to see that not only you have at last set yourself to write a book, but that also the first thing I read from it clarifies what has had me puzzled for fifteen years or more - your insistence on the ERs crucial importance for philosophical course of action, a politics of philosophical life.

Very interesting. Ive saved the text to my hardddrive. I do believe this stuff needs to be rewarded, that it can't be thrown like pearls to the swine. Here, it is in its place as it is valued in the terms it carries (not to say in its own terms, I can't make that claim, obviously), but even so you must indeed make sure you don't lose the momentum of your book to free publications of its first part.

It is not proper to not derive power from power. Philosophy must stand in the world, otherwise there is no Dasein.

Now our philosophies may merge. Parodites, Aletheia-Thrasymachus, Pezer, you and myself - all of these now, in my mind, address, if entirely different universes and orders, also the very same thing. A form of consciousness that is a proto-mind from which we derive the mind anew, this time it is not shaped haphazardly from a derangement of the instincts, but as an architecture in time, a true meddling with the process. It is not without trepidation that I praise all this.

Parodites was the first to reveal to me the possibility of truly cracking the mind. More crucially, of having that intention. Now, every one of the other 3 has shown me not only this intent but also the accomplishment. And none of that really surprises me - Ive anticipated this moment even as I sat on your couch below the poster of that British girl.

Now I can place that memory - it was the period in which I was practicing affirmation of the ER. Streetfighter EX lent itself very well for it.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Arch-Native Philosophy - Sumerian Bill and Ted - The Magical Tree of Life Academy
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10533
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Sun May 31, 2020 12:09 am

individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Love Empty
PostSubject: Love Love Icon_minitimeFri Mar 16, 2018 1:17 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
The perfect person will just slip into your soul and fit there perfectly, and you into theirs. No force or pressure is needed.

This is what love means, to me anyway.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Styrkjar
bowstring
bowstring
Styrkjar

Posts : 27
Join date : 2018-01-21
Age : 22
Location : The abyss

Love Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love Icon_minitimeFri Mar 16, 2018 9:23 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I completley agree, it's an absolute certainty. If she is the right one it just feels right.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Love Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love Icon_minitimeTue Mar 20, 2018 11:21 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Real love will always rescue you from the depths of any hell.






___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Love Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love Icon_minitimeThu Mar 29, 2018 1:10 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Shit I figured it out. What Love is.

Two souls tangled up with each other.

Look at this from the vantage of VO.


Omg. This is real.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Love Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love Icon_minitimeFri Mar 30, 2018 1:44 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Yes, this is when its real and it ends, death is a natural result. To live on after this actually means to have to become something else. Which is why the modern world with all its miracles exists. People that got destroyed had to somehow continue existing, and took radical measures: creating a kind of life out of the rubble of their remains.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Love Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love Icon_minitimeFri Mar 30, 2018 1:56 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
It's also why VO exists. VO is the re-employment of my being after I was torn apart completely. Which in turn followed the suicide of someone who didn't choose to re-employ. Not just my being was used, of course, my way of recreating life just happened to be with philosophical and scientific materials.

Science and philosophy now are even more alive. I only came alive again after VO led me to another love, which never could become fully unfolded and which the will never have to fully die, and which thus won't have to kill me. Ill tay sort of entangled with her forever.

But yes when two souls get entangled they also get violently ripped away from their old world. Which is why in family oriented societies love is nearly impossible. All that is allowed by the forces of nature there is hypocritical relationships. When there is love it will remain secret, a private affair.

So we are talking about love here as it was invented in the early Middle Ages as the Roman Empire fell apart and the virgin cult branched off into an earthly ideal, the damsel in the tower and the French language.

LANGUEDOC



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Love Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love Icon_minitimeFri Mar 30, 2018 2:03 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
So Parodites is right that before Christianity there wasn't such a thing as a soul. Not in such a way the it could be entangled with another. It was all still more physical.

What proto-soul and entanglement there was was between members of the same sex. The Greeks -

You may forget but
let me tell you
this: someone in
some future time
will think of us

-Sappho



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Love Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love Icon_minitimeSat Apr 14, 2018 5:29 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I suppose the power to create is equal to the power to destroy, if nothing else, itself. Love is a really crazy intense experience of subjective edification, pleasure in the loss of control over oneself that means and requires the existence of higher and deeper orders of control. Thus why love is so close to what freedom is and means.

I think love breaks us down what we used to be and reconstitutes us anew and continually from moment to moment, we become a “self-making making-ness” as such, almost as if the creative-destructive loop were being compressed in space and time: in space as the offshoring of the destructive element’s activity through the most narrow and specialized threads of subjectivity such that is allowed continuous flows of new contents into the soul by way of these more or less stabilized-reified connections so that a machine is set up whereby destruction is applied instantly to anything outside the domain of thd closed love-loop ouroborus between two lovers; and in time as the entrapment of phenomenological quanta in this looping river between and as two souls so utterly connected to each other and in such deep ways even they cannot know and must only “feel”, so that even the experience of meaning itself is changed and time becomes something you define based on every moment with the other person and every little shade and iteration and nuance of that moment, rather than time being something that defines you.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Love Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love Icon_minitimeSat Apr 14, 2018 5:51 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
How do I know these things, how do I figure out these things? I am a relentless excess. My soul is such that it generates continuously this overflow and I must do something with it; I drink to suppress and manage it but then the drinking also causes it to overflow out of me, unstoppable, until I drive people away with my manic energy and constantly messaging them, because for me every single moment and idea and sentence spoken or written between myself and another person becomes a potential universe, into which I am able to dump some of my excess out of myself. Philosophy is a side effect of all this, for me anyway. Love seems closer to the roots.

I enliven my soul in love, in enjoying and partaking in the pleasures of other’s excess so that I have something to relate my own to more truly and completely. Taylor Swift’s music for example, or a great conversation over drinks with a great woman. In a back and forth existential dance I want to intake all of their excess into myself and discharge all of my own excess into them, and since we are like volcanos always erupting inside of ourselves this just works. And yes this means of communicating soul to soul and excess-exchanging has to be created, had to be created in human history. And it barely just exists, it is very rare. But imagine down the road at some point in the future when this thing I am describing, this thing called love, is as common as simpler pleasures like drinking a glass of wine.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Love Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love Icon_minitimeSat Apr 14, 2018 7:18 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
This kind of love activates me in ways I cannot be activated otherwise. It needs to be reciprocated moment to moment, then this kind of excess-looping thing can generate totally new subjective states and possibilities in me, and I can become like an entirely new person, the best version of everything good in me. It all comes out, naturally and effortlessly, one after another after another, ideas, emotions, energy, all of it. Everything in consciousness. Therefore I conclude that this kind of experience of love is basically what consciousness is, at root; what we call love is the totalizing self-activation of consciousness aggregating itself hierarchically within itself according to its own principles, and requires this presence and image of the other person for whom this activation can occur and be equally as meaningful as their own activation is for us. The elevation and exchange of excesses in motion.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Love Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love Icon_minitimeSun Apr 15, 2018 10:02 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
All of this bullshit about love, it’s unrequited nature in my case, is turning my focus back to my writing. I’ll push my books out to the world, now. And try to market them as I’m able.

I’ll be remembered as the Future Nietzsche. Maybe I’ll change my name on the books to that.

Also I’m going to publish all of my writings in private message, chat, and letters about this love experience I had. “Love’s Excesses” will be the title. With the intro I’ll write it should be at least 200 pages. And I already know the quote or at least the person I’ll use to quote from, to open the book. Rachel Whetzsteon, a poet from NYC who killed herself on Christmas due to extreme boredom and unrequited love. It’s perfect. She is a great poet too.

Bleed openly.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Love Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love Icon_minitimeSun Apr 15, 2018 10:13 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Also a line from Taylor Swift, to open the book.

After all that nice smooth tequila this beer tastes extra bitter. Good. How appropriate.

Four books, not too bad. About 1000 pages. But I can do better. It’s only a beginning. Daemonic excess, Value Ontology, and tectonics break upon the shit in the soul and transform it into something qualitative, something vital, something necessary. Something living.

So glad I’m over her, finally. She taught me how to unlock myself and live outside of myself. But then she abandoned me and forced me back into myself, and I can’t see ever coming out again. Oh well. Good.

Bleed excess openly. That’s the only motto for living that I know.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Love Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love Icon_minitimeSun Apr 15, 2018 10:14 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I have no shame. Good.

“Guilt is merely the first form of knowledge. And pride, not even the first.” -from my lost writings



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Love Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 2:44 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
i now realize the emotion of love is a psychological capitalism. love is the feeling of deep mutual interconnectivity per what i’ve outlined in Social Webs; massive constant exchanges of excesses back and forth are freely given by both parties in order to generate new value on both ends. each excess exchange represents increase in value on both sides.

this increase in value due to the transaction of excesses, is what we experience as the emotion of love.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 3:28 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Or maybe it's more simple. Indeed a christian thing, and one Aphrodite and Eros laugh at.

More self-deceit than actual transaction.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 3:31 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
In my experience, the main function of love is to shield the lovers from real world forces. A cowardice.

Nietzsche said it was a victory over christianity. Yes, like in the sense that covering one's self in shit is a victory over a rapist abductor with OCD.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Love Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 3:44 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
read my thread on social webs.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 3:45 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Ok. But a thing to add first.

Indeed Astarte would veritably scoff.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 3:46 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Where is it?
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Love Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 3:49 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
https://beforethelight.forumotion.com/t1260-social-webs
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Love Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 3:59 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
What is called love is a proxy for knowledge; knowledge of oneself, of others, of information (facts) generally. As well as a proxy for being able to process and do something with that knowledge, to link things in more interesting ways wherein the addition of one new piece of information is able to properly change the entire knowledge-structure if that is what is logically called for.

This is one reason I am a misanthrope now - most people are utterly incapable of doing this, of properly processing new information. At best they attempt to catalogue it somewhere appropriate in their knowledge-sphere, but nowhere does the new piece of information cause logical chain reactions that would produce massive new changes that would be called for, derivatively, based on that new addition of knowledge.

Philosophy, philo-sophy, is called a thing about love for a reason. Love is indeed a proxy as I noted above.

When it comes to personal intimate love of another person, it is all about the excess-transfers between 'souls' (phenomenologically, metaphysically speaking, etc.). Yes we have a soul, and no I am not talking about some religious idea. The soul is a collection of the entirety of our being, at every possible level in which this occurs. Ideas, feelings, remembered experiences, inner visualization, rote perception, heuristics of behavior, desires and goals, actions, language and ideas, unconscious impulses, number and degree of facts accumulated and understood, and of course the impulse or lack thereof to assemble all that together in the most comprehensive, coherent and powerful structure possible. <--- that is literally what "soul" means.

When two people are in love, their respective souls entwine. This is why the phrase "soul mates" has real meaning, why such a phrase even exists. Before you even meet your future lover, your two souls are already in sync and agreement simply due to the large number and degree of similarities between you two with regard to the aspects of what soul means, which aspects I just outlined above. Now when you actually meet such a person, your and their soul immediately begin to form intimate deep interlinkages, threads like a spider's web, and on those threads your respective excesses begin to transact. You move some of your excesses to the other person and they move some of theirs to you. This is why I stated that love is a kind of psychological capitalism, because in such exchanges of excesses every single transaction is freely chosen and represents an increase of value on both sides.

Our body, hormones, etc. are attuned to produce a feeling called "being in love" which feeling is a subjective emotive expression of the fact that such a vast excess-transaction is occurring and more importantly that such an occurrence is producing new value for you, is actually growing and expanding and deepening you in the most literal sense possible. You can liken this to Nietzsche's notion of the feeling of the increase of will to power. We feel ourselves becoming more. That is partly what the feeling of love indicates. But the feeling of love also indicates other things, like security and understanding, new possible plateaus on which to act and engage productively based on how we determine productive engagement according to our own standards of self-valuing; expanded novelty is also an important function of the experience of love and which the feeling of love represents.

Love is simply the 'emotional' (define emotional: bio-psychological body proprioceptive process of feeling massive physical and psychological changes occurring all together at once and felt/experienced as a single feeling and change rather than as all of those individual feelings and changes that in fact amassed together in the same moment to produce the overall emotion) representation of a fact, namely the fact of productive soul-interlinkage causing real and literal increase in our being.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 5:18 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
This logic of yours. It's a superstition.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Love Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 5:47 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
explain what you mean, and then prove it.

i don’t do bullshit. such as one-line dismissals with... nothing else.

ffs this is a philosophy site. i mean jesus
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 8:15 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Is bullshit rather not ignoring what is obvious between people who know eachother and eachother's reference points all too well?

But then that is what I mean by the superstition of logic. You ignore what is real by pretending it is it that must pass your test.

Like Zoot. Except you at least have the balls to bring metaphysics into it.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Love Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 8:44 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I take valuing as the axiom and from there I explain things like logic.

Love, to me, is simply a strong valuing. Without this very powerful, all consuming, all encompassing experience, the notion of valuing as will to power would not have occurred to me; love to me simply means the thing by virtue of which I understand other things. It is the most irreducible concept in my life, precisely because it is the most comprehensive and all consuming.

It would be impossible for me to understand or approach love as being built up of other things, or to derive it from a combination of other concepts, because I can not conceive of anything anymore as not being built out of valuing, and I can't really conceive of any worthy human made thing, concepts included, as not being built out of love.

Hormones are valuings, and indeed they work together in cohering and amounting in a greater valuing, but I don't think they "cause" love - rather I think love, as a phenomenon, is what causes these hormones to have a function, terms in which they are valued and van self-value; and thereby causes them to exist.

A hormone did not come into being without a function, it did not exist as a consistently appearing substance without its function; it came into being because valuing was expanding and required new configurations of itself.

This is how I approach love in my own life too, as the means by which I know myself, become myself, the criterium for my existence. I don't give a shit about "success in love", I just care about whether Im still driven by love, or by something lesser, in which case I will have to conclude that I no longer exist.



Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

A Note for Saweliows Empty
PostSubject: A Note for Saweliows A Note for Saweliows Icon_minitimeTue Jul 24, 2018 2:42 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
The weak don't want to live at any cost, they want not to feel pain. They're afraid of death because of the pain and dying without having known release from pain. Of course Buda comes along on a mission and yells "Bitch!"
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

A Note for Saweliows Empty
PostSubject: Re: A Note for Saweliows A Note for Saweliows Icon_minitimeWed Jul 25, 2018 12:05 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
To base one's understanding of the child on children one knows, such as nieces and nephews, is duzzumb. Because the whole point of a child's power is that an adult, specially an adult of the family, will neeeeeeeeever see the true child. They put on the weak mask for adulsts, they know they like it. Adults simply do not know how to play or what is worthful in life, they lost it somehow along the wizzay.

A girl is a little different, she is quite at home with adults. Boys are incredibly attracted to this strength, this ability to inhabit the boring, misterious and powerful world of adults. When they later come to play, how can a boy feel more lucky? Power towering over any big stick victory over other boys. The alpha child will drop the war game with zero explanation and go play house. He will, of course, be the father and call the shots, or that is the only victory. Maybe he'll be the doctor...

Anyway, the chizzild cannot be seen by adults. Like hobbitses! Maybe JRR Tolkien's only faliure is the faliure to imgine the true life of a child.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

A Note for Saweliows Empty
PostSubject: Re: A Note for Saweliows A Note for Saweliows Icon_minitimeWed Jul 25, 2018 12:26 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Yes, adults tend to be just the remnants of children.

This is so painful for the child as it grows to see, that it begins to pretend to respect the parent. And so another adult is born.

This whole society is remnants of children that forgot the bullshit for which they gave it all away.

Philosophers, shamans, musicians often among the exceptions. Sports players are the worst of the rule - having become adults (prefessionuls) on the most facile, pointless seriousness.

In old age humans tend to remember glimpses of reality, and become close to children. Or if these aren't available, to animals.

The thin hollow life of most adult humans is akin to the waste of natural systems through careless pragmatism.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

A Note for Saweliows Empty
PostSubject: Re: A Note for Saweliows A Note for Saweliows Icon_minitimeWed Jul 25, 2018 1:30 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I guess Zarathustra represents the ultimate care in pragmatism.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

A Note for Saweliows Empty
PostSubject: Re: A Note for Saweliows A Note for Saweliows Icon_minitimeWed Jul 25, 2018 2:00 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Lol, did I say only victory?

No, there are a lot of games to be played with girls.

The first times I tried playing with more than one girl at a time, I had already a girl I'd played with for a long time and so I was the father, she the wife, and the other girls members of the family, serving us. Vying for her spot. They were never gonna get it. If a boy insisted on playing with us, he would be a pet.

But as my wife left me, I was able later to realize that any number of games are possible with more than one girls, where not necessarily one gives any single girl supremacy in any clear or absolute way.

The last time I tried the wife thing... It is very hard, upon gazing opon a powerful girl, not to simply want to make her wife. Sort of cruel not to. The only way is to make one's self far more powerful than any one girl.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Arch-Native Philosophy - Sumerian Bill and Ted - The Magical Tree of Life Academy
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10533
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Sun May 31, 2020 12:10 am

Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Love - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 2 Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 8:49 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Oh yeah and I don't believe love is reciprocal, or meaningfully so. Sure it can be, but thats just a lucky accident. It doesn't add to the truth or power or integrity of the love or anything like that.

All acts of love are indifferent to what will be received in return; love is of course the will to sacrifice oneself for a higher arc of oneself. If there is no will to sacrifice, there certainly is no love.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Love - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 2 Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 8:52 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Pezer wrote:
Is bullshit rather not ignoring what is obvious between people who know eachother and eachother's reference points all too well?

But then that is what I mean by the superstition of logic. You ignore what is real by pretending it is it that must pass your test.

Like Zoot. Except you at least have the balls to bring metaphysics into it.

i have literally no idea what you’re talking about.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Love - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 2 Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 8:54 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
So there I actually did "reduce" love to another concept; the will to sacrifice.
By sacrifice I don't mean "throw away".

Sacrificing something means to give something an extraordinarily high purpose and thus value.
It is then transmuted in the fire of valuing into something "sacred".

The concept, sacredness and sanctity are crucial in how I approach VO; they allow me to deal with my own existence without compromising it through pulling it through a semantic wringer.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Love - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 2 Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 8:55 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Pezer wrote:
Is bullshit rather not ignoring what is obvious between people who know eachother and eachother's reference points all too well?

But then that is what I mean by the superstition of logic. You ignore what is real by pretending it is it that must pass your test.

Like Zoot. Except you at least have the balls to bring metaphysics into it.

Ehm, thats a bit over the top dude...

Zoot?

That guy can't even hold together the most basic logical strings.

I also assume Capable doesn't know who Zoot is, because he would not have a reason besides the bad luck of having stumbled into him.




___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 2 Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 9:07 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
"i have literally no idea what you’re talking about."

You are literally lying.

'Your God is imaginary, made up of your imaginación.'

'Those words in that configuración produce no meaning in me. For me to understand, help me see how it is my God that made it so.'

'Lol old trick. Funny how it used to hold so much power. I'm a little disgusted. You're smarter than this. I hope.'

_----------------_

Fixed:

The power of a tonic is not proof of its revelation of truth. One expectats revelation of truth to come with powerful elation, but to equate the two is to prefer feeling good to being right.

This love you now describe, I discussed it with Parodites once. The love that demands all things reveal their names.

For now, I will simply ask: can these hormones not arange differently and produce different states than love?
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 2 Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 9:11 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I have recently begun cautiously worshipping Astarte (she'll pull you right quick if you're not careful). She arranges those hormones into desire rather than love. Power proper, the classical understanding of what it is.

And there are other uses.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 2 Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 9:15 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
If I had to guess why Romans grew such a preferente for love, I would guess that it makes happy men who are easy to rule by any clever enough to have names wating for the momento of revelation.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 2 Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 9:18 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I prefer Jodorowski's concepción of love, which is at one time more honesto, Humble and infinetly mire ambitious:

Two lovers laying in a bed, with infinity crawled up in the córner of the bed like a cat.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 2 Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 9:22 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
To be clear, I have found all these things because my question was always: what is the greatest thing one can want? The most wantable thing?

And uh, hoo boy, love is faaaaar behind it.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 2 Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 9:29 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
To name just one drive that opens far more doors: boredom.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Love - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 2 Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 9:31 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster

"The power of a tonic is not proof of its revelation of truth. One expectats revelation of truth to come with powerful elation, but to equate the two is to prefer feeling good to being right.

This love you now describe, I discussed it with Parodites once. The love that demands all things reveal their names"

No no, thats not what I mean. I mean the love that caused me to be within an inch of death. Fuck name giving at that point. Just pure phenomenology. Recognition of the core of all events of which I can reasonably consider myself aware. Without love, no true awareness, and with love, no more things. As things don't exist, only valuing does, and where love is as total as it can be, all valuing is absorbed into it, including eating drinking and breathing.

Im not then simply equating this love with being, Im just saying that in this state of being usurped by love and having become its wheel, I was able to see into the urgency of atoms and this capacity to see allowed me to advance the WtP theorem in terms of valuing.

"For now, I will simply ask: can these hormones not arange differently and produce different states than love?"

What if I say no? I get to laugh, and nothing else happens.

Thats what Ive unlearned, using hypothesis that I can't prove.

But one may of course assume that all kind sof sensations are possible through these hormones. I seriously doubt it, by the way, as there aren't that many real sensations, and most that there are are parts of love.

But say that a few can combine into a totally alternate sensation - which still would have to be valuing though, as there is nothing else --- still even if this valuing were in no way related to love, a very unlikely case, then still this doesn't touch the point of the increasingly comprehensive self-valuing of love having caused these hormones into existence in the first place. Even if they might be bastardized later on by some use value, their root is love, and they can only be explained in terms of love.

I appreciate N intensely for stressing the difference between explication and explanation.
Science only explicates, philosophy may attempt to explain. Explanation always requires reference to a broader and looser context, and thus always requires some art, some effort on both the part of the writer and the reader.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Love - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 2 Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 9:35 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Pezer wrote:
To be clear, I have found all these things because my question was always: what is the greatest thing one can want? The most wantable thing?

And uh, hoo boy, love is faaaaar behind it.

Power, of course.
But the point is that love is the worst thing you can lose.
It the foundation of all true power you have.


Denying this would only discredit yourself - as your love of this life and this world, its uncanny purity, is what allows your style of asserting.

Caesar loved Rome, Alexander, Venus, the honour of it all, this is why he cared to dominate.


When you subtract love from your conquest, what is left is a mausoleum.
Why VO is such a juicy conquest. There is no death, no hollowness. All paths are beset with the flora of life.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 2 Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 9:37 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
What I see, with all the respect I do have for you, is you imposing direction on things that predate you. Love paints everything. And hate too.

But there are higher States that create, notice and care about more. Because this history of directions is not only ancient, but infinetly so.

Love is produced. Don't get me wrong, I don't mean materially by hormones. I mean by other uh things even more primordial than love.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 2 Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 9:39 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Not power guy. You still don't understand.

Will to power.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 2 Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 9:40 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
What is lofty enough to use love, rather than be of use to it?
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 2 Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 9:42 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Even the question gives me a slight fear boner.

I'm not used to being UNDER that question.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Love - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 2 Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 9:51 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Well I used love to create VO. Boredom, there was a lot of that too alone on these Viennese afternoons. Im talking here about one that had a guy killed and me nearly dead, an existential predicament of value identity, not some breezy affair. People die for love plenty. I thin you're being childish in the face of your own great love for, for example, your country. Or Trump, or even Obama. These aren't trivial choices, this is what you are. It indicates what you will do with power. Will to power means willing to power, you can't will to will to power, that is as if you don't already will to power.

Try to realize how I think, what Ive done to (my) thought.

I reversed the order of things, I made it so that you have to start with the most comprehensive attainment to address the simplest thing; all else is vanity and just piss poor weakness.
But this requires a magnificent leap not of faith but of actual self-valuing - it has to be capable of being a fact - has to be capable of demonstration.




*When I say love I don't mean man woman kiss kiss make baby.

I mean obsession and consequences - transmuting oneself entirely through the experience of oneself, which always has to go through a big outside world with significant outside beings in it, god plant man animal or just breath. They don't need to be human or alive at all.

Love is what you love. You love a lot of things. Thats not a hormone. The hormone is a unit in a set of data representing units that we've brought into connection with other such units when we observe them while love occurs. Love is valuing with necessity.

The only other things are pain and fear.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Love - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 2 Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 10:00 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Granted, you can wish for a greater will to power.
An such wishes are sometimes granted.
But this is not different from willing to power, as there is no other means to power than will.

Still, an interesting concept, the will to increase the will.
Id rather see it as explicating the will, cracking it open.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Love - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 2 Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 10:03 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Drugs can be used to increase the symptoms of the will to power, in other cases it can work to transmute the character of the will into a different modification, perhaps to align it with logic or with some specific being - but "All that matters is the quantum of power that one is - the rest is cowardice." - N, The Wil to Power



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Love - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 2 Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 10:13 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Love gives the risk of annihilation of subjectivity - it can be the harshest condition for it. Therein is its value, a breeding place for strengt; love is very akin to despair. It is the other side of the coin.

I see it as the most violent phenomenon, consuming lives like Saturn reaps them, and changing billions of young people into functions of a new human, rendering will irrelevant in the majority of cases - if there is one will to power in Homer that warrants attention it is that of Helen, or of Venus and Eris and all the goddesses that forget their ethics and all become like Venus, the crimson dame, she who hovers above death.

Life can't exist if not to sacrifice itself. This is just the basic condition. All else is slave morality.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Love - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 2 Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 10:29 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
What I wish to accomplish I keep for myself, as every wise man does.
But what I know, what I have, what Ive been and seen, of this I speak freely.

And of this I derive semblances of my goals, lesser forms of them which I may speak to see if there is any interest in that direction.
But don't expect me to speak philosophically of my own goals. That would be very foolish of me to do, I would dissolve into my own philosophy, even worse than when I did when my only goal was to make sure VO gets explicated enough for future scientists to understand its most empirical purposes. I will certainly want to see a bit of that myself.

Anyway, it appears my Venus in Pisces placement shining through. It is dark there at the end, the Russian degrees. When my progressed moon crossed my natal Venus my friend committed his ritual suicide.


True Romance.






___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 2 Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 10:39 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
It occurred ti me on my walk that the question with you is not what is lofty enough, but what is arrogante enough.

Flowers for Astarte. That is an arrogance that is definetely heroic.

I pledge myself to help you however I can.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Love - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 2 Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 10:49 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Yes, lol.

It was probably the first offering I ever made to a god, I knew only that I wanted to transgress.

It was very much an expression of the scarcity of my own life at that point, a willingness to go beyond mores with her was absolutely the refreshment, the direly needed entrance into the first halls of Taurus.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Love - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 2 Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 11:04 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
She was always quite a too far ahead in these days, I then simply wasn't ready to assess my own worth, which is part of what a love goddess commands. But I never feared the tally, so I made an opening.

The statue you picked is very striking and I find it very pleasant to have this goddess mentioned in our midst.



But of arrogance before a god - reflecting on why you strike at this note, I see now that it is a safety measure boring them - or worse even, insulting them with pretence or even boredom before them - which is a true scorn on them and causes havoc, pure hatred of the gods for these false peons.

It is best to be clear about ones expectations in ones deeds.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Love - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 2 Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 11:11 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
As a Taurean Jupiter I take pride I knowing my well rooted place in a long hallowed tradition until and from here. It makes me feel like a tree, a wind-swept tree, ravens became my friend.

Why is it such an honour? One very simple answer might be because my gods strike fear even in atheist hearts. Their names tell them what they already know: there's a storm coming in.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Arch-Native Philosophy - Sumerian Bill and Ted - The Magical Tree of Life Academy
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10533
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Sun May 31, 2020 12:10 am

Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 3 Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 12:26 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Are we dust?

Pezer is walking down a downtown street in Caracas with an assossiate. They are both high on acid. It is night time. Lack and hardship is their lot, within which they are overfull and arrogant. The Nacional guard starts walking beside them. Pezer uses his jedi minf powers, deflects them. He later learns they stopped to have a chay with his assossiate. Now at the hight of the lsd orgasm, having faced and evaded great danger, he happens upon a well worn arch over a sewer gate thing. He stops upon it. His assossiate had been showing him something. What was it? Millions upon millions just like Pezer had walked upon that sewer gate thing. It was full of the dirt of hours, days, millenia, seconds. With a million variations of his own heartbreak with a million variations of him and a million variations of the girl. And a million variations of a million variations. All just like him.

I am dust, he pondered.

Hail Dionisus.

Hail the bull.

Hail New York and Paris.

Pezer moved on, in search of shelter and fire for the might, aware of his puniness at the magnifiscent river of life.

We are all crocodiles.

...

Are we dust?

Pezer thinks not.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 3 Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 12:41 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Vultures became friends of mine.

Well they already were. But I understood better why. Powerful bastards.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Love - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 3 Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 1:19 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
The dust perhaps wants to be us, ancient dust once wanted to be us
and perhaps our most hopeless yearning is still this dust.
Well that is sure, and we philosophers are more dust like when we are young than when we become weathered;
the dust is still strong in this one, we may say of a youngster.
As the dust recognizes itself as such a thirst is allowed; thirst can be quenched quite well on the earth. What was once dust now is vine.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 3 Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 2:15 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Lol is now vine.

See? Arrogance.

I kinda like that. Wanna see where it goes.

Wanna help.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Love - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 3 Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 2:27 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
i don’t appreciate being called a liar. especially when i’m not lying.

lucky for you i guess, i’m a misanthrope now so i don’t have such high standards for others (you) as i once had. feel free to sully yourself and abuse your host with absurd insults and refusal to think, just you’ll have to forgive me if i don’t give a shit.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Love - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 3 Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 3:11 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
what’s the difference between me and you?

“Move units, then talk shit and we can do this
Until then - I ain't even speakin your name
Just keep my name outta yo' mouth and we can keep it the same
Nigga, it ain't that I'm too big to listen to the rumors
It's just that I'm too damn big to pay attention to 'em
That's the difference “
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 3 Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 3:17 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
You don't appreciate it?

Well, I don't appreciate you inviting me here. To lie to me.

Yeah. Lucky me. You might hex me or something, not completely sure what the threat is. You talk a big game, that's for sure.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 3 Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 3:50 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I was always fascinated by your kind Jakob. Like a brilliant treasure I couldn't quite understand. I knew about the violence, such a sensitive soul. I always tried to stick up for you, but an intelligence of that level inevitably carries a pride that can't accept real sticking up for.

I'll take all your advice with me. Good luck.

This is fucking sad. The ultimate playmate but you fundamental y cannot deal with, are offended by, the real world.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Love - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 3 Icon_minitimeSun Jul 01, 2018 11:50 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
"Bing bing boing boing"

-Trump




___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Love - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 3 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 12:00 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
You wanted me to start beating on Capable with you didn't you. "Help" me insult my friend.
That's what "the real world" is to Pedro.




___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Love - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 3 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 12:57 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I don't understand what the hell you're on about now, I guess it was the crocodiles?

Fine man were crocodiles.
Real crocs.

I'm not angry at the croc.

Just calm down man.










___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Love - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 3 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 2:15 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Pezer wrote:
Are we dust?

Pezer is walking down a downtown street in Caracas with an assossiate. They are both high on acid. It is night time. Lack and hardship is their lot, within which they are overfull and arrogant. The Nacional guard starts walking beside them. Pezer uses his jedi minf powers, deflects them. He later learns they stopped to have a chay with his assossiate. Now at the hight of the lsd orgasm, having faced and evaded great danger, he happens upon a well worn arch over a sewer gate thing. He stops upon it. His assossiate had been showing him something. What was it? Millions upon millions just like Pezer had walked upon that sewer gate thing. It was full of the dirt of hours, days, millenia, seconds. With a million variations of his own heartbreak with a million variations of him and a million variations of the girl. And a million variations of a million variations. All just like him.

I am dust, he pondered.

Hail Dionisus.

Hail the bull.

Hail New York and Paris.

Pezer moved on, in search of shelter and fire for the might, aware of his puniness at the magnifiscent river of life.

We are all crocodiles.

...

Are we dust?

Pezer thinks not.


This was great.
Weird how you then have to slip back into the bourgeois.

The only other guy who ever figured he would lecture me on "the real world" had just paid for his own gay rape by a bunch of turks and then gave up his musical genius for a life of birdwatching. I hope the similarities stay superficial.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 3 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 4:49 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Hahahahahahahahahaha

Lol no I'm just playin.

I don't think I've ever had this much fun in my life.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 3 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 4:51 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Appearently my gambling house starts in aquarious.

So yrs. Try to imagine.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Love - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 3 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 5:04 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
you better explain what you mean about me “lying” to you, because i have no idea what you’re taking about and i won’t let such an accusation stand.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 3 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 5:14 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Omg man.

That you are less than forthcoming.

In the specific case it came up earlier, that it is clearly bullshit that you didn't understand what I said. Is all.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 3 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 5:20 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Look, despite everything, we accidentally found a point of agreement.

Philo.

This love. I love football. Yes, for I do love wisdom.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Love - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 3 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 5:23 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Pezer wrote:
Omg man.

That you are less than forthcoming.

In the specific case it came up earlier, that it is clearly bullshit that you didn't understand what I said. Is all.


you mean this?

Pezer wrote:
Is bullshit rather not ignoring what is obvious between people who know eachother and eachother's reference points all too well?

But then that is what I mean by the superstition of logic. You ignore what is real by pretending it is it that must pass your test.

Like Zoot. Except you at least have the balls to bring metaphysics into it.


yeah, i have no fucking idea what that is supposed to mean, it certainly isn’t in reference to anything i’ve written here. it’s unintelligible.

learn how to formulate your thoughts in a somewhat coherent manner at least, before expecting others to have an idea what you are saying.

and no i am not lying. i don’t appreciate being called a liar, for simply pointing out that i don’t know what you mean when you make incoherent statements like the above. and then you call me a liar a second time for saying i’m not lying.

just... you are exampling very well why i became a misanthrope.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Love - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 3 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 5:27 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Pezer - dont think your clarity never fails you - it happens when you are expecting someone to understand things from where you stand even before you start to write. It is how all the world writes, but VO prohibits success here explicitly. No one can know what you mean like this, we have to guess. I can approach the meaning but I severely disagree with you, as this is not about aloofness but about real life judgement, necessities, which Zoot always panics to exclude, why he ends up where he does. Zoot is a tool. You can't expect anyone to "understand" that Capable has anything to do with him, let alone demand of Capable that he "admits" it.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Love - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 3 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 5:35 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
i’ve never even interacted with this zoot person, to my knowledge. and i don’t seecwhat it has to do with my thread here.

pezer i’m still waiting for you to say anything at all about what i’ve developed here and in the social webs thread. you simply dismissed it all without explanation. that’s not... interesting to me.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Love - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 3 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 5:42 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Zoot is the guy seemed like a prospective philosophers clan member in the thread on ILP and made some videos, which were cool at first but then he invited heroin junkies in his van and soon after got convicted for dropping his pants before minors and went to prison. Haha been out for a few months. He ha read a bunch of philosophers and is just one of these supreme nuisances that use philosophy very deliberately for the purpose of staying distracted from truth. Which means, of course, that h get every single step in philosophical discourse wrong. He slips on every fucking rung. Since I had expectations of him I despise his failure.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Love - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 3 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 5:45 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
jesus. yeah i’ve never talked to that fucktard.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Love - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 3 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 5:51 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Pezer wrote:
Look, despite everything, we accidentally found a point of agreement.

Philo.

This love. I love football. Yes, for I do love wisdom.

Ive not enjoyed football this much since 1995.

Power / freedom. The power to do something / the freedom to do something.
The freedom to restrain oneself with ones own deepest values. We have a saying in my country: eerlijk duurt het langst; honesty takes the longest time.

The truth is not for the aloof. In fact thats what the distinction is; truthful vs aloof. This is the human condition. We can't avoid to be aloof about many things, it is what we are truthful about that governs our conscience.

Why would we want a conscience? For the same reason a drug dealer needs an accurate scales.
putting your values on the scales in the moment of truth. "Philosophers" have feared this moment.

I cant believe philosophers have existed without campfires. I can literally not believe it, I don't.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Love - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 3 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 5:52 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Thrasymachus wrote:
jesus. yeah i’ve never talked to that fucktard.

Im sure it will remain that way.
For all the idiots that cross your path, may you be spared this one.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Love - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 3 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 5:55 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
As for misanthropy, Nietzsche was the greatest exponent of it so far, literally hating mankind so bad that he proposed that its only goal is to be overcome.



Love View previous topic View next topic Go down
Go to page : Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next
Author Message
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love - Page 4 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 4 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 6:03 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I'm sort of half tempted to say something.

But I don't. Not for now.

Thank you all, see you all next time.

Neymar has really grown as a person. This match was exasperating to me because I passionately liked both teams.

But I know Capable doesn't like his threads highjacked. Enough for now, enjoy Japan Belgium.

. ....................


Wow wait. Lol. A misanthrope Nietzsche?

That's like saying Copernicus hated the Sun.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Love - Page 4 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 4 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 6:04 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
The risk here is that one goes into an ivory tower.
Capable is constantly doing the exact opposite of that, engaging the marketplace like Zarathustra and constantly receiving the same responses.
I avoid both market and tower when I need to speak my mind clearly; I become the tightrope walker, just indicating the highest aspect of the process that is taking place.

Ive learned more from Zarathustra than from anyone else, including Nietzsche.
Im sure that goes for Nietzsche too. Zarathustra is the life that life cuts into. His blood is wisdom, why one reads that book so slowly or never and why I intend to never finish it. Odin is close there, much closer than a human can endure qua his humanity, and madness is found accordingly. Madness in the form of redemption.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Love - Page 4 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 4 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 6:06 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Pezer wrote:

Wow wait. Lol. A misanthrope Nietzsche?

That's like saying Copernicus hated the Sun.

No, the opposite. N loved life and saw that humanity does not revolve around life but around death. From his perspective the Superman was required to redeem man.
He loved man when man becomes god or animal or superman, but not when man is intent on staying man. This he found sickening.
But we have grown since then - I know he would have liked to see us play.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Love - Page 4 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 4 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 6:07 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
right. the misconception is that misanthropy is somehow closely related to nihilism, when nothing could be further from the truth.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Love - Page 4 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 4 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 6:12 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Wagner convinced N that man is irredeemable. Wagner was his epic-liberal non sequitur, a lost dream.

Philanthropy and Misanthropy are very good friends.

I feel Im quoting st Augustine but one must decline the general nature of man to better it, and to better a nature simply means to make it healthier, more prone to enjoyment, thus more selective, more free in its will to power.

Ns very clear problem was that man wasn't ready yet, that Bolshevism ad Nazism still had to wreak their havoc on mans self-image, and I think he just saw too much of the pain that was possible. Hence, what is the value of truth? That is a all one great euphemism for the biting off of the adders head, which is an euphemism for truth.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Love - Page 4 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 4 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 6:20 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Thrasymachus wrote:
right. the misconception is that misanthropy is somehow closely related to nihilism, when nothing could be further from the truth.

Yes. It is the wholesale condoning of mans crap that is nihilistic.

Mankind needs to be overcome, like the ape needed to be overcome, because it is possible. Greater things are possible. We will still have all that is vital but shed some unnecessary humiliations, like the ape shed so much that we are glad to have lost. And to he who say well we also lost, you can go to the gym. Enjoy ape and man at the same time. Nothing wrong with some of that. But the humiliations man must shed are precisely that liberal skin that is coming loose. There is much that is repressed, that is a ridiculous understatement - a tremendous fear of truth is what characterizes man to such an extent that Nietzsche found even he couldn't escape it - and yet he tread where he feared. Why he is the ultimate hero, action hero even, superhero. But not yet a superman.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides


Last edited by Fixed Cross on Mon Jul 02, 2018 6:23 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love - Page 4 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 4 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 6:21 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
There is not a single post-Nietzsche thinker that I've seen address Nietzsche and not simply find a way to squirl away from his consequences. And to cover it up, make up some un related weakness. For Derruida, for instance, he claimed he used to like Nietzsche because he was an angry teenager's.

Anyway, that is all I see still. Nietzsche was in fact so hopeful towards man as he was that he threatened to leave Europe if they did not come to their senses. History shew him an optimist.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love - Page 4 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 4 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 6:25 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I will concede that a radical reaction AGAINST Nietzsche would be so powerful, because Nietzsche was so powerful, that it would be worth seeing.

Not more worth seeing than a people that could actually read him.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Love - Page 4 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 4 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 6:30 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
You seem to conflate misanthropy and pessimism. His greatness is in turning pessimism of strength into an optimism of strength. Previously, optimism had been some loose affair with a personal God. Now it became a task.

He was surely a philanthropist, but it was the loathing of the general rule as it stood for man was what inspired his most hilarious writing, his strongest happiest spirit. But I have the privilege of being able to read Zarathustra in the original text, which has been a bloody feast of recognition, dangerous laughter close to madness. Good book. There isn't a decent English translation though, it all sounds absurd and far far away, where in German it is like the tale of red riding hood but even more wolf.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Love - Page 4 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 4 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 6:33 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
These masters of to-day—surpass them, O my brethren—these petty people: THEY are the Superman's greatest danger!

Surpass, ye higher men, the petty virtues, the petty policy, the sand-grain considerateness, the ant-hill trumpery, the pitiable comfortableness, the "happiness of the greatest number"—!

And rather despair than submit yourselves. And verily, I love you, because ye know not to-day how to live, ye higher men! For thus do YE live—best!



I damn sure know how to read that.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love - Page 4 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 4 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 6:39 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I don't know. Until I see solid proof to the contrary, I will consider you a hard reaction against Nietzsche and follow you with great interest.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love - Page 4 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 4 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 6:40 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Remember that fascism is a hard reaction to communism. A hard reaction to something can be more akin to that thing than anything that came before it.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love - Page 4 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 4 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 6:42 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Lukaku is one exciting motherfucker. He could single-handedly win this Cup.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Love - Page 4 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 4 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 6:55 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Of course I am a hard reaction, like a billiard ball to another.
I existed, N hit into me, a reaction took place that was hard as all fuck indeed, and some ten years later this reaction amounts in VO.

I am a counterpart to N, for sure.
As our charts reveal.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love - Page 4 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 4 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 7:16 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Sure. We'll leave it at that.

I am loathe to revive the actual philosophical discussion. Where you bring more pride than quality. Though you do have quality.

I know you are sensitive and easily offended. But by fuck, if this has any future, it will be with a bucketfull of honesty on my part. No more pasifying.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love - Page 4 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 4 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 8:49 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I guess that means it probably doesn't have any future. Frustrating how I can never tell what it is that can keep this thing going.

Imaginary tug of wars in a dozen different directions. But if the images can't keep up with reality, it becomes sterile.

I feel like shaking the computer.

MAybe that's the problem, a computer again. Phones are more honest.

More likely your inability to remain current. Current, dog. What is the point of this damn forum if not my amusement?

I'll go cool off. I can see I'm getting impertinent now.

See ya when I see ya.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love - Page 4 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 4 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 9:09 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I'll be more specific, since this IS a thread about love.

I am restless to a point of transcendence as a default state. I cannot handle things going well and being on track: I either need an incredibly existential arch to do battle in or... I forget the other. You easily provide these, but they are shadows, nothing real. They don't stand up to prodding. I can hear you thinking "that's neither my goal nor my problem."

Fuck I forgto the rest.

My main problem with life is how boring it is. Truly, it's fucking boring. The girls are prudes, the men are cowards and the people in charge worship machines. And everybody is scared of themselves and life and anything that isn't a spoon in their mouths.

You at least overcome 99% of these fears. But you are a first world baby, actual danger turns you off. Except if it's machinic genocidal danger, like Nazis, which you may or may not realize also provides detachement and thus avoiding from and of actual danger. The building up of forces on a scale that drains them from any individual humans, just the archetypical undercurrents.

This will not prevail, because I exist. You may also not understand that yet.

Only a pampered first world baby could consider those build ups appropriate sources of fun. Quixotesque to the max, without the charm of the scarcely populated world of medieval knights.

Fuck. Fuck your complacency. It is cowardice, I say this with love.

Oh well. Goddamnit. This boredom. On with taking over the world.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love - Page 4 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 4 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 11:20 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Stop looking at me like I'm crazy you fucking asshole. You're the one that lit the beacon.

Who in the fuck did you think was gonna come?
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Love - Page 4 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 4 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 12:01 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Quote :
I'll be more specific, since this IS a thread about love.

I am restless to a point of transcendence as a default state. I cannot handle things going well and being on track: I either need an incredibly existential arch to do battle in or... I forget the other. You easily provide these, but they are shadows, nothing real. They don't stand up to prodding. I can hear you thinking "that's neither my goal nor my problem."

The real prodding isn't done here, among real people.
The problem is the path into the goo, the type of path Trump found.
Its not so much a problem as a case.

Im a detective in this sense. I like the action, but Ive got a purpose between the lines. Detective work is a lot of watching things unfold.

Quote :
My main problem with life is how boring it is. Truly, it's fucking boring. The girls are prudes, the men are cowards and the people in charge worship machines. And everybody is scared of themselves and life and anything that isn't a spoon in their mouths.

Hence the misanthropy.

Quote :
You at least overcome 99% of these fears. But you are a first world baby, actual danger turns you off. Except if it's machinic genocidal danger, like Nazis, which you may or may not realize also provides detachement and thus avoiding from and of actual danger.

Ive always sought out danger to the point of getting hurt, it is why I don't drink much. The nightmarish psychic memories of nazi times don't allow for avoiding danger either, thats a misconception. My sister is the same in this way, walking into the ghettos of Johannesburg, got held up and robbed of course, didn't mind it much, what counts is just seeing what really dangerous out there and what happens next, what you do next, to see if you're helpless or not. Neither she or I are helpless in danger. Perhaps we both endure it a bit too well, causing the conditions for it around us. What to do with this dangerousness, this is the question. I am fortunate enough to have friends like these, there is a great deal of meaning to the danger. But knowingt he absolute reality of it, I am patient with what matters the most.

Quote :
The building up of forces on a scale that drains them from any individual humans, just the archetypical undercurrents.

This will not prevail, because I exist. You may also not understand that yet.

But then again, I might understand such things quite well. And they might be the very reason for what you see as complacency. Taurus isn't complacent.

Quote :
Only a pampered first world baby could consider those build ups appropriate sources of fun. Quixotesque to the max, without the charm of the scarcely populated world of medieval knights.

Fuck. Fuck your complacency. It is cowardice, I say this with love.

Such a reproach is no insult. It is merely a call to action.
This is of course one of the reasons of my respect for you, that you give out this sort of reproach to the most complacent historical type, the philosopher; this is why we are a clan, if only bound by the fate of promethean vision.

Quote :
Oh well. Goddamnit. This boredom. On with taking over the world.

There is no other thing.
Boredom and love form a hard nut, the world itself, which needs to be made, usurped into life, the earth as a temple to the will. It must be erected, it isn't already there. But as soon as there is one temple, one explication of life that suffices in Dionysos' presence, as a theater, the age will have shifted.

I take your instincts seriously, this is also your Saturn year, the first year of the Saturn calendar, and with the Sagittarius Jupiter year starting inside of this Saturn year, I would be a fool to dismiss the signal of your increased unrest.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love - Page 4 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 4 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 12:38 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
It's just... Yeah, you would, the question is whether to incluye you or not. And since I know you have a similar path that you will follow anyway, I am willing to throw everything and the kitchen sink at it.

Which led me today to the Second great pain. The first was the Nazi flag. That sort of stopped me cold and drew me off of my happy dream. The Second was looking at my horoscipe in astrocafe after throwing you away. One of the things it said: Lilith making some aspect: avoid love at first sight at all costs for it will lead to ruin of all duties and projects. Which I knew when I saw her. But you know how those things go.

That pain is significante enough to send me into a tail spin. Fuck all the Gods.

So obviously fuck you too. And me.

So here we are. Faith now outside of me, hovering like Link's fairy by my side.

Situation normal, dog.

Crazy game with that Japan.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love - Page 4 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 4 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 12:50 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Plus you have an ability that I can never have, no matter how hard I try: sitting still, riding the wave that you made, performing a proper stake out.

I'm a terrible fucking detective and I know it.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love - Page 4 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 4 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 1:27 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Also I'm quitting the smokes. Cheating often.

But I gotta do it. Can't have the vultures laughing at me like that.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love - Page 4 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 4 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 1:36 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
That's not entirely true. I'm the finest detective in history after Nietzsche. Of real men. But what is needed now is what you say, detecting the goo. Working the goo. I could kill it. But the patience thing, it's bad. Even though the gods offer me women and riches aplenty as a reward. I can't ever hold it for long. I'm hoping as Saturn progresses and I amass the control that comes with the money I can be seduced by the gods. But, as you know, the from here to there is a problem. So here we are. Just me and fixed cross and the shadow of the dragonfly.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love - Page 4 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 4 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 1:39 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Also, this needs to be on the record, Capable is an unparalleled genious. I always tell him that he's the only philosopher I know. His writings are some crazy fucking shit. They can actually highjack a Nietzschean. That's impressive. But I can't do battle AND read his shit. I hope a life or two from now I'll be able to.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pezer
builder
builder


Posts : 2191
Join date : 2011-11-15
Location : deep caverns in caves

Love - Page 4 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Love Love - Page 4 Icon_minitimeMon Jul 02, 2018 1:41 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
So that's why I urge him to drop the hate and keep writing. He will be posthumous. But he will be up there with Nietzsche, past Nietzsche in many important ways.

To him I say: stop the hate fool. We got this.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Arch-Native Philosophy - Sumerian Bill and Ted - The Magical Tree of Life Academy
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10533
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Sun May 31, 2020 12:11 am

individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Social webs Empty
PostSubject: Social webs Social webs Icon_minitimeSun Apr 08, 2018 10:01 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Friendships are scalable and transferrable. You can always add another person into your social connections web, grow the web like this, or take great experiences and feelings from one relationship and apply them into another relationship. Friendship, I mean real friends who actually care about you and you actually care about them, are this kind of values-web of real connections that extend into and as your own life. Obviously this is what romantic love is too, having one person with whom we try to replicate this entire structure in its entirety. But that isn't necessary, instead we can have several or more good friends and the structure still exists, more spread out among different people. As far as I can tell there are both benefits and detriments to having it spread out like this, compared to the 1:1 relationship of romantic or serious love.



At the selfvaluing level (webs of values, daemonics, etc) it is such that it is impossible to connect to others without that connection going in both directions and to the same degree in each direction*. It’s hard to explain how such a basic idea hit me so hard and I was seeing it literally as a philosophical truth construct, something absolutely real and surprising, but basically there tends to be this idea that we can reach out to someone and exchange information or touch them or communicate or whatever else, and the interaction is one-way mostly or entirely, but I think that’s false. I think at the existential/phenomenological/VO level every connection is by definition mutual both/all ways to exactly the same degree. For interaction or exchange to move one way it must have forged already or simultaneously be forging, carving into the earth of being, a path back to itself and the mere existence of this path back is an interaction exchange as such already, because that is all that these sort of paths and "earth of being" are anyway.

*It almost always appears that there is difference in a connection, that one person is reaching out and touching more than the other person is; this is true, but only at the surface layers, at layers more derivative and secondary, more like constructs resting on surfaces that act more as symbols and discharges, growths like trees, rather than at the deeper tectonic levels. Deeper in the tectonics, at VO and Daemonic levels, there can be no connection one way unless it also exists in the opposite direction, and unless information is flowing back from the target toward the source to the same degree that information is flowing out from the source to the target. It is hard to explain exactly why this is, ontologically speaking the case, but it has to do with the fact that these sort of 'connections' are literally this kind of carving out of channels of information-transfer, they are these transfers of information and nothing besides. So if more overt information is flowing in one direction and not in the other, you can be sure that this indicates an imbalance between the target and the source with respect to their own individual self-valuings, as structures and as aspects of the social webs, for example; however, in the deeper and hidden tectonics, the connection is always equally mutual, and subtler flows will always transfer underneath your conscious awareness.


This is a new application of Newton’s law of equal and opposite reaction. It has massive implication in our relationships and to things like social media. For example now, with technology we can send a single image or a meme with text on it or gif whatever, and the amount of information that flows back and forth between ourselves and those who see our image/meme is essentially infinite, because of how deep that pool of information is and how we cannot probe it’s depths, how it can affect potentially everything. This is the actual power of memes. And why not just the existence of the internet but of social media was needed for them to appear. And it’s why things become polarized and magnetized now to a degree and in a way they didn’t before, which "upping the ante" has caused the rise in political correctness as a kind of desperate compensation attempt to keep things balanced on a more or less even keel. Assuming Trump as presidential candidate had even been possible before social media, he would never have led to the kind of insanity and outrage and chaos and all that did happen, without social media having existed, even if he said and did all the exact same things say 10 to 15 years ago. The insanity now is just a consequence of how the tectonics have suddenly deepened.

And I mean they have literally deepened. I can see it, and of course everyone can feel it. It actually gives the impression of shallowness at first, loss of depth, because we are now more isolated without our former grounding.




And true to my first insight about mutual connection, it’s also the case that my tie to others in this sort of pain/unlimited/negative implications way, which allows me to probe the limits of existence but also puts strain and danger into my social connections, and how this interaction and exchange allows me to create knowledge out of excessive experience, also works the other way in that once having gained knowledge by pushing experience past the limit and into pain/negative implication, I can then turn around and draw further excess back into the world of my experience from this new knowledge I have gained, which is what I am doing now by writing all of this right now. This additional connection here in this message I am writing is allowing a reverse flow back into my world/experience in such a way as attempts to correct for the imbalance of how some of the social connections I have elsewhere in my life caused my world/experience to destabilize (allowed me to destabilize my world/experience) as a consequence of the difference between their limitedness and my own and in a way that produced totally new knowledge for me.

This is maybe the trick of original thinking. Somehow this back and forth of exchange of excess and the needs/attempts to balance this out alternatingly one way then another, produces ideas from the world and the world from ideas.





All of these social connection things are like modules that hook up and create new social connection things, I don’t even have a word for it. The concept for it barely even exists, let alone any words to explain it. Also on the thing about the mutuality and equality of all connection, this logic appears at the far end of our knowledge in that the most abstract, penetrating and significant insights appear as the most simple, basic and obvious things, so obvious in fact that we cannot see them. Much less explain them; but when I am able to see a little into these things, and when I feel them out and approach them and do that whole exchange of excess back and forth thing, then I am able to find words to explain what is happening. And it takes thousands of words to barely begin to explain something as seemingly simple and obvious as the fact of “we make social connections to each other”.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning


Last edited by Thrasymachus on Sun Apr 08, 2018 10:22 pm; edited 5 times in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Social webs Empty
PostSubject: Re: Social webs Social webs Icon_minitimeSun Apr 08, 2018 10:08 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
One reason people isolate into limited spheres of experience and interaction is for basic protection. When you share something with someone else you open yourself up to this other person to the exact same degree as you draw something from them to yourself. This is just how it works, existentially-phenomenologically speaking. This is also pure ontology. Tectonic, Value Ontological, Daemonic.

The need for control of privacy and for what one shares with others is very important. This boundary does not need to be absolutely firm, and should be somewhat of a gray area to allow for novel possibilities to present themselves to us, but the boundary should exist and be meaningful. Something you can control and change. This conforms to VO explaining how the self is a aggregate of valuings that achieve a mutuality of valuing each other to sufficient degree that both interconnectivity occurs and lasts, as well as that each value itself remains itself without compromising its own integrity too far. This delicate balance creates a web-like structure that stabilizes and coheres itself slowly, carefully, subtly, and grows like this over time.

This social web values thing (I don't really have a good name for it, and it is a separate thing from the selfvaluing itself although it also a part of the overall selfvaluing) can be damaged by contact with others whose own valuing/s are too severely different from one's own. Thus an extensive architecture of tools and techniques exists to mediate potential relations with new people. E.g. social convention, taboos, small talk, flirting, etc.

Well flirting is a special case, because here the two respective persons already share self-valuings that are similar enough to each other in their deeper structures and aspects so that a higher-order resonance occurs when they come into closer proximity with one another, and due to this resonance their respective social webs also immediately begin to link up to each other, automatically and instinctively. Then this linking and especially the significance and suddenness of it will impact each web, causing readjustments of excesses flowing around on the threads of the web, leading to transfer of excess to the new node, namely to the other person with whom one is flirting.

Each person's web can only handle so much excess, though, and so when you dump a lot of your excess into their social web, even with flirting, this can be risky because it may cause the other person to get overloaded; their own web cannot deal with all of that excess, so the other person will pull away. This sets natural limits that are felt out over time, and a balance of sorts can be intuitively achieved between these two people. Over time, flirting may lead to deeper feelings of intimacy and love, in which case the respective self-valuings are becoming closer to each other, more threaded together, more entwined and interdependent, and thusly also the respective social webs are becoming better able to handle each other's excess transfers -- and this means that these two people can better understand, help, and appreciate/value each other.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning


Last edited by Thrasymachus on Sun Apr 08, 2018 10:29 pm; edited 4 times in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Social webs Empty
PostSubject: Re: Social webs Social webs Icon_minitimeSun Apr 08, 2018 10:24 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
^ In addition, this produces one more intellectual, philosophical justification for the importance of privacy: the necessity, to the very core of our selfvaluing and daemonism, to our selves, to our souls, for being able to maintain some significant (although not perfect) control over managing the kinds and degrees of connections we have to others. Without a certain degree of privacy, applicable directly to the social web thing itself, much more so even to your selfvaluing as such, these subtlest of structures cannot cohere themselves beyond a very minimal level. This is how and why the concept of privacy and the notion of right to privacy appeared in the human world. And I would say it also exists implicitly but very strongly within the animal world as well.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Social webs Empty
PostSubject: Re: Social webs Social webs Icon_minitimeSun Apr 08, 2018 10:32 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
All of this connects to what I was saying elsewhere about Love:


"The perfect person will just slip into your soul and fit there perfectly, and you into theirs. No force or pressure is needed.

This is what love means, to me anyway.


...Shit I figured it out. What Love is.

Two souls tangled up with each other.

Look at this from the vantage of VO.

Omg. This is real. "



It is real. Perhaps the most real thing of all.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Social webs Empty
PostSubject: Re: Social webs Social webs Icon_minitimeSun Apr 08, 2018 10:33 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I have one issue with this, namely the there are vast power differences, and that what one person has to share is not necessarily available, quantitatively even, in the rest of the world. The person puts a lot out there, and this remains unresolved and become a standard of other peoples interaction, like a Totem actually, as indeed it would be identified with taboo.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Social webs Empty
PostSubject: Re: Social webs Social webs Icon_minitimeSun Apr 08, 2018 10:44 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Fixed Cross wrote:
I have one issue with this, namely the there are vast power differences, and that what one person has to share is not necessarily available, quantitatively even, in the rest of the world. The person puts a lot out there, and this remains unresolved and become a standard of other peoples interaction, like a Totem actually, as indeed it would be identified with taboo.

I absolutely agree with this.

And I see immediately how this awesome insight works perfectly with what I am developing here. Social connections are not all equal, because people are not equal; the equality of the mutuality of the exchanges of information along both directions of the connection between selfvaluings is something formal, structural, ontological, in so far as to be able to transfer information to someone else requires that you yourself be capable of receiving the exact same scope and kind of information from them in return. It is not always the case you will actually receive this information from them like that, but the mere fact of the necessity of the possibility for being able to receive it like that is what I mean by the equality/mutuality of these sort of connections.

So if there is a significant difference here as you mention, then yes a kind of Totem/taboo thing wold appear, a hard point in the webs of others to whom you connect, a kind of singularity. They will struggle to deal with this singularity and may simply attempt to avoid it or downgrade its importance in their web; but the significance of having such a singularity sitting there is going to force changes upon them whether or not they know or want it to. And then yes, extend that outward into/as the broader world as aggregate of numerous social webs all somehow connected into and through each other, nodes all over the place, threads spilling everywhere, you are going to see changes to how large flows of excess move around in the world of these webs, namely even excess flows very distant from you and to which you do not even have any direct or known contacts are going to begin to adjust their flows to the presence of these singularities which exist in the nodes of others, because you put them there as a consequence of how our interactions with others are so imbalanced in these ways.

So we might even say that the fact of such significant imbalances is a kind of super-node or glitch in this system, because ideally connections should stick relatively close to that lower tectonic layer of equality/mutuality in the formal structural sense, in order to achieve greater efficiency in the system overall and for ourselves generally, to achieve better more meaningful social connections and relationships with others, which allows better excess-flow exchanges for us and for them, which is sort of the entire point of all this sociality stuff; however, when severe imbalance occurs and the structural/formal layer down in the tectonics cannot sync properly with the salient surface layers, this is where those nodes, in other's social webs, which represent you and your connection to them are going to become somewhat overloaded, massive, threaten to collapse like black holes from all of that additional mass that is not being properly regulated under the surface. The structure itself will vibrate differently, this probably is felt as some emotional friction or physical discomfort. But it is very hard to remove a node from one's social web, once it is there, and I doubt people can really remove it even if they would like to. That is another reason to look at these kinds of social connections seriously and take them by the assumption as being very meaningful.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning


Last edited by Thrasymachus on Sun Apr 08, 2018 10:48 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Social webs Empty
PostSubject: Re: Social webs Social webs Icon_minitimeSun Apr 08, 2018 10:47 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
And in fact, consider the other person's nodal point in their own social web, the node they have for you, for your connection to them: if indeed they are unable to come anywhere close to matching the kind of excess or information you are transferring to them, if the sync is not properly occurring between higher and lower layers in the tectonics between you two, then what will occur? This node in their social web is going to get oversaturated and begin to spill out its contents as excess in new ways, probably mostly at the lower structural/formal levels simply because the higher more conscious levels require that kind of conscious processing power and realization-ability which, most likely, is going to be largely absent for such a person for whom their selfvaluing is so significantly different and 'simpler' than your own.

If things cannot be understood, they are shunted down into unconsciousness; this does not mean they go away, far from it. In fact this is probably a large part of the basis for why this whole deeper tectonic, structural/formal system of managing these kinds of social connections even formed in the first place.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Social webs Empty
PostSubject: Re: Social webs Social webs Icon_minitimeSun Apr 08, 2018 10:57 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Of course then this also shows how philosophy works, how great art works, how truly epic personalities and minds literally change the entire world by simply existing, by simply maintaining some degree of contact with others and through that with the entire world.

These singularities are like glittering dark gems, I see them as a kind of deep green with purple sparkles all surrounded by clouds of black. Whereas the nodes themselves tend to be more white, light gray, tan, that sort of color. Also the nodes may be smaller or larger compared to the singularities, but the singularity is of a different kind, so almost resides in a separate dimension from the rest of the web in which it is sitting. I would assume singularities even from one web to another also create a kind of meta-connection to each other in how they lead to adjustments across multiple webs between them, adjustments of how information and excesses flow. But because a lot of that information and excess is trying to avoid the singularity, the webs are sort of adjusting themselves around these singularity-points. These singularities bend the world, consciousness, being, into rivers, or carve rivers out of oceans. [This must lead to higher kinds of organization, and therefore to greater abilities for reductions in overall entropy. So it might even be necessary that such singularities exist, that such vast differences manifested as nodal connection points between people are the case, even though ideally it might seem better that things were more evened out between us all.

No, that does not seem to be the case. We need these kinds of differences. This is true for many different (lol) reasons.* ]

Although that isn't the more significant level of analysis here, not the most meaningful thing. What is most meaningful is not even accessible to us yet, because we lack the vocabulary and the philosophy to even approach it; the level of the meaningful as such, how the values themselves work, what they are, what facts/meanings have caused them to be and to which these values and aspects are connected and which they represent, etc. The deep structural intricacies of a single soul are so much deeper than we are capable of penetrating that it might as well be infinitely out of our reach. But I do think philosophy, and not only philosophy probably, will start to achieve this greater depth. The entire discipline of philosophy and by extension the entire world is already slowly building toward this point, at least it seems so to me.

So the singularity is just a node that cannot manage what it has absorbed, or is not synced properly, thus errors are flowing out of it. These errors generate logical as well as immediate-practical necessity for dealing with these errors. This necessity exists in direct proportion to the distance of an individual social web and selfvaluing to the errors themselves, which also means to the source of the errors. And then this necessity, like the pains of existing, of life, pushes subjectivity, consciousness, valuing, higher and higher upon the continuum of being.


* Shit. I just derived how-why it is necessary that a large number of people remain at a lower level compared to the small number of people who dump far more excess and information into the world's social web connections. These differences must exist, but also the entire structure must slowly rise up over time. In fact I would say this is what history shows is exactly what has been happening and continues to happen.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Social webs Empty
PostSubject: Re: Social webs Social webs Icon_minitimeSun Apr 08, 2018 11:27 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Fascinating development.

It happened to me on social media during Trump rise, what I put out there caused such a black hole/negative totem which resulted in my cousin posting an actual death wish on my fb page and another cousin jumping in to be angry at me for saying something to the extent of fuck you then, and then it turned out a large part of my old social circle had just turned to zombies on account of too vast differences in power/truth.

I would say this "incorrect" or un-ideal stage can be represented as a very spiky irregular graph, and that it has to be smoothed out, through philosophy, or what we may call philosophical politics, through strategic investments and fertilizations, into more of a bell curve.

Essentially, what needs to be brought about is a proper order of rank.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Social webs Empty
PostSubject: Re: Social webs Social webs Icon_minitimeMon Apr 09, 2018 12:18 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
The Trump phenomenon and how people react to us even just saying that Trump is more or less ok, is a good example of how these things work.

I am going to keep focusing for now on the aspects of friendship and love when it comes to social connection, social webs and selfvaluing entanglements. But all this could also definitely also be applied more toward politics and philosophy-politics.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Social webs Empty
PostSubject: Re: Social webs Social webs Icon_minitimeMon Apr 09, 2018 12:43 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
But these were my friends.
Also the reason he gave for the death wish was my tribute to his dead brother, which he, because of my work to save us all from annihilation, interpreted in some sick perverse way.

I don't experience this difference between friendship and other aspects of life; for me, friendship is total, or non-existent.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Social webs Empty
PostSubject: Re: Social webs Social webs Icon_minitimeMon Apr 09, 2018 12:48 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
For 20 years Ive given this guy everything I could possibly share if I thought he could benefit from it in the slightest.
He has always been ungrateful and unreliable but I have so much love in my heart that I was constantly thinking he is still worth it. That was excessive valuation.

Thats something I need to become aware of and control, my tendency to overestimate people.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides


Last edited by Fixed Cross on Mon Apr 09, 2018 12:59 am; edited 2 times in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Social webs Empty
PostSubject: Re: Social webs Social webs Icon_minitimeMon Apr 09, 2018 12:49 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
That’s interesting because for me it is always separate. Friendship occupies a specific area of my life and subjectivity, and might expand here or there from time to time but is always distinct.

I suppose this is why I conceive of the social web thing as separate from selfvaluing proper and as something sort of external to the self to which the self relates and into which the self transfers some of its excess (and from which it draws excess to itself).



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Social webs Empty
PostSubject: Re: Social webs Social webs Icon_minitimeMon Apr 09, 2018 12:51 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Fixed Cross wrote:
For 20 years Ive given this guy everything I could possibly share if I thought he could benefit from it in the slightest.
He has always been ungrateful and unreliable but I have so much love in my heart that I was constantly thinking he is still worth it. That was excessive valuation.

Thats something I need to become aware of and control, my tendency to overestimate people.

Yes I’ve had to work on that too. I’ve gotten better at it recently, which is nice. I still treat others as if I were overestimating them, to draw out whatever is latent there and also because it’s possible I could have underestimated them somehow. But I’ve become more accurate. It helps me value much better and more effectively.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Social webs Empty
PostSubject: Re: Social webs Social webs Icon_minitimeMon Apr 09, 2018 1:02 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
It is heartbreaking to realize how lowly so many people are, how little they have to give, and how little they value people around them.
Most social interactions are entirely fake. I hadn't realized how deeply I had become embedded in these fake structures, I had a blind spot to some sociopathic liars. I mean that in the clinical sense, Im not exaggerating or anything.

This is one reason why Islam will keep encroaching in Europe - muslims have a far greater loyalty between each other than the typical modern westerner. Our "species" is on the brink of extinction, when it comes to value-connections. The death of god has brought about a terrible lack of self-valuing. Self-Valuing can only exist through real interaction with other beings, and this is nearly gone from our world.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail https://pinterest.com/jakobmilikowski/soup/ Online
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Social webs Empty
PostSubject: Re: Social webs Social webs Icon_minitimeMon Apr 09, 2018 5:39 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I am not quite so worried about it as that, but then again I do choose to restrict myself to interactions with others who actually have real value. If I were to be more indiscriminate as to with whom I interact then I would probably be far more pessimistic. But I had to place severe limits on it for my is sake, and it’s worked out very well. I’m much healthier and stronger and more coherent-clear for choosing not to engage with subcreatures.


....

Specifically on the issue of love, I think love actually replicates the social web structure but with only one other person; normally a social web comes into existence as a consequence of many different friendships or relationships all mutually interacting, but between one person and just one good friend or relation you can have deep connections too of course, and these are based as all such connections are on shared values and shared self-valuing. Thus there is a “as below so above” format here: between you and just one other person with whom you are close (not even talking about love yet) there exist many shared values and self-valuing types and tendencies and actions, and every such point of commonality between you two becomes a node in a network, this network being the entanglement and entwining of your respective souls. This of course allows excesses to be transferred back and forth between you two, quite literally (onticly, existentially, phenomenologically) connecting both of your souls together.

This is also quite obviously very similar to what happens with the social webs. In a social web you have different nodes with each node being your contact point to another person with whom you are friends or have a close relationship; the web itself is the interlinkages between all of those nodes from your own perspective as oriented to the web. So the web is unique for every person who relates to it, even if it includes all the same nodes, however in virtually all actual cases no two people would have the same nodes in their respective social webs, since we all know and have different people as friends and close relations.

Now it is revealed that each node in a social web is actually a mini web of its own, a web composed of nodes each of which is a point of similarity or commonality between you and this other person with respect to each of your own values and self-valuings. This whole structure actually looks incredible, if you really look at it as I’m doing. Quite remarkable and beautiful.

Now back to love, love starts from this interlinkage between two souls wherein their connected souls form a network of nodes as mentioned above and as are similar in structure to the larger social web, and then love deepens and expands this network of connections until... what? Until a certain threshold is reached, until the connections become so extensive and deep that a larger significance appears and both souls in effect become two sides of the same soul, a shared soul. Two people merge together and become one, but also remain separate and distinct from each other.

This happens because in such close connection the excesses are in a state of constant transfer in and out of both sides of the connection, of both souls, so that the connection between two people stops becoming digital and becomes analog.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Social webs Empty
PostSubject: Re: Social webs Social webs Icon_minitimeMon Apr 09, 2018 6:10 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Now having connected his topic to what I wrote about love, I will attempt to also connect all of this now to what I was saying about virtual hologram girlfriends; these virtual hologram girlfriends (who do not yet properly exist at least publicly but I think will exist publicly soon) are much like our own dreams and fantasies about someone we barely know and with whom we have no real connections yet: based on a projection of our own values and self-valuing, we dream an ideal image of our love based on the fact that this image presents itself to us as a reflection of our own values and self-valuing. That reflection can be accurate or inaccurate to any degree but still functions as if it were real. And such dreams can serve to train us in ourselves, to give us better insight into what it is we are and what it is we want in another. This is why virtual hologram girlfriends do not worry me too much, despite that people will form relationships with them when in reality there are no shared underlying values or self-valuings in the hologram itself; what is in the hologram is a Turing model, and which model is continuously absorbing your own values and self-valuing patterns and then reflecting these back to you. Similar to our dreams and fantasies only far more potent. And it isn’t as if our dreams and fantasies are dangerous or harmful (although they can be if taken to a very far extreme of obsession), so too for virtual hologram girlfriends. These holograms are basically externalized dreams in a more potent audiovisual (and tactile, eventually) format than that of our imagination, but I see no fundamental difference between the hologram in this case and the dreams we have in our imaginations.

Dreaming come to life, perhaps that is what virtual and augmented reality is going to become. Well one must first dream, I suppose, before one can properly know and engage with reality. Dreaming as practice for reality engagement.

One danger I can see is a person might fall in love with a hologram. This seems hard to believe, for me anyway, because we know the hologram isn’t a real person; however, I have to assume that many people are too stupid to know this fact. Therefore such a “love” would be based on a deep failure of that person’s consciousness and understanding, would be like they literally fell in love with a dream or fantasy of theirs. And in a limited way this is what we do in real love, we tend to idealize the other person to some degree, we always build on the real deeper tectonic connections something more ideal and subject to our own determinations, ideas, desires, and dreams. But in such cases as real love the actual existence of the other person grounds the fantasy/dreaming idealization, in a pure fantasy or with a hologram no such grounding exists except for using oneself as a ground; therefore would represent a kind of narcissism. So distance must be maintained even as one forms relationships of a sort with one’s fantasies/dreams or with virtual hologram girlfriends. This distance keeps the experience from becoming a danger, and keeps the experience naturally pushed to the periphery of oneself, where it cannot affect one’s values and self-valuing in any significant or overly broad (in either space or time) way. This is why I see such experiences as basically practice for the real thing, as a kind of surrogate or externally manifested process of our own imagination.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Social webs Empty
PostSubject: Re: Social webs Social webs Icon_minitimeTue Apr 24, 2018 1:33 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I see now that for the social web thing to function properly each node must be separate from the others. Not totally separate but sufficiently so. The nodes should have some connections to each other, or at least that’s ok, and necessary for the social friend aspect in terms of groups, but each node’s connection to me, to my social web, must be independent and not tangled up in that connection with other nodes to which I’m also connected. I think this is why I keep things separate and tend to compartmentalize relationships. This delimitation causes more substance, more being, to come into existence.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Social webs Empty
PostSubject: Re: Social webs Social webs Icon_minitimeTue Apr 24, 2018 1:37 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I also realize now that it’s impossible for me to truly love more than one woman at a time. My soul will only link up in this way to one other soul. I can make good connections to more than one woman but not in whatever it is that love means. The more one love connection develops, the more the other declines. It’s a simple equation maintaining a balance. It’s ok for now but eventually I will need to collapse that equation into just one person, one lover. But I’m not going to force that and it will take time to allow this all to work itself out naturally.

Maybe Nietzsche didn’t have anyone to really talk to. Maybe thats why he died.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Social webs Empty
PostSubject: Re: Social webs Social webs Icon_minitimeThu May 10, 2018 1:48 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I had two primary nodes in much social web, two women I befriended closely and who I really needed and came to care about, and who I thought cared about me. All other nodes became secondary to these two. I was able to exchange unlimited amounts of excess for a while between these and myself, and a very delicate machine developed: emotional and love excess between these two nodes, social personality excess between a few nodes at my job, and then philosophical excess with Parodites and Fixed, plus some degree of overlap between all of these all flowing throughout me at the center of this vast web.

And then it all collapsed. All I have left are the two original philosophical nodes. The social nodes and the emotional/love nodes are all but gone now.

It’s crazy to have experienced this kind of phenomenological, existential machinery of subjectivity that I experienced and then to have it simply shut off.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Social webs Empty
PostSubject: Re: Social webs Social webs Icon_minitimeThu May 10, 2018 2:08 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
It’s amazing the effect this has on me. I found out for a brief time, about two months, what it is like to have these female friends on whom I could truly rely. I was bouncing excess around without limit, like a god juggling universes. I could do anything. And then it all went away. That too is amazing just in a terrible way, to lose that power. I know why most people are so miserable, now. And why they don’t even realize most of the time that they are miserable.

I tried for years to find friendships like this with basically no success, and suddenly I had two at once. It freed me to use my philosophical friendships and my philosophical powers, rather than depend on these for everything which before putting this social web machinery together I didn’t even realize how to upgrade those nodes to higher quality excess contents.

I’m fairly sure that no one else understands these things. This is new philosophical territory. Most people just have no fucking idea what life can be like, their own lives. Subjectivity is untapped potential. Philosophy hasn’t really been born into the world yet, and neither has friendship, not really. Excesses are still highly limited and unaware of themselves, so used to never getting their needs met that they have come to take this state of non-fulfillment as totally normal. But a tectonic god like I am is able to pierce that veil, if only for a moment or two.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Social webs Empty
PostSubject: Re: Social webs Social webs Icon_minitimeMon May 14, 2018 3:42 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I realized now that love is a form of communication, or perhaps it is more accurate to say that communication is a form of love. And not simply verbal or written communication, also gesture and body language, touch, eye contact, subtle emotional exchanges, that sort of thing also counts. It is possible for two people to love one another and share that as communication in the moment even without speaking. But I do believe that love reaches its peak when all these various forms of communication occur at the same time, linking two souls together as deeply and fully as possible.

This is also touching on why love tends to be between two people rather than three or more, why polygamy is not natural. Polygamy may be natural in a sense of lust, sexuality, even co-habitation and caring about one another or raising children even, but when it comes to love it would be difficult to link up three or more souls. Or maybe not, maybe this would be just as easy as linking up two souls. It just seems that love is already so rare, it is hard enough to find another soul with whom one can truly connect like this, so to add a requirement of finding two other souls with whom you can truly connect would make it even more rare.

When another soul links up to your own, as communication because that is what it is, excesses shift and are released; this produces instant mania, euphoric energy and happiness. We call that “falling in love”.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Social webs Empty
PostSubject: Re: Social webs Social webs Icon_minitimeMon May 14, 2018 3:46 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Although with polygamy if you could actually find true love with two or more females, and they with you and each other, this would produce the most intense and deep social web ever. Like what I had with these two girls with whom I was close friends, sharing excesses back and forth like creating universes, only we weren’t actually in love mutually and if we had been the experience would have been a hundred times more potent.

Yes... communication is a form of love, of soul-linkage and excess-exchange. So is friendship, friendship is simply a watered-down version of love. Qualitatively or structurally-phenomenologically the same thing, but quantitatively reduced in scope and degree.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Social webs Empty
PostSubject: Re: Social webs Social webs Icon_minitimeMon May 14, 2018 8:03 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Although with friendship, it doesn’t need to or drive to progress into love, so it is it’s own phenomenon. Therefore possesses a nature entirely its own. And this is why it’s difficult to be good friends with a woman, because the friendship does tend to naturally escalate toward love. Thus heterosexuality is a useful stop-gap that allows friendship to exist as it’s own entity.



___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”. -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Social webs Empty
PostSubject: Re: Social webs Social webs Icon_minitimeTue May 15, 2018 9:41 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
The form of what we call consciousness is being able to feel or experience something from both sides, from the side of that which is felt and from the side of who feels. That’s what neurology does for us, and the nervous system generally, it takes the fact that cells sit up against each other and it turns this fact into something more, into a true mutuality of connection that raises reality higher into a more triadic function wherein a third term sits above the two terms in relation, and the third term becomes the primary ontic, phenomenological object.

When this happens at the internal level of ideas and feelings themselves, what we call a psychology appears.

This is also why people often get stuck in catch 22’s, because they are operating at the level of the two terms in relation and not operating at the triadic level. For example, someone feels like shit or is stressed or angry or upset, so they do something to address that or deal with it, and the feelings dissipate or go away; but now whatever it was they did to make the feelings go away, isn’t needed anymore because those feelings for which it was needed no longer exist. So the act invalidates itself in its own completion. This can also be equally true of acting on positive impulses and needs, for example in fulfilling a desire: when the desire is achieved then the act itself loses its raison d’etre, if the act was not also situated triadically.

However, the higher side of human experience is that we also often end up in more triadic methods, which sit outside of “time” and can address problems and situations without invalidating themselves. This is closely associated to rooting oneself in deeper values, in being rooted in that way. More “shallow” or materialistic people are not rooted in this way and so they cycle between the lower terms in relation without ever getting up to the triadic level. The triadic is stability and “beyond time”, is this a part of truth in a more complete way.

So any problem or situation we might be in that we notice ourselves cycling between one extreme or strong feeling/response and another, we know is a sign that we need to elevate the problem or situation into the third term, into the comprehensive triadic state ‘above’ the conflict. This requires finding that about which both conflicting terms speak or work around or against or within; to find the proper philosophical kernel in each conflicting term and to then find the common ground between those kernels, and then to invert that ground by making it into the primary category so that it becomes a sky over that for which it is ground.

How all this relates to social webs: the social web is similar in logical structure to the triadic, because each person is like a single term in relation to one another, while the connection between them is the triadic in the higher case of approaching something like love or is the cycling bipolar catch 22 in the lower case of being unable to approach something like love.
Last edited by Fixed Cross on Sun May 31, 2020 12:22 am, edited 1 time in total.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Arch-Native Philosophy - Sumerian Bill and Ted - The Magical Tree of Life Academy
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10533
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Sun May 31, 2020 12:16 am

individualized

PostSubject: Inner mental model, and e-motions

We orient ourselves toward our own experiences, in the mind and as memory; this is what we call the mind itself, which is the inner model of the outside world (which includes ourselves in that model as well) that we build over time by having experiences with the world and with ourselves, and these experiences go into memory and inform the creation of the model.

What we call the inner mind's eye, the ability to visualize things in our thoughts, as well as dreams, is all the inner model. There is basically no difference between dreaming and being awake, except that when you are awake your body's senses are streaming billions of sensory bits into that model thus sort of over-riding or suppressing it for a large part, maybe around 90% suppression of the inner model. Thus most of what you experience with that model while you are awake is really just the sensory bits from outside, converted into the language of the model itself, while the model itself and its own stored information is suppressed to maybe 10% functioning (which 10% is your inner visualizations, imagination, inner monologue, your thoughts, etc.).

So when you dream, these body senses stop streaming into the model, in which case the model stops being suppressed and takes over consciousness. In other words when dreaming you become conscious of the model itself, only. Specific dreams are probably (based on past work I have done in this area) neurological reconfigurations based on meaning and logic embedded in and as the neurological patterns which patterns correspond to the meaning (facts, reality, significance) of our experiences, in so far as reactivating those same patterns return the original impetus of the experience back to the totality of consciousness, which totality acts like an overall context to recreate the original experience as the model's operation in the present moment for you to then "become conscious of", which is exactly what happens.

So the neurological patterns have a dual and opposite structural logic: on the one hand the neurons are trying to maximize their logical complexity to a perfect integration of the data they represent, as their connections to other neurons, so that this information is represented perfectly and without error or vagueness (basically each neurological pattern contains an implicit meta-pattern that imposes itself upon the pattern, which meta-pattern comes from the larger neurological context and represents a more perfect configuration of the neurological pattern on which the meta-pattern imposes itself), while on the other hand the neurological patterns represent complex forms with large energy requirement to maintain, and thus the neurons are also trying to entropically find a lower energy state and thus to dissolve their own patterns.

The interaction of these two competing forces, toward order and toward disorder, in the neurology as the logical pattern-structures between neurons is probably a large part of why the neurology is constantly self-active, trying to find an impossible balance point between these two extremes. The two extremes work on the level of individual neurons, neural patterns, meta-patterns, and probably globally on the entire brain as a whole. So you not only have constant dynamic self-activity of the neurons which are always "moving" (adjusting their patterns with each other according to trying to follow each of those two competing forces, which produces an imperfect sort of ex post facto "balance") but this is occurring on all levels in the brain, from an individual neuron all the way up to the totality of all neurons as a whole global system. This constant self-activity is why we dream, and what dreams (as well as thoughts, inner visualizations, daydreaming, imagination, etc.) really are. It is why we have both Eros and Thanatos, natural pull toward order/life and natural pull toward disorder/death. Eros or love is the representational experience of order and life, a summation toward the most logically expansive and integrated possible totality of patterns on all levels of the neurology, and your ability to maintain consciousness of that.

Consciousness (what you are aware of, what the inner model is focused on at the present moment) ends up orienting itself to certain aspects of the model at the exclusion of others, because it is not possible to actually focus on and be aware of the whole model itself, because it is way too huge and also is always changing. Not only do you need the best patterns, but you need to be able to orient consciousness on those patterns in ways that do not change or destroy those patterns, and in ways that are able to maintain those patterns over time and maintain your ability to be conscious of them over time. This is not easy, and takes a long time to figure out. But once this is figured out it is what we call emotions. Emotions are like a collapse of the global level "internet" kind of connected web of neurological patterns and meta-patterns, a collapse to a single perspective (consciousness-of) on a certain limited number or area of that total web, limited but sufficient to produce certain overall changes in the body (through forcing inputs back into the brain from the model, and pushing these back out to the body due to how the brain controls the body); these changes in the body are what you feel when you experience an emotion, or more specifically when you experience an emotion you are feeling many body changes at the same time, and these many changes blend and merge together in how you feel them as one thing and largely indistinguishable from each other. This one emergent feeling of how the many individual body change feelings feel, is experienced as a single new feeling and given meaning by your inner model. Most of the meaning it is given comes from the certain areas of the inner model/neurological patterns and meta-patterns that were selected to be the perspective of the present moment of consciousness, which produced the emotion in the first place. The emotion is like a global "e-motion", motion on the "internet" of your total brain-body relationship.

This is why emotions reflect and represent facts, meaning, the world around us, reality, because in order to produce the emotion at all you had to successfully limit your awareness (perspective, consciousness-of) of the total model to a narrow limited range of that same model but in such a way that is sufficient to draw out certain different connected aspects of the model itself, aspects connected in how they are meaningfully and at the factual level organized together with each other; this produces an idea, but how does the idea go on to organize the body in such complex ways to produce the many different feelings at once that come to constitute the feeling of the one feeling, the emotion, itself? I think this is because the very act of being able to successfully produce an idea like this implies a kind of super-meta-pattern organizing as a very condensed logical collapse of a huge amount of the total neurology such that these secondary connections the brain has to the various organs and body-systems are simply activated as a consequence of being brought together and up into the super-meta-pattern. So basically the "lower" layers of the brain are drawn partially up toward the higher more conscious layers, and begin to trigger feedback to the body where there already exist connections to the body stemming from those areas of the brain that are involved in that total apotheosis. But this only occurs because these areas themselves are already, in an instinctual and evolutional sense, already connected to automatic reflexive reactions to certain stimuli, and the inner model is now, because so highly delimited in this apotheosis, able to actually produce experiences that are sufficiently precise to act as stimuli inputs for these connections between the brain and the body's organs and systems. So basically for example you are able to think about a predator, and this will partly trigger your fight/flight response in the body, and can produce fear or anxiety (indeed, anxiety that people feel as a "disorder" is basically exactly this, their inner model is always producing experiences of predators/fearful experiences and feeding these as stimuli inputs into that person's body, causing the body to always be a little bit amped up in flight/flight mode), but this same logic begins to operate on more and more abstract levels the more your inner model is delimited around a logical core of meaning, which meaning successfully represents something about reality itself, something factual and significant.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Arch-Native Philosophy - Sumerian Bill and Ted - The Magical Tree of Life Academy
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10533
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Sun May 31, 2020 1:19 am

It is possible to say that "a neutrino" is only a theoretical unity interpreted out of a collection of detected properties assumably resultant of disintegration of better understood forms of energy, things that more literally fit the description 'particle'.

If so, a neutrino, and this goes for more subatomic definitions, is to be understood, if we are aiming for epistemic exactness, a case of transfer of information. I.e., parts of what we may define as a particle -- empirical results amounting to almost a particle.

What kind of structural consistency does a neutrino have? It does not respond to electromagnetism, only weak-forces affect it.

It may exist only as our assumption, its structural integrity may be a fiction, an inference made because of the assumption that all change detected must be the effect of particles, which is how we still understand quanta.

It may not be the case that the transferred energy amounting to the detected neutrino is caused to be measured by it being there as such, separate from the measurement. It may be that the qualities that amount to the definition 'neutrino' are in part 'teleported', by the very expectation of and preparation for the 'arrival'.

A neutrino may in part be caused ( in terms of space-time consistency ) by the placement of the receptive material, the terms of its being-measured, which accounts for its existence. The neutrino can not positively affect, the conditions for its existence must be created. Part of the work of its being is done for it -- this may account for the lack of space-time momentum -- it is in part a non-entity, appearing here and there as 'real', actively constant particles permit it.



It is clear that what I describe as method to measure / establish is what is always used in physics / chemistry, particle-science. Assumption of what will happen if the calculations are correct, suspension of judgment until the assumption is recognized in what occurs. I would propose that perhaps in the case of / at the level of neutrinos, our methods of establishment what "is" are unsound.

It seems to be a natural assumption that the surplus of gravitation measured/inferred from the movement of certain galaxies, may be the result of wrongfully applying laws that we have establlished to predict the movements occurring in our own "system" - galaxy.




The key to open any kind of space-time power is to include as much contradictory logoi into one logos as your energy can muster. Then consolidate in ritual (instances of exalted, eternal life) and create a symbolic order. Then obey that order.

It is my understanding at least that Dark Matter, the assumption made necessary by the application of Newtonian Law to "The Entire Universe" (the assumption of a universal totality) would be present mainly in a specific form of galaxy, one that is relatively young, and less circular, more elliptic.

I have read this at one point but I can not find it on the internet. The point would be that dark matter, i.e. surplus gravitation, is unequally distributed in proportion with "legal", expected gravitation.




Relations are a priori dual, triple, => , not merely after the fact of measuring them. The relations we measure in physics and chemistry do not only exist in terms of force.
There is also another aspect, and this is unmeasurable in exact terms, as it involves not just the present state but its entire history and future of affect in every possible universe in which it could exist.

Even the very idea of a particle is cleaved. There are always two ways of contemplating the object. For example:

- The minimal and maximal requirements for its existence, its ‘essence’, raw (unmeasured) content. ⇔ Its maximal power to affect (a quantity of force).

- The possible ways in which it can affect and be affected (a number of qualities in various quantities). ⇔ Its measurable effect. (its measurable activity at a given moment).

These cross relate into two four further dualities, of which two are simple and two quite a bit less so. More on these later. In the above, the second part of each pair is expressed in terms of something outside of itself. The first part expresses all that it can possibly be, i.e. all possible contexts for it to exist in. The second is a process of valuing and counter valuing, the second part is translatable in common sensical speak only via such words as (value-) standard and consistency.

In the case of the latter it is very difficult to distinguis action from passive existing. Something “just exists” only to the measure that it is active. Even if this activity may be wholly enforced by the ambient history, it does act itself in a particular way that can only be affected by the ambient indirectly. Thus it is an integer being, essentially independent, yet requiring for this independence something to be independent from.

And such arrays of standards arrange themselves alongside those standards to which they may favorably compare. I.e. each thing seeks (gradually falls into) the context in which the most is required of its essential potential.

In human lore this is called Good versus Evil, but it is the inevitable form of time, the progression of increasing density on the one hand, and slowing relative time on the other.

The end scenario is one of complete stability and zero progression of time. Time would then ‘freeze’, undoubtably for it to burst open in a new Big Bang (or Crash - as in a pulverizing sheet of glass).




Pezer
"Evolutionists" who call for a return to the bestial logic of our tried-and-true evolutionary processes don't get the point. An evolutionist claims that the bestial logic of our tried and true evolutionary processes are things which have always been and continue to be right at the core of our existence. The evolutionist uses consciousness to fabricate an image of its consciousness which he then recognizes even before the image. Evolutionism is not primitivism because everything is already primitive, evolutionism is a full circle from feeling to knowing to know-feeling and feel-knowing

The importance of the death of God is what? That all we have is this, and ourselves. Our worship of God produced such intricate and sophisticated work, one wonders what similar sentiments could produce when attached to a vision of reality which is corroborated by its very object and which object is very thirsty for power, also better equiped than when this ever was dreamed of.


Fixed Cross
The term "God" remains vague. Who is dead? Is it Zeus? No way, he lives in Jupiter and the thunderstorms that free my heart. Is it Baal? Sure, he could be dead-ish, no one worships him. Is it Yahweh? Well - he's alive and kicking in the hearts of not only Jews, but all Western occultists. Who is dead is Jesus and his dad. That's what's significant -- the God of meekness of turning the other cheek, he's dead. At least - is he? Is not Jesus only a reference to a solstice, and Mary to the constellation Virgo?

In any case, you are right in your conclusions.

"Our worship of God produced such intricate and sophisticated work, one wonders what similar sentiments could produce when attached to a vision of reality which is corroborated by its very object and which object is very thirsty for power, also better equiped than when this ever was dreamed of."

God allowed man an uncanny thirst for power. Conviction was the means to this will. Our "problem" here is to get motivated to that same level. With value ontology a seed was planted. I felt at that time the power to create new Gods. We had a talk about that, then. The first enthusiasm (-- from en "in" (see en- (2)) + theos "god" --) paid off, and here we are.

"God is dead" is not enough of a statement. God is a ..... fill in the blanks -
man will always require something higher than his present state to orient on. It can be his future self, it can be a future descendancy (the Uebermensch) but it needs to be something ahead of him. Or am I wrong?



Pezer
The problem with God is precisely those general terms. God can be anything, it is a word that simply conjures the hole in the moment which the company has decided to explore no further. A scientist must chase these holes down, not give them names and worship them. I, as you know, give the exception to Chaos, for reasons that can become clear with some thought.

This other God, this Yehova, God of Abraham, perhaps God of the Egyptians, or some Egyptians, this is the curse behind Iesus and not the other way around. Jesus was a hippy who got taken advantage of by over-zealous rabbies with that good ol' God in their hearts and revenge in their minds.


Fixed Cross
Pezer wrote:
The problem with God is precisely those general terms. God can be anything, it is a word that simply conjures the hole in the moment which the company has decided to explore no further. A scientist must chase these holes down, not give them names and worship them. I, as you know, give the exception to Chaos, for reasons that can become clear with some thought.

This other God, this Yehova, God of Abraham, perhaps God of the Egyptians, or some Egyptians, this is the curse behind Iesus and not the other way around. Jesus was a hippy who got taken advantage of by over-zealous rabbies with that good ol' God in their hearts and revenge in their minds.
That's crazy. In the whole world, there is no group that has resisted the idea of the "Jewish" Son of God with such baffled repulsion as the rabbi's.
God has no one Son. His son is Beauty itself, the theatre of experience.

The tree of life (the glyph of which YHVH is an outtake and to the front of which 'Iesu' (the guy didn't really exist) was modeled) is the scientific model pur sang. Newton was a kabalist and Einstein definitely read a lot of it.

But also my own thoughts about value-relativity merged after many years of meditation on the sephirotic combinations of the 'bare (meaningless) logics' that can reasonably be said to sustain the human mind as representing reality. For example: Force/Form, Possibility/Decision Overflowing/Limiting-standardizing -- or Force/Overflowing, Overflowing/Possibility, Form/Limiting-standardizing, Limiting-standardizing/Decision - and then such contrasts as Overflowing/Decision and Possibility/Limiting-standardizing at the midst of which is the theatre of experience, the "Self", which does not exist except through such relations.

Capable wrote:
None of us can see tomorrow. Our words are still yesterday's languages. Who has the power to think the pure un-thought, the strangest derivation in the moment? We must learn to follow even the tiniest clues, even the ones that aren't there yet.
Quote :
Let us learn to speak like the wind. Let us learn to seek like the wind.
I like this.
Frames, running colors, streaks - caves, black bear with a red tongue and white teeth, snarling. A blue sky, a bald predator lurks, vast wings, hanging still. A volcano-top in the distance. Ants, colonies. Zoom in: Marches across the desert. A man with a female crotch and an electrifying voice.

The pyramids - I step on one of them and hurt my foot. My blood gushes down, the red birth of the Nile. The river feeds the barren Earth. A civilization of ants arises. Ant-history lives forth in ant-eternity. Ants call other ants Gods. In the meantime, the Sun slowly sets and I perceive my tent. I had already put it up. I forgot. A rabbits-stew, a wife in grey, a telescope.

Chaos and the wind are friends, we do not essentially disagree.

The Tree of Life is no limiter, it's to use freely and discard freely, it is a means to escape language and human context without losing control of logic. There are other means - but this one is particularly powerful, and has often been near and sometimes at the very core of western scientific progress.






Once again, if we take value ontology to the extreme and set value as prior to any formation of whatever affectance as literally as possible, then causation is free from itself.

Imagine this: is it perhaps possible that our value systems do not only dictate the future we create, but also the past from which we came?

What about this: Next to an origin of man from Ape, there is an origin of man via Atlantis, Lemuria, Hyperboria to beings like Wainamoinen. The history of the organism then depends on the substance which the soul takes on - in terms of which science of the body the subject values itself presently.

I know this is probably not the case. But it is now thinkable and illuminates at least that our memory, individual and collective, is greatly determined by the language we use to propel our essence back through time to arrive at a concept of an originating.






This is entirely hypothetical, as it can not be recreated as an experiment.
And thus, keep in mind that paradox means apparent contradiction.

Say that two photons are rushing toward each other from opposite directions.
And coupled with each photon is a perspective.

With what speed does the perspective of either of the two photons perceive the other photon approaching?

How does that correlate with the fact that, from an observer neutral to both photons (exactly in the middle), the photons are closing the distance between each other at twice the speed of light?





The speed of light encapsulates each reference frame.
It's like a membrane beyond which nothing within that frame shall pass.

From the reference frame of object A, the closer object B comes to light speed, the closer it comes to absolute gravity. If it would attain this, the two objects would not be able to move away from each other any longer.

Thus the nature of c as a limit holds together everything by gravity. It forces all mass which is of influence to other mass to forever remain of influence to it - it binds together all already-bound reference frames.

It is an ontological veil between this world and something which is only possible in terms that are impossible here. Possibly that is simply "nothing", but I don't think that's the necessary conclusion.





Let's see - the change elapsing within the photon are infinitely slow compared to the change elapsing in the physical reference frame in which it has its cause and effect.

And 2 times zero is zero, yes, I think that solves it.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Arch-Native Philosophy - Sumerian Bill and Ted - The Magical Tree of Life Academy
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10533
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Sun May 31, 2020 1:21 am

The concept value within value ontology refers to that which constitutes the momentum of the entity's self-sustaining through time. Value is incorporated in the particle as force that effectively counters, or harnesses against entropy. A particles self-valuing is the structure-in-time (path, circuitry) of its substance (energy, force, power to effect) in which other substance (energy, force, power to effect) is incorporated as increasing momentum of this structure-in-time. This structure in time is a constant in as far as it apprehends itself in terms of its own momentum, and these terms are its "values". Its momentum is its "self-valuing", the standard to its values. It persists in as far as it apprehends itself as necessary to itself, thereby necessary to its values.

As soon as it apprehends values separately from its own necessity to itself (self-valuing), it begins to disintegrate.

Value is directly translated into, or integrated as, momentum of the circular path of power to effect (thereby to empower) itself.

This power to effect and re-cause itself amounts also in power to cause change outside of itself.






Values are dictated by the subject, not the other way around. The highest value is the valuer, per definition. If there is no valuer, there can be no value.

Value ontology is the ontology of the valuer, which is the hub of the universe.

A value can be something that an atom requires to exist. It's not a product of consciousness. Consciousness is a highly complex form of valuing.

Establishing objective value is the precise opposite of what VO does.

Life is not itself necessarily of value to the one who is living it. That is why people kill themselves. Life is a result of valuing. Life is valuing, and if it values itself, it will keep on living. But it will only value itself because it is a means to attain to certain values. There is no "will to live": at the basis of life, life is a contingency of the will to attain values.

I realize that this is a deeply radical reversal of perspective.




The last paragraph says that if there is no value, the valuer will come to cease to exist. It say nothing about where there is no valuer.







With the double slit experiment, you always hear: "an electron behaves both like a particle and a wave" or "an electron behaves now like a particle and then as a wave". That's misleadingly phrased.

When the electrons are quantized by influencing them from another frame of reference, their pattern of distribution is like that of particles, and if you do not influence them from this other spacetime frame, they distribute according to the logic of wavefunctions.

I think that the coherence of their arrival pattern is guaranteed only if their reference frame is left intact, when all that matters is the coherence between the charge of the source and the charge of the impact.

The electrons do not need to exist as such, they are only the transference of charge. If man insists on measuring this quantifyingly, the electrons which are actually measured as individual causal agents (detected) do not thereafter alter their quantized state. They have been brought into the context of another reference frame, and can not at the same time disregard this frame.

The pure frame involves only the charge (value) of the electron source, which is a turbulence, and its wavelike (highly interactive) distribution.



Analogical suggestion - value will distribute differently when it is quantized/monetized, then when it is distributed in a direct transaction, where the frame of reference is only the relation between giver and receiver. In this context we might say that "meaning" is left intact. I can imagine that this can be extrapolated to the quantum state, in the sense that, very broadly, "il n'y a pas de hors-texte" applies and the QM "weirdness" can be seen as a hermeneutical incompetence.




I can't grasp the math, but I grasp the logic of it, which seems implicit in relativity itself. We've established that c is the only constant which is present in all measurements. All measurements are based on this constancy.

The electrons are measured (experience to be present, affecting) by being exposed to c as relative to reference frame of the observer. Their behavior is thus bent to the measure of the observer, which is to say that they are, at that moment, electrons. We are necessarily measuring the electrons that apply to c as it is from our frame of reference, which means a distribution that is physically logical. But if this reference frame is not involved, there is no necessity for peak-quantity to appear as a click in a frame of reference, but simply the possibility of light from any frame of reference.

And equally as gravity is curved, the peaking and declining functions on the screen are representations of potentiating optimizations, self-accumulative (content to the second power), climaxing and silencing. The behavior of undetected electricity the behavior of potential itself reacting to itself. As soon as potential becomes manifest, it ceases to exist as part of the field it arose from. Similarly souls are born into matter and die into the Bitter Sea.

It leaves me wondering - what is the contradiction between relativity and QM?



"Nature herself doesn't know where the electron will go".

- the electron as self-valuing will move in accordance to its context (its own valuing; direction-response-continuum), the electron as valued in terms of observer will go in accordance with the observers context.

Prediction without measurement is implicit, prediction with measurement is distribution.







In philosophers terms, will to power.

The photons or electrons (I'll use photons here) moving through the slits are influenced by whatever material is calibrated to 'make sense of them' (hit them to draw specific energy from them) at the slits.

You can't measure the quanta at the slits without actually having something collide with them. The calibration of that 'hit' is set in terms of the experimenters reference frame.

It's important to note that only if they are successfully manipulated so as to affect the observer at the slits, then they are observed as quanta with sufficient individual momentum to behave as particles.

If the emitted measuring energy is so weak (emitting photons or whatever at too great intervals) as to miss a quantum, then the quantum does not behave accordingly to being influenced as a quantum.

It's very literal value ontological logic at work.

The how of this is implicit in the a priori definition of the required outcome. So we can pull a philosophers trick and reverse the phrasing of the conclusion of the experiment: The influence is only sufficient to disturb the interference pattern if it manages to quantize the light.

Light appears to not be "made of photons" per se, rather, photons are the minimal form in which light is measured as a unit.

A photon is the epistemic unit of light.





Imafungi wrote:
Fixed Cross wrote:


It leaves me wondering - what is the contradiction between relativity and QM?

The contradiction, has to do with gravity, its more of an undiscovered successful bridging of the two then a contradiction because I believe they are both successful in their own arenas, General relativity being a description of the macro phenomenon of gravity down to a certain small point, and QM being the descriptions of the most micro fundamentality of what the universe is made of. The problem, though it is posited Gravitons exist (which would be the particle of the gravity field, as Photons are the particle of the EM field) the problem is they cant experimentally access gravitons though I believe they are trying and have been. Because to discover the details of the particles of matter of nature we smash them together and observe their characteristics in scattering, This is more difficult to do in an effort to search for and grasp gravities physical essence because I think it has something to do with gravities physical essence being space itself, and what happens is we just create mini black holes...But I only know relative generalities about this topic so you would probably be better off asking google.

This sounds plausible - it is like modern science to insist that gravity, which is the very manifestation of coherence and structuring, has itself 'particles' separate of the particles that 'have', are gravity.

Would Einsteins formula of mass and energy not be made into an irrelevancy by the existence of a particular gravity-carrier?

m = (e/c^2) + 'gravitons'...


The idea of spooky action at a distance is based on the superstition that matter consists of discrete blocks of some hard substance on a background, or rather plateau of Medium, aethir, god-field. First of all this is rather silly in itself as this Medium begs the same question all over again. On what ground is this Medium predicated? What is the ground to the ground? Infinite regress, as with all sciences proposed finalities.

Second, the substance is EM and gravity. This is what particles are. Their manifestation is the force they represent.The coherence of these particles as force-standards and mediators is their being. What else is there to define, describe or identify them? Nothing.

In a similar vein, such people have asked:
'What is the essential waterness behind water? Which non- water makes the water so watery?'
It does not occur that 'things' as we designate them contain within our notion of their being, their being and thus their nature, which includes their ground.

Science is always looking for groundless grounds that ground all the rest which is taken to be purely contingent and of no existential integrity. Its eazy enough to interpret this yearning; men who live without the faintest clue that they exist by their own nature, unaware that they have a nature, that they are what nature has now become. Men who see themselves as separate of the universe, looking in on it from the outside. With all due respect, autists and idiots.





I've often casually proven astrology to be true by predictions of what a chart would look like given some characteristics. I've done it in the other thread, conjuring up people I was sure to have oppositions. It's not up for question for me any more than gravity is - but it sees at first equally inexplicable.

As a general but accurate rule, the only people who do not believe in astrology are those who haven't seriously looked into it. I've seen the transformation in everyone I confronted with his chart. I've learned not to do this anymore as it is oppressive; but neither as I think Hume has a point that we don't know for certain if the sun is going to come up, do I feel there is a point to doubt astrology when the empirical evidence is as overwhelming as it is for the gravitational constant.

All you have to do is measure it, but you do have to do that.

But indeed it is hard to explain this in terms of what we already know - but given that man still knows virtually nothing, it's not surprising to me that the more we come to know, by the philosophical work of our friends and ourselves, the less strange or unlikely it becomes that we are products of more than just configurations of molecules on Earth, that we actually stand as in the center of a cosmos; that our being is far too subtle to not be influenced by the cosmic majesty of order, which was fleshed out as the argument for possibility itself.




I get it, I feel it even - it is ugly compared to philosophy - it shouldn't go near it - it feels arbitrary.

But it's one hard motherfucking fact of life we're gonna have to get realistic about.

Not that it's arbitrary, but that it is the opposite. Today, I have gone a long way to explaining it based on Parodites' conception of the origin of the mind - as the re-anchoring of beings in the world, in coherence, in being, after the instincts had been 'threshed' by the self-analyzing being; the 'empty mind', or the chaotic firstborn-mind opened itself up to the cosmos as a gaping wound to receive any possible ointment of constancy. And this is still the way that shamans rip open the fabric of causality to the spontaneous dance of the soul under the sky in which the connection between the two is the actual being. This is why the lightning is the symbol of divinity - the coherence of our mind reflects the discharge of cosmic order into the vacuous proto-consciousness represented by the threshing floor, where the wills of the gods bundle to play with man.






I wrote this post an hour or so ago on an empty stomach. I've eaten lentil soup with sausage now.

The status of the argument is as follows:

under scrutiny is astrology.

Note: I can't allow any relation of this field with the term 'supernatural' or any other phenomena falling under that term, this is a specific field of inquiry and relates to fields that are vague only in the sense of having a vague understanding of it. It is ruthlessly exact and there is no room for doubt about the consistency of influences.

It is a culturally imposed superstition that leads people to doubt astrology. All serious cultures take it seriously, because you can not tae calculated risks without it and you can not build greatness without a lot of good fortune.
They called the farao's the cosmic architects. It's a field of knowledge that leads to long term power. If anything it's the actual gift of Prometheus; fore-sight. That this is often deadly is the reason astrology is shunned, but for a philosopher this fear is not quite as well founded as it is for people with lesser inclinations to know themselves. In all western wars serious astrologers are consulted, and newspapers print 'horoscopes' that prescribe events based on sun signs, which is impossible, it is very clear why astrology is discredited, but it is not clear why it is working so well. Again; my best argument is the one I've given today - the moment that being had disconnected the instincts from each other, man stood erect; the moment man stood erect he was crowned by the heavens. As the earthly causal chain was broken, the celestial one was forged. The moment in between is the great possibility that Parodites' philosophy describes and thereby opens up for 'use', and this moment underlies all consciousness. Astrology functions as a particular set of laws on the field of the daemonic formative process, but it is no less adequate to the phenomenology of human fate as physics is to the phenomenology of falling objects. This absurd consistency is why I make such a point of it. It's not that it's merely interesting, it's rather that it is an entire field of exact knowledge that is disregarded with this mere disregarding as grounds for the conclusion that it isn't proven to work. Yes, it is proven. It's been proven to work a long, long time ago and never not been proven since. It's only not been clear at all how it works. But the same goes for gravity, and a lot of things of which we only now that it works. The actual, historical reason man started disbelieving astrology is that he started believing in the Bible which forbids it. I' sure took Newton a while to get people to believe that such exactitude of prediction could be possible, before he could get them to actually test out his laws. Now the effective terms of astrology are not less exact than the terms of mass, but our words for our own states of being are slightly less exact. Astrologers therefore prefer to work with the astrological names wherever they can. They are by far the most exact terms we have for "human being".
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Arch-Native Philosophy - Sumerian Bill and Ted - The Magical Tree of Life Academy
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10533
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Mon Jun 01, 2020 10:44 pm

Abstract wrote :
Relative to something anything can be bad, relative to something else that same thing can seem good. Burning coals on the feet is hell compared to soft earth, heaven compared burning of the whole body...(not the best example)

Isn't everything just relative?

Relative to what?

Relative to something that is relative to it? If that would be the full definition, it means that all relating things are always equal, simply "relative to relativity".

This can not be the case. Something is relative to something. Otherwise, the word relative has no meaning.

Nietzsche faced and did not solve the same problem as you are posing. He also believed in the absolutism of relativity, and the absence of "solid value". Value-ontology posits solid value as the (logical) ground to all relativity.


Quote :
If so then isn't heaven just a state of mind; considering things with respect to the right things?
Keeping in mind there is worse?
To whom is heaven heaven?
To a consciousness, an "I", a solid value, which can measure itself differently against a variety of changing conditions, but always only has itself, its particular nervous & endoctrine system to measure.


Quote :
Knowing less is to know the more?

Knowledge is perhaps well defined as the ability to position ones mind in respect to a given problem. The mind is made up of terms, and knowledge consists of terms, but also their connecting structure (the minds 'skeleton'), hierarchy, logic, which can/must not necessarily be defined in terms, but requires such things as experience and "intuition", the workings of the "subconscious" to exist.




why something and not rather nothing´ is indeed a result of misplacement of the term ´something´. If being is explained so as to be understood, there is no more question as to why it would exist, instead of nothing. It becomes clear that, versus/on top of nothing, precisely what does exist is what would exist.

The reversed question why there is not rather something than nothing, is essentially the same question/ing, as it departs from an absence, a lack of context for experience. As the vacuum of a beings experience increases, as it is less able to relate to itself, as it loses consciousness, the question of the naturalness and self evidence of its own being becomes more problematic, and with that the given of being becomes rationally unsustainable.

Even in abstract ratio the subject has need of itself, as value primacy, to ground inferences.






Ontology aims at knowledge of what is.
Philosophy inquires after our way of knowing.
How do we know what is?
In what way do we know what is?
A proper epistemology arrives at the best way of knowing (what is).
The quality of this knowing evidently influences the content of the knowledge.
So ontology is subservient to epistemology. What is, is dependent on how we know.
This does not mean that if we know nothing, nothing is - we can not speak of nothing at all.
but it means that if we know something, we know it as something.

We do no longer need to focus on the correctness of our ontology. It is impossible to have an objective view of what is. The question has become one of the quality of knowledge - its value to us. This criterium is in line with what we have come to know about knowledge. A proper epistemology then, causes us to throw out the traditional idea of ontology, as a description of what is, as it is - and moves us to embrace ontology as an extention of epistemology.

The study of what is, is now the study of what we cause there to be, by controlling our gaze.
Secretly enclosed, this has always been the true nature of science. Scientific method is the control of our gaze, to perceive exactly in such a way as produces the type of results we consider proper.

Why do we consider these results proper? It is dependent on the quality that we value most greatly: consistency of results. Results are accepted and rejected based on their consistency in occurring.

Religion is another way of formulaing ontology, another way of prioritizing results. In religion, the exaltedness of the results count greater than the consistency in which they occur. Results, measurements, are classified in terms of how they move the beholder. A question of the nature of the espitemology. One is not necessarily truer than the other - science is the ontology of consistency in human perception. Religion is the ontology of the limit of human projection.

Neither science nor religion operates at the level of epistemology - neither field of thought models its own criteria and includes this model in itself.

Philosophy must know itself. This means: knowing of knowing - a knowing knowing itself - thereby knowing it to be with some precision.
When we know how we know, we know what we are. In this way we are confident that what is, must be. This certainty is our own work. There is no such certainty except in the case of the self-knowing knowing.

We see that ontological certainty is equal to will.





many religions.
A set of tenets is used to establish an order, on top of which is a dominating drive.
The dominating drive is unknown to all followers of the religion except to the one with the thought that created the context.
The vision of God is the powerful realization of the current situation, implicit in which is the vision of the greatest possible influence one can exert in that situation.
The moral nature of the influence is dependent on the materials (people) to be influenced and the character of the visionary.
The former can change over time, the latter can not.
A religion has a definite character - if it is to be successful at all, it will come to many different manifestations.
Once the code of a religion, the thought behind it, has been cracked, the religion loses it's coercive power.
God is no longer Great.
A greater possibility than the one that was possible from that once primordial perspective, is now imaginable.
Weak souls search for nothingness (superficiality), vital souls for experience, being - new depths.




For truth to be made explicit, there must be a framework, a context for statements to signify. Science is the most reliable framework for explicit truths - because it restricts the substance that can be designated to equalized quantities of mass. Clearly philosophy can not operate within this framework, this procedure is of use but only within a larger framework, wherein the subjective human is included, which means also the use man has for science, essentially, the view of science as a moral perspective. This idea was formulated brilliantly by without-music, in the ILP thread The Ontological Tyranny.

The other 'end' of this spectrum is the total abandonment of logical method, the idea that "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life!" and the satisfaction with that, the idea that, as a consequence of the truth of this statement, everything that one asserts with ones being is true.

Another approach yet is "all that matters is the quantum of power that one is, the rest is cowardice" - in other words, the only valid truth is in power, same as "might is right".

But to me an even less reducible truth appears as the idea that all existence is self-valuing, that these truth-generating self-valuings condition any kind of situational truth such as physical law. The reality of self-valuing is a transcendental truth, something that underlies all instances of procedural truths and conflicts between these.

A difficult question is the one of defining my true values, because it implies an exhaustive certainty pertaining to my self-valuing core. I am not sure that the self-valuing can be exhaustively explicated.

Finally, what is suggested to me by the OP is truth as the absence of bias. But even to move toward an absence of bias is a result of a bias - a bias against bias - the absence of bias is death non-existence, for a self-valuing is a bias. And this is reflected in the etymology:

Quote :
O.E. triewð (W.Saxon), treowð (Mercian) "faithfulness, quality of being true," from triewe, treowe "faithful" (see true). Meaning "accuracy, correctness" is from 1560s. Unlike lie (v.), there is no primary verb in English or most other IE languages for "speak the truth." Noun sense of "something that is true" is first recorded mid-14c.
One can only be faithful to something.
So, the question of truth is the question of perspective.
The quest for objective truth ends for me at the observation that all subjects may command a fundamentally different truthfulness, and that objectivity is merely the consensus of these commands. Truth then is a matter of power - something is made to be true, made to be valid, made to apply, by force.

As force accumulates, so does the potential for truth. Truth may be best defined as 'that which is impossible to negate', i.e. necessity.
Truth-procedures are subjectively designed channels for necessity.

In this way truth is indeed a 'way' and a 'life'.







a comprehensive definition of power can not equal the scientific definition of potential. I say power is more than that - it is also the noble quality of defining oneself self consciously. Thence: to act consciously. To stand not because of gravity and utility, but in order to stand. Also act, not because it is convenient, but because it is an act. This is the noble way, the divine creative holy grail, this is how myths are born to seduce other, lesser actors of times down the declining line to the idea of nobility - the false dream, the repose of the Last Man. No myth can inspire man to act. Only a deep rage, an intolerance, can make a man separate from his familiar causes, "that which determines him". The Father. Self-determination presupposes intolerance. New-Age people are the most intolerant of dogmatics. They will have nothing to do with the past, with history, with reason. All of them are resentful, all New Agers I have met, except the astrologers, who are ancients and still wise, fearful of Saturn.





I want to examine the power of value ontology to merge analytical with synthetic-a-priori judgments by the calibration of semantics to grammar.

Please help me clarify and verify the terms.

An analytical statement is tautological, it is so "by definition".
A synthetic a-priori statement is a definition of a subject that requires concepts which are not required for the term to be defined semantically. It is rather a substantiation of an analytical truth.

Is this true?

Example: "light moves at the speed of light" is analytical (and a priori)
whereas "the speed of light is 299 792 458 m / s in vacuum" is synthetic a priori
and "light can be measured in terms of photons" is also synthetic a priori.

Are these proper examples?




To value empowers.
That which is power is valued.
To value one must self-value.

So we have
self-valuing
valuing
otherness
power

Power is the quantization of otherness.
Selfvaluing is the qualification of 'ness itself.

And thus valuing, as an intermediary, is both quantative and qualitative. It places the quality in context so that it becomes a quantity.












whenever we make a statement a kind of nexus is created where different perspectives can make a claim, all interpreting it in terms of themselves, all thus bending this truth in all sorts of different directions even just for it to apply to anything at all.

Language is thus fundamentally divisive, and unification within language is the near-impossible task of philosophy.





In a purely ontological framework, there isn't even such a thing as falsity, so neither is there any truth. Truth is only valid in a statement or a thought, it's a meta-concept.








Self-valuing can not be seen as temporal-causally prior to valuing in terms of self-value, i.e. valuing the world, as the two are seen/understood to occur at the same moment, and the latter is indeed needed to enable the former to be manifest. However, as we must infer from the terms, self-valuing is logical-causally prior to valuing in terms of self-value. We see a difference between the logic of value-causality and the logic of temporal causality.

The problem with applying causality to value is that we are here working with logic that is not adequate to the thing which needs to be explained. The logic of causality is derived from a classifying-observing the physical world in terms of a continuum, and so to be valid always requires a continuum, a chain, in which each cause is also an effect of something else than to which it is the cause.

In the post linked here I have explained self-valuing as the activity of consistency. Consistency does does not itself have a cause, in the sense of transferring energy quantities, that is to say, in the proper sense of causality. As no cause can be inferred from it, there is no manifest ground to it, except “possibility”. I keep arriving at this ultimate ground for being in terms of value ontology – being is because it is not impossible, and its possibility escapes its impossibility because if its particular form/mode, which is consistency, specifically, consistent self-value.

Now, “possibility” flowing out into consistency may be described as “necessity”. Self-valuing is possible, not necessary –- valuing-in-terms-of-self-value is necessary where-ever this possibility is actualized. We see how necessity is subservient to possibility, whereas possibility is subservient to nothing, except to the absence of its negation, impossibility. Impossibility of anything is of course an extremely positive, active classification, entirely dependent on a general possibility of being.

As it requires only possibility and not necessity, self-valuing can be seen as transcendent. It stands “behind” the manifest world, and its logics of causation, quantity, sequence and temporality. If one were to apply such logics to self-valuing, it would appear as “self-caused”, but this goes against the very logic of causation, so it is wisest to simply dismiss the concept of causality if we are describing its ground as a principle.

As a manifest being, however, a self-valuing is indeed caused by that which it values in terms of itself. This is the case when temporality has taken hold, when we speak of growth, of being, matter. Self-valuing “becomes itself” by enabling principle of causation, by which it is then indirectly self-caused as an ongoing process.


As far as I can reason, there is no way to discern, physically or imaginatively, any 'existent' (any being, thing, object, subject, entity, etc) that escapes the activity of "self-valuing" as VO puts it forth. A thing, in as far as it exists, must interact with its environment in such a way as to keep existing, which is to say it must keep attaining itself.

The notion of "value" is attached to this seemingly circular reasoning because this is the only way in which such circular reasoning actually applies to reality. It is, as Nietzsche discerned, a beings valuing (which is to say its acting on and thus 'having' and specific values) that determine what this being is; what the being of this being entails.

Valuing is not an arbitrary notion, it can not be replaced with another; it is not the case that every circular self-referent definition also refers directly to existence in such a way as to make it understood. It is only through observing our valuing that we can understand what we are, what we do, why we do it and when we're going to do it, as well as other beings responses to that doing. The term "existing" or "being" is in fact hollow until this insight has been attained - the insight into what it is precisely that beings 'spend their time doing'; responding to either non- or to other being to the effect of continuing a similar responding; this very particular form of responding is what entails being. Any other type of response would amount in the end of that responding. And we happen to have called this self-perpetuating form of responding valuing.

This is the notion that, even when I am addressing it myself, proves very elusive; it is not that from now on every dead entity has to be reinterpreted in terms of what we understand as valuing (e.g. choosing, selecting, and doing so consciously) but that from now on every human action has to be reinterpreted in terms of the same kind of necessities that drive 'dead being'' i.e. unalterable behaviors.

Value Ontology does away with the idea that humans can be changed, that there's anything we can do about what we are, or that we can look at our motivations and interpret our actions as if from a higher vantage point than from our self-willing - there is nothing more 'objective' than this willing to power, and our consciousness is merely a by-product of it, and so are our definitions, and so is our very capacity to define.

The very notion of a definition requires a self-valuing standard; thus, in as far as a definition can be truthful to what it is, beside to what it represents (and thus represent cleanly), it must to begin with include its own capacity as a self-valuing.

Further, every definition posits an 'unchangeable' - this is the whole reason why (the lie) "A" = "A" can be stated at all; a definition is supposed to represent an unalterable thing - but we know there isn't actually a completely similar "A" to any "A", be it a symbol (each equal symbol exists in a different context, if ever so slightly, and is thus a different object with a different 'meaning' (effect)) or a physical entity; the only unalterable thing about such things is that they self-value. As soon as they stop doing that, their being is altered to become either non-being or a very different entity. Say, for example, that a written "A" exists in a world where man works with different alphabet, or with no symbols at all. In this case, the self-valuing "A" does not exist, the "A" does not exist, what exists is a few diagonal lines that no one man will discern in the same way as the next man. The "A" only comes back into existence as "A" when a man discerns it as such. It is thus unchangeable only in as far as it is involved in certain interactions. The same goes for man, or any kind of living species. Whatever can be fixed by a definition, relies on an often unfathomably complex context, within which there is not one single constant except this necessary form of relationship between things, which is called self-valuing.

In mathematics and formal logic, such a context spreads out in 'instantly into eternity'; that is to say, as long as one thing is completely valid (positively existent), everything must valid (positively existent). But in life, and in the physical world in general, such contexts spread out gradually in time; each instance of self-valuing is phenomenologically different from the next; no single "implication" (effect) can be reproduced in another instant. From this we can gather that formal logic and mathematics aren't actually referring to the physical world; "A" is never actually "A"; a symmetrical equation like this always refers to an artificial world, one that exists out of time; and yet even here time operates on it as man works the equation, and bends it in such a way that variables are included, and the first "A" becomes, by conditioners, distinguishable from the other "A", and a picture of reality begins to shine through. The most basic example: Action = - (Reaction).

A mathematics of being would depart from the notion that in as far as there are abstract notions applicable together in a system, they must on some level be fundamentally equal to each other, since they are representing things that can be computed with one another; and in as far as there are notions that represent reality, they can never ben fully abstract, and never be perfectly represented, and never quite fit in the same system as which supports fully explication of another notion.

Reality is asymmetrical, must fundamentally appear to us as such - or rather, every instance of reality that can be discerned, which is to say, any situation with different entities relating to each other, must appear to us as asymmetrical. Will to Power is the primordial way of designating this asymmetry, it its referral to rank and difference.

The ultimate question about metaphysics is what we can say. The veracity of any metaphysics relies on its own notion of truth. Is value ontology true or not? That depends whether or not truth is connected to reality; whether or not, in short, we assume that reality can be truthfully expressed at all.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Arch-Native Philosophy - Sumerian Bill and Ted - The Magical Tree of Life Academy
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10533
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Mon Jun 01, 2020 10:53 pm

The fire flux.
But this is philosophy.

By my beard, and his, this teaching to be deeper than one had thought, is this not philosophy?



Truth is at once simple and infinitely complex; entities tend to integrate only that to which they feel akin. Most people confronted with delicate philosophical reasoning across several pages will be repelled, unable to integrate, digest. The silly ones among them will project their failure on the writer, and assume that, because they could not appreciate, the text is simply 'too complex'.

Another matter is elegance. Some philosophers were able to convey complex idea in rather simple terms. Problem with that is that their ideas were usually misunderstood - simplified by simpler minds.

Personal: a problem is that in my own mind, VO is a logic that is beyond simple; it is entirely obvious. It is in fact so clearly the case that it applies everywhere that, to put it into words, is already making it far more complicated than it is. And yet, the implications of its application are so vastly complex that the brain starts producing neural connections at the mere anticipation of working it through.

Simplicity for the sake of a pleasant read or an easy 'ah yes true!' is an epicurean taste, unrelated to intellectual conscience.






Something just dawned on me.
Selfvaluing-pure is the unfulfilled potential to value. *
As soon as valuing is attached to a specific value, the purity is no more.
Thus, there are no pure organic self-valuings. An atom is, as far as I can tell, a pure-selfvaluing, as it requires, once it has come into being, no external circumstance. Please correct me if I'm wrong, in that case a pure-selfvaluing might only be pre-existent, a hiatus in the world, a space of pure chaos, from which an autonomous possibility emerges, that can sink its hooks of potentiating into this or that selfvaluing beyond the chaos.

Philosophic skepsis in combination with creative powers is, that I understand, how a human can relate to self-valuing pure, to lack of attachment, to the full potential to value without any outstanding investments.

Fools try through askesis to also do away with the physical valuing, but they would have to do with air pressure and gravity and heat, and yet it does work to exalt ones self experience momentarily, if one abstains from certain values considered more or less essential, such as in a fast - or in the extreme some asphyxiatic methods - and yet all of this is ultimately nonsense, as it is a arched, not a reified state of detachement.

Philosophic skepsis is a a reified lack of need for definitive truths. It opens up the self-valuing to the thing called sometimes mind, sometimes, freedom, sometimes even god, but the thing in any case from which effortless power, vision and joy issues, waters that touch but never attack to the worlds already-existing values. And wherever valuing has run scarce in the world, the mere potentiating gaze of the self-valuing acts like water on dry clay.

A table has very little potential to reach such a state, as it exists by virtue of being attached to this value of it, the person who wants to have a table.

This allows us to distinguish active from passive self-valuing by means of principle -
we can trace what remains of the being if it has withdrawn all of its investments.
Organic life is always part of an ecosystem. This system regulates the integrities with respect to each other in time, life.
Abstract thought can attain to a sphere analogous to pure integrity.

The perfect mathematics only relates to itself.
The perfect logic relates everything to itself, and allows for no investments in anything that eludes it.





The faith in gods of fate such as Zeus or "God" is the manipulation of thehuman mind in adequate terms of the possibility principle.
Now the uncertainty principle refers only to the possibility of not-nothing that will never be completely filled in, for it to not negate itself.
It is toward this principle that all consciousness is directed. The skygods represent this upward gaze into uncertainty as a positive, as a drive.

So the name and word of god is a vessel for an orientation on an uncertain future which by that name is pre emotively turned into a victory. In turn, the human is oriented on such victory and senses at once the overwhelming power of being aware of the game of odds, and the law of the supremacy of consistency.

In this day and age gods arent needed for many people oriented on what once god allowed. But for others, they still represent the powervacumm behind the uncertainty principle/ratio.

God faked his own death more than once. Same with Wall Street.





Some beliefs are built on grammar, the idea that there is a subject and an object and a verb, an activity that should stand separate of these and that yet binds them, etc -
these are relatively deep yet still naive beliefs.

And some beliefs are entirely built of trigger words.
this is the system of any excited, disenfranchised mass.

Trump is one of the few rare folks out there to ever pull this shit who hard just to distract from it, so we can get back to deeper beliefs, built on greatness rather than on triggeredness. You have to use the word, it is fundamentally a tool, and its materials to work on are man, and the art you're creating out of it is what is pitifully called a congregation. A movement.

VO has been pure because it doesn't do this. Its not an easy term to get used to at all, it rearranges your whole mind, it reinforces the whole structure of meaning giving, it annihilates the difference between subject, verb and object. The belief is now restricted to a grammar that disrupts all previous grammar. It is a fundamentally iconoclastic belief, it can't destroy itself because it is already made of the same stuff of what nihilism is made of. It is nihilism rearranged, so that it turns out as earth. The pieces in their place, we see that relativity of values is not a top down condemnation of value but a grond to generate whatever already is of value - such as the sense that there is something of value - from what is irrevocably here, now.

De-facto-ism.
Thats where you don't need words in the first place.
seeing what speaks for itself first without the use of any word.

Of course, if you're in a busy city this can get pretty depressing. Among talking people you need to be talking or you'll be violated and disrupting.
A city is "all talk".
City talk radio, almost a tautology. And in this snow of noise, a new ground to silence and abstinence from belief is born - the jazz like talk that passes the time, in which a pure stoic soul takes hold that believes nothing, and firmly. Such a man can discover a universe of feels in any given thing, that is the advantage. A truly firm nihilist can always be moved by seeing that someone put in a little extra effort. And this is what nature made of, extra effort - and so the nihilist becomes a philosopher, by seeing that to be nihilistic may be true, but apparently just not good enough. This is when envy comes to the aid of wisdom. All sins have their place.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Arch-Native Philosophy - Sumerian Bill and Ted - The Magical Tree of Life Academy
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10533
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Mon Jun 01, 2020 11:05 pm

I see the Absolute as a result, as an apex.
Not as a ground or origin to being, or to beings nature, or it its laws, but as the inevitable climaxing of being in relation with itself.
Not an instant of climax not any discharge, no sexual references intended - I mean simply a finality, a modus in which the process of locally based Being (as self-valuing) finds a definite consequence.

Therefore the Absolute is a kind of symmetry, or a harmony, something we primitively ay understand as "abstraction", if we do not see how it has come into being.

Yet when it occurs, such "abstraction" is a real form of existence and it can be referred to as a temple of origins, like Plato and the Hermeticists have done.

The cabalistic Tree of Life shows us how out of the local self sourcing point (Kether - "Hadit, with Crowley) and the consequences of its self-valuing nature, which include contradictions, a systemic absolute can be conceived.

Maybe Ill add to this later.





There is a need to replace the term value ontology. The emphasis needs to be on the instrument of valuing, the ontological core, the self-valuing. The valuer, the valuing (as in the being), and on the fact that a specific logic is required to ontologize with these terms.

Something can be said for Valuer Logic - The logic based on the principle of a valuer, analogous to the physics based on the principle of a quantum (of valuing).

A quantum of valuing is a valuer. The logic describing the interconnectivity of valuers reflects the physics of quanta. The logical operations reflect the causality of relativity - i.e. nonlinear space time curvature rather than chains of action and reaction.

VL does not concern itself with the moments in which collisions become formal causes, but rather with the structural property of an environment to attract causes and effects of such and such nature.

"Fundamental Matter", the affectance sea, Higgs field, is contextualized into the logical discourse as a valency-net, a web of relations which exist only in terms generated by its users - and is only conceptualizable as a derivative of a primordial activity, "relating", which ultimately implies a inequality.

The primary inequality is between being and not-being.
The secondary inequality is between being-this and that-being.

The formula for every relating must consist of three elements. A relator, a related and a relation.

The primary relates to the secondary in terms that will reflect not-being in a certain way: not being-this, not that-being, etc.
A relation is thus a location for values. Values exist as relations, and determine beings to one another. Values are "contextual appearances"- contrasted with "beings", whose natures are undisclosed except through time, recognizable as "behavior".

Someones structural behavior is his soul, his appearance to himself and others is his personality. The appearance creates the context for the soul, but is not the only decisive factor.

The decisive factor is read a posteriori, in an abstraction of the overall behavior. "The will". The soul is the body of the will, and the body is the body of the soul. The will operates through drawing a certain behavior out of a given body.

It's mechanisms are in part simply consequences of its place in the Whole (everything that directly and indirectly affects him) and in part the type of operations that makes the whole possible - valuing-interpreting, being-subject, resisting.

Change is the effect of resistance as matter is the effect of the speed of light.



This made me think of a way to describe "ascending to ones higher self" less arcanely -
to reflect ones overall-behavior in ones present actions.

I do not mean "sitting on the couch and watching tv all day" but rather "enacting such and such a contrast/conflict". For overall, most lives are marked by a certain irredeemable difference between value and necessity. To embrace this difference seems ironic, as it seems like it relativizes the valuing and surrenders to necessity. But that is a formula for death. And indeed, the search for a higher self often leads to death of the soul - to lethargy.

Another way to embrace the difference is to use it to eternalize ones valuing of the lacked thing - to create an 'ode' to that which is not - in order that it exists in the mind of the world.

Ascesis, along with sadomasochism, is another way to 'own the difference between what one wants and what one can have'.

The most worthy way of embracing the difference is the pure, emotionless reflection on it, resulting in what can be called "military planning". I find that the highest form of praise to life is a systematic construction of means of dominion.

Life itself, that which is praised, flows gratefully into such vessels.






No, I will stick to value ontology. I've come to love the word.

I use the term value because I want to employ our most direct intuitions about the world, to work in unision with the powerful framework of established knowledge which the scientists have gathered.

Language guides us, its possibilities are a vast sea of potential, and we steer our course through it. But no none has ever mapped this full sea of language.
In this ocean is one island. A place where the ocean knows itself by seeing that which is different from it – something enclosed in the ocean, but not moving with its tides.
More than half dead, beaten by vast currents of overpowering value-systems colliding in "me", I stranded on this island and from that day on, the oceans could be navigated, charted, mastered.

The human mind is such an ocean – always in turmoil and never an equal thought process. Colliding streams of consciousness, waves of emotion, never an anchor.
Always things are registered and always a reaction forms. The only constant seems change.

But change from what? Is there a standard? Is there a measure of things? And who measures it – who senses it and responds to it accordingly? What is this core of the surf, the depths, the storm and the silent seas? Always a “yes this” and a “not that”. An appraiser.

“Judgment” – always the “correct measure”. But what is this correctness but historical precedent? It is a selection. Nature selects herself for herself, and she is doing so right now in your thoughts. What is the value of this? Does it attract or repel? This question is answered instantly by an atomic core. It can take years in a human mind. But the question is equal: in this encounter, how do I maximize my harmonic momentum?




The idea would be that, in order to liberate the world from paralysis and shameful, useless obstacles, we all privately have to melt them down burn them up, heat up our soul without any other aim than to melt the old valuing sediments, fossils, patterns, into freshly erupting volcanic activity. This itself would naturally regenerate the human cosmos, we would not even have to worry about establishing a value system that is ethically viable - we would be able to count on such systems coming into place as the released radiation, raw valuing-of-the-moments-beauty, converts to mass again and crystallizes into freshly resounding harmonics, arches of meaning that connect the humans in the here, now by extrapolating their self-valuing through science into something that is at this point beyond imagining.



This Frozen-ness is still Egyptian. Pyramids, eternal corpses, steel masks, geometric tombs, obelisks - solidified death-worship.

Those 30.000.000 Egyptians in movement would only need to understand that, when their movement is experienced for what it is, rather than as a means to an unclear end of moral freedom, the revolution will be a historical fact.

Human conscience needs to be converted into dance.






Indeed, the core of the self-valuing entity can only be described, objectified, as a machine. It does what it does because of an inevitability that we may deduce from being, our own being and whatever this implies.. We may deduce it from what we know, the full extent and depth of it. We can not indicate anything that exists without seeing how it must hold itself as a standard with the aid of what we perceive as some mysterious force or quality. Gravity, strong force, the facts of nature we can not penetrate into by isolating the things they pertain to from us, these are expressions of what we can understand when we take ourselves as a model for such machinery.

This is where the distinction between subject and machine dissolves. A subject is a machine. We are conscious, yes -- Parodites is making vast strides in describing what this particular form of self-valuing/machinery is, how it stands apart, what it produces, what we may attain with it, and what we may/can/must value in it., as ourselves. I have identified the other way end of the scale -- but the mechanism, the machine is still the same. We perish if we do not function as such a machine. Therefore, as vast and interesting and even crucial to know in order to aim for our ends the difference between the subject and the atomic machine is, they are still. under the definition of value ontology, identical at their basic machinery.

So, in line with what Capable says, We must affirm a more object-based descriptiveness within value ontology, and refer to what now stands in Production under "naive valuation" -- the concept of valency. This derivative of the concept "(to) value" stands precisely between the valuing "subject" (self-valuing/self-sustaining standard) and that what it values, "the world", the other, the object. It is in this medium of the universe, the true "ether", entirely a matter of possibility and correspondence,, where "all is properties and situations", that we may identify the machine-like infrastructure, the circuitry of the machine.

We can not penetrate deeper into the core of self-valuing than by knowing comprehensively our own self-valuing. This is the phenomenal/phenomenological task before us, and this is the perspective that I hold in regard to a new ethics. Very elementarily, we take our organism as the axiom from which to penetrate into the logic of the atom. In this, the subjective, including what we refer to as consciousness, stands logically prior to the things from which it is seen/interpreted to emerge/be constructed. So the study of phenomenology and ontology now must be a study of psychology, but not the categorizing kind, rather a new direction (of which the 21st century has seen preludes) -- something we may call experientology. The categorizing not of "effect" of "substances" but of modes of being, as recognized and categorized by beings as resulting from a certain "brew of passions" which is enabled by a certain valency-structure. This is and has always been the study of economics and politics, the true social sciences, working mass-psychology. We have just found its proper terminology, the scientific language for the subjective -- the means to objectify subjects into machines without devaluating them.

There remains the fundamental difference between a machinic object (a car, etc) and a machinic subject (a self-valuing). We may however understand now why we create machines around us, and why they so easily fit our valuing system. Our cosmos is host to and product of a machinal structure. At the core of all machinery is (identified from a human perspective) this machinal inevitability that is also at the ground of evolution - a mechanism that only in retrospect appears as logic. From its own perspective this mechanism can not be exhaustively conceptualized, but we must, as Capable notes leave room for the undefined of the machine, that makes it so distant from an automobile which only functions by knowing exactly what it does -- the quality of the machine that makes it not a tool, but a tool-wielding, interpreting all machines as its own functions. We can only approach and delineate this. What we can define is that which approaches and delineates it -- valency.

In order to articulate the categorical science of valencies, our area for objectification, it is useful and necessary to understand the subject and its non-conscious counterparts in terms of the machinal. But at the same time we have an overlap, a twilight zone between the visible / technical and that 'je ne sais quoi', the area where valency becomes value, where our approach is suddenly reversed mid-course without changing direction of its course inward -- the realest and most bewildering revaluation of values -- the moment where the machinal, first approached as the most precise, as we touch on its core appears entirely imprecise. This is the moment where "the severest self-legislation" is required, which means not only to set laws for oneself, but to set oneself as a law. Science has not been supported by ego's strong enough to attempt this - it has so far been the domain of the Camelof Zarathustra's metamorphoses of the spirit.

With the introduction of value ontology into science, there is an "I will" required. Science must deliberately impose itself on its subject matter, in order that its subject matter does not impose itself any further on him. The "I am" of science is still very far away, we stand at the beginning of penetrating into the machinal, the "machinery of the universe", by introducing ourself into its vital functions.

For this to become viable, tenable, this "self" has to be elaborated and even 'celebrated' like never before. The perspective, for every ontic machine is a perspective, every perspective is a machine, must be the new 'atom' of a new science. This will require an entirely new scientific caste -- to which end we can only begin to inspire new students, seedling-thinkers. To this end the language of the machinal could be employed effectively -- to draw out, "lure" rigorous, scientific minds into a realm of self-knowing by allowing the notion of self-valuing to express itself in the language of the machinal. We should appeal to the hardest, toughest and proudest with our project, for it carries the potency to bend the strongest steel, to shape everything around its dynamic core.

To make circles out of straight lines. value ontology does for logic what the notion that the Earth is spherical did for mans awareness of himself in relation to the cosmos. It places the limits of the subject (of logic) within itself, and describes the mechanism/cosmos wherein it exists in terms of the consequences of this centering. So as "gravity" first became the core from which effective physics emerged, so "valuing" becomes the core from which an effective thinking can emerge.






In Kung Fu, or Aikido, or other ancient 'dances of life and death', the sole aim is to solidify ones body, physiology and mind so as to be able to produce the perfect spontaneous response to any given situation. Perfect in terms of what?

Exactly. That is the question.
The East Asians have arrived at a bottom line standard here which can be pointed out with words like aesthetics, cleanliness, purity. But we western philosophers are moving beyond this as we speak. A comprehensive answer to the bequest for a standard, life will provide to us individually, as we walk across the threshold of an age of greater humanity... guided no longer by the sky or the earth, but by philosophy, by an awakening to 'raw valuing', which, by the way, is experienced as a burning heart when it commences to take hold of a heart that has been placed by its owner on the altar of some deity or void.

Awakening hurts, and making judgments that result in further pain is required.... only to those to whom the pain of tedium and nausea of the indirectly-valuing humanity has grown intolerable, the pain of standing utterly alone in the universe as a potential center (the solipsist makes an empty claim) is also a pleasure, a nektar.





As a clarification: the first reflection entering my mind the moment after I had slipped into an understanding of valuing as the primordial, was "but this means all miracles I witnessed, all magic I partook in, all Gods and all of Gods aspects Ive encountered, are real."

I had seen innumerable "impossible" things happen during over a decade of immersion in magic, but, as I am at heart a logician, lived in a state of constant suspension of belief in what Id witnessed and done, because I couldn't explain it, nor did I aim to; I never figured there was an explanation, until I stumbled upon it, or culminated into it.

What I realized instantly as well is that the explication of my logic is no less than the explication of the world including a sufficient definition of God. So I figured this task is not entirely my own. It now turns out that we are both creatures defined only in terms of Philosophy, a dragon of which we are organs. You may be its wings, spreading and its mind, I may be its stomach and its eyes. Its heart is being itself.

Being is not sufficient to itself without philosophy - these are the terms human existence imposes on itself and thereby on the whole of existence.

Ive built it from the "ground" - the abyss, the lack of hitherto discovered ground - in constant battle with error of man through forums and the combative nature of the Will to Power - what kept me able to ground myself without a ground is simply my immense activity, the fire in my nature, which has always been relentless and the cause of much unrest in my environment - why Ive been forced to live with marihuana, as mankind outside of philosophy does not provide the density of being required to conduct my currents. I always burned through everything and everyone and, because I suffer of some of the suffering I cause, Ive been glad to lead an outwardly passive life, made out of the deepest, happiest contemplation and raw, paganly violent outburst of physical emotion.

You seem to have excavated it from above, all alone, in the company of the whole host of past philosophers and with the blessing of El Shaddai.

In between us is Capable, who is also an organ of this beast.
Even if by ourselves we are worlds sufficient to themselves - CONQUEST requires more than one philosopher, simply because Being is Plenty, and not of one set of terms.
Philosophy can conquer only where more than one are involved. That is why Plato is different from Socrates and yet of the same body of thought, as is Aristotle.
The irreconcilable natures of men - the irreconcilable nature of natures is nature.

We do not need each other. There is no need involved in philosophy, only riches. It is rather that the great Dragonhead of beings unfolding lies to hoard it all together, so as to impress itself on itself and find justification (pride, vanity even) to walk through the door without a frame, the threshold to the unsupported, where ones own footsteps form the ground to ones presence -

Philosophy in Time, a march, echoing forward as the structure of the future. All temples are build as representations of time, in a specific ordering. Philosophy must become the altar of the religion of Earth, on which sacrifices of possibilities are made to make the way free for necessity; unfolding, Aletheia, as it ever was.









The empty God is an idea - already a phenomenon - derived of the experience of a being. There can exist no true thought of a thing that is not manifest.

For a human to imagine knowledge of the sinless, ie the positive value, as something that does not communicate itself is a sin - an error, a mirage. True humility before that which can not be aprehended means to accept ignorance of it. To act on and devise morality based on that which one claims has no bearing on existence is a contradiction.

Thus, and as is indeed the case in the world, the effort of returning the light to God as the devout ones you speak of attempt in their prayerforms is the denial of truth, of God, and leads indeed to a quick decay of the being, which is a gift, even if it can be turned into a prison, and should not be returned.

In short, the existence of the unknowable can not be known -


Such a returning of the light is a practice born of pain and sorrow and fear - and the resulting feeling of goodness lasts as long as a drug high does and has the same addictive effect. Eventually the potency of the method runs out and both Earth and God are lost. Hatred and selfloathing remains. The undead.

In truth man is given only the labour of love - this is what DAATH reveals as the equivalence of knowledge and will, the knowledge which hovers above the abyss.

Daath is not itself the abyss but rather the one way of not falling into it. The precarious selfmade bridge as which true entity is born, connecting phenomenon with eternal truth.








Christ could be an image of the "Gott ohne Wirkung" - defying process as such and thus becoming a concentrated void and center. Erasing conditioning, cleansing.

Creation and Christ are thus somewhat antithetical - Christ as an answer to and partial rebuke of the methods of creation.






Thus ultimately there is, in as far as roots and ground are concerned, only the truth that things are rooted in themselves. Be it an Aeon, a culture, a man, a flower or even a crumpled beer can, all things gave their final origin (I just made up that term because it is required) in themselves.

There is nothing behind words - there is ultimately only the ink, to paraphrase the Dogen.

God is this being-rooted.

DAATH is the recognition of this nature-of-all-possible-things as being rooted in themselves - this unity of will and knowledge is --consciousness as rooted in itself--; i.e. proper consciousness.

Why are things rooted in themselves?
Because it is only due to their existence that they exist.
Causes may be attributed after the revelation of their existence. But without their existence they do not have causes. That is a purer truth than the statement that without their causes they wouldn't exist -- because the only certainty is that they exist. The causality statement is speculative, imprecise, not merely because causes are infinitely reducible to other and ever less certain causes. God as first cause is therefore the epitome of dissolution of knowledge. No God thus created the world. God is the way a world is rooted in itself. And thus there isn't one God but as many as there are world's.

The earlier statement is simply self-evident.

And so God is, in as far as he is known, self-evident and not a matter of speculation and neither of deduction.

The root of knowledge is the root of being, and we arrive at this as we depart from it, in the purity of action.

What is a pure act? An act which is rooted in itself.

Music.








The removing of marble from marble has no bearing on nothingness - it is simply all marble, some of which is selected and the rest discarded. There is no paradox in that.

The idea that a God beyond knowledge can be known is not a paradox but simply an error. You have many ways of referring to this error as it has heen made by various sects but with all due respect, none of this constitutes an argument.

The fact that space is required for an object to move, that the world is not of infinite density but varies in density does not imply or even suggest nothingness.

As for relative and human terms: we are both human and our perspective is relative. We can not move beyond this. That these gnostics imagined they could means only that their pride exceeded their wisdom.

I ask: how did they imagine they could know beyond their own existence? Knowing I won't get an answer from them , my own is that they wished for this world to mean nothing because of their personal qualms with it. That is all the logic I can discern in the whole demiurg-theory. And logic is what I am interested in, I am not able to take things on faith.

How do you see value ontology producing the idea that consciousness is rooted in itself? I have meant to present these as separate (though compatible) ideas of which VO is far more recent. It is true that the attainment of consciousness as rooted in itself (nirvana) has enabled me to move past the being /non being distinction and perceive the nature of pure possibility in my own human, relative capacity for valuing.

There is only the relative, this fact is the absolute. The awakening to this fact is accompanied by overwhelming love. Because love is the hardest case of relativity - love is absolute.









Pi is the discrepancy between the circle and the straight angle.
It simply signifies difference.

Of course the fact that the world appears, from our limited perspective, as changing, doesn't in any way suggest it is inferior to something else. If we assume a perfect all-being then change is our way of perceiving something the scope of which exceeds our own being. And here we agree : the way the world must appear to us is as a riddle. Time is one of the keys to this riddle. But it is useless without the key that is love; involvement.

Hence, the mysteries of the crucifixion. There is no standing aside from existence, especially not for God.

Time and love can suffice for us to apprehend the absolute, that which does not change. As when the part becomes whole to itself (through loves labour (time; Kronos)), it apprehends that all that is whole is absolute, it apprehends the ground of manifestation. It is easy to jump to the conclusion of God from there, but that is, as far as philosophy (as the antipode of faith) can determine, a name for ones own awe and gratitude; Ones valuing -- of ones own completed labour of love.

Therefore God abandoned Jesus as he abandons every other saint and sinner when they cease their labour and thrust themselves beyond their own love. ("Let this cup pass me by")







Water on stone.

Then there's also God but that doesn't mean anything.
Not to me, not to God himself.

Water on stone. Understand this and become aware of the blasphemy that the idea of a "demiurg" represents.

Ive instinctively loathed the term since I read of it in Nag Hammadi scrolls, and now I know why.
Those who cant see their own perfection and emptiness in the path of a mountain creek have invented it.
I know from your music and other traits that you are not such a person.

Drifting at sea staring upward
salt carries me lightly
I know why they denounce this world

the world is indifferent
except to indifference
in hate or in love
no-mind, pure touch
of fist on air, of palm on the water-surface
dragonfly catch a touch of musk








to speak "All" is the greatest imaginable abyss beween speaking and truth.

The act of speaking is so particular, the sound of a spoken word by a specific voice must be among the most particular occurrences in the universe, and for it to address a perfect universal is so deeply troubling that beings, gods and the like, come rushing into existence to fill the void that was drawn into being by the most sweeping misunderstanding nature ever had of itself.



"All" is not.

"All" is ever hidden.








The challenge was to go beyond the lineair casually of time, to behind time space as an object embedded in a higher dimensionality, "the eternal", the logic of value of which numerical calculations are like the breath pervading time space based consciousness.

So where numbers take flight, as they do in a certain genius, they represent the instructions of the eternal into the linear.

The eternal is not what is addressed here as God or end-attractor but rather the environment in which this attractor is built, the element from which it emerges as the father of consciousness.

Consciousness is valuing-abstracted, i.e. suspended. An idea of an idea of a value or a valuing, and this idea holds a radically, paradigmatically different causality than whatever bid interaction it was abstracted from. As a suspended valuing it already pertains to eternity, as what is suspended in time to become object of consciousness has no natural end, no end-consequence written in its own code (and no longer a meaningful beginning) and can be seen as a result of osmosis of the eternal necessity of being as valuing (giving value, being gives itself to itself, giving is willing) through the membrane into hard 4d physics. This osmosis is probably just thought.







for elements to fuse completely they always have to work beyond universal protocols, as universal protocols are always restricted by laws of averages. Magic begins with concentrations of strength and resource far beyond average - one already needs have purified, perfected the elements in order to engage them in magic. So the whole mysterious nature of magic is not a vagueness on its part but rather on the part of he non-magician who works with averages and slews and arrays and mindlessly gathered sets, whereas he magician accounts for every piece and bit in his equation (love is the law) so as to properly impregnate the elements with each other.

And thus, the only possible enduring manifestation of being is magical - simply because magical outcomes trump other outcomes by all positive standards of justification - most notably, use of resource; magic uses all resources to their utmost potential, causing the most ferocious reactions, and intensity of result, which follows.

Hence all animals and plants are magical species, as is the fully unfolded human being. But to be a magical human being is such a powerful experience that, set against a world of withering and collapsing pseudo-beings, it is simply terrifying.





I made a fire in the rain.

Magic is nothing less or more than the complete fusion of the elements
efficiency and untold vigilance to produce abandon beyond random



Thus magic has a high risk factor. For every set of perfectly honed mechanisms there are many applications.

In general Id define magic in terms of powers of perception.
magic is activity which is more concentrated than the mind of the average beholder.




Essentially the Nietzschean task is the only one which matters in philosophy - t doesn't mater whether we resolve intellectual problems as long as they don't cause a mastery over our Earthly being, which, make no mistakes, means mastering the Earth.

The idea that mastery can exist in blissful isolation from the Earth and from organic being is the demiurgic error itself. The idea of the demure as a creator of a false world stands at the apparent heart of the mistaken realm of thought which seeks to explain away reality in favour of a delightful logical conundrum. VO obliterates all such logical conundrums and all delight in the endless paradoxes which Reason has hitherto thrown at any zealous suitor. VO is bold, brash, remorseless, and very proud of itself as firstborn philosophy of the Earth, fulfillment of Nietzsche's desires, which are the desires of mankind, amounting to the will to come out from under the cover of darkness. Man, unit VO, has been living like trolls in the dark. Now, with VO, the apocalypse has broken out and thats just ... what I said it would be in 2011... and it will come to an end when I have said it will come to an end and Im not gonna repeat that again. People who are serous will have etched this date in their minds and are preparing for it. People who aren't serous are going to be pieces of dust in the wind.

Why can no philosophy confront VO? It is like this, as Capable indicates: VO is the father who is the future. Whatever is born from VO is born from the future. VO is not something made in the past agains which you can rebel. It is the logic that de-trivializes your own existence, forges an eternity out of your efforts. It thus confronts man with the question: do you prefer to be trivial? Or do you want to actually exist? And this, friends, is what causes he greatest upheaval and hatred and deliberate misunderstanding -- many men find that deep down they prefer perhaps not to exist. And that is what divides, as long produced and discussed, our human species into two different types, this is the selecting mechanism Nietzsche was after, what he saw in the Eternal Recurrence.





Enlightenment, liberation, salvation, all this is found in the recognition of the longing as itself a positive substance. It is here that God becomes accessible to consciousness and happiness becomes a basic condition. Naturally this happiness is as thorny as it is fragrant, as it doesn't do away with the agon. It merely recognizes it as the elixir of immortality.







There is no contradiction.
"Nothing" is a contradiction.
"Contradiction" is a contradiction.

Contradiction is contradiction.
Nothing is nothing.
Nothing "is" in contradiction.


This is actually how I arrived at VO: the fact that two quanta of will to power cant contradict each other while still trying to overpower each other. They are the same, yet they have apparently opposite aims.
Except they don't, because the real aim is in existence itself, which is in juxtaposition, rather than in contradiction, to other beings.

Juxtaposed by means of value, which is necessity, translating in scarcity - the thing to warrant compulsion, which is propulsion, i.e. energy, being.

Dialectic is false in all cases because there never are only two elements in the equation, nor are elements functionally described in terms of their antipode, much less in terms of that which contradicts them. Thats why Hegel is a convulsing pit of hell, or a furnace as you have called him, saying you tossed him in it.




What we get from his logic is pulsating orders of symmetry, fractals, music, crystallizing matter.
Life erupts in order to expand the parameters in which asymmetry can take place, so that great orders of symmetry become possible.

Symmetry is of course tension, tension of existence with all the things that would be possible if this existence didn't take place.
What exists is the tip of the iceberg of possibility, underneath it, tension exists in decreasing symmetry down to nothing, which is the only thing which contradicts itself, which is asymmetrical to symmetry.





Value increases when its presence decreases.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Arch-Native Philosophy - Sumerian Bill and Ted - The Magical Tree of Life Academy
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10533
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Mon Jun 01, 2020 11:08 pm

"This claim is false."

Why is that possible?

The answer is remarkably simple: Because language did not originate in logic, but in differentiation.
Logic therefore can not be perfected in the form of language. It can only pertain to language perfectly.
It has proven to be a matter of locating the term that denotes the meaning of language itself. The case was so extraordinarily fortunate that this same term also refers to the basic primordial instinct-to-be, which now is understood inclusively as the inherent mechanism of self-valuing and the outwardly projected valuing in terms of this inherently perpetuating self-value.

Even now after clarity's dawn it is only a relation to language that the "path" or truth" is found - the most pertinent value in each instance of conceptualization. Language is much of man but it is not all - but it has guided man since instinct had become madness and madness eventually mind [the birth of mind - the most terrible path nature could possibly have taken] became reason, and reason habit and custom and a path out of hell.

And here we are at the exit of this - cave soiled by million gods - there is light beyond these walls - the paintings are our memory - primordial past. The times when "Our truth" was possible, the place where the writing was on the wall, and not up in the air in song and 'self-valuing geometry' and different from every perspective as a clous of summerbirds as heat collects in the air and the pregnant darkness sets in.

The question on my mind is: is the cloud a self-valuing? No - there is only one self-valuing int he cycle of charge and discharge - that is the principle of lightning itself. This keeps itself in motion by being the cataclysm of two forces it values in terms of it's self-valuing. But this principle re-incarnates from place to place in the same context and is 'embodied' by nature, and 'brought to life' with a consequence that cracks open "reality" for a moment and makes one aware of the central mechanism - the circuit of energy collection and discharge. This is "looped" in a lifeform, feeding back on itself. A combustion engine, even a wheel, certainly fire, is repreoduction a a part of the self-valuing circuit. All great inventions, from television to tea-making to proton colliders, all tap into the 'genius of the cyclus', which is "being".





To become a whole cyclus - or better, for each day, or each moon, or year to become a complete cyclus of self-valuing - of arrival fulfillment commencement of 'greater things' which is always the impetus - the mirroring back of oneself as 'potentially greater' is essential to the expansion of matter into its various forms. Valuing in terms of self-valuing circuitry is 'the illusion whereby power is attained'. The power attained by it is expelled into force in all 'natural phenomena' - technology taps into that root, but brings forth different things because it has, instead of the air, sunlight, water and soil of the earth, the mind of man as its ground, and this mind is also the 'air' in which it grows, and from man the budding idea receives attention like a creature receives sunlight, and in the end it must be seen to be believed - except to this flower itself and that which brought it forth - a flower is the consequence - what kind cause can we see to a flower, beyond, at the end of, it's chain of evolution from the first atoms?






It is believed that the first signs and sounds of language originated as religious practices.

But this is natural, and unavoidable, because the power of speech introduces the very thing that we now know as God. With language, man distances himself from himself into a separate entity, which can be inherited by people he will never have physical ties to. And this is what God is; that possibility of being by not actually being, namely by, instead of in a particular way and place, being everywhere and in every way, always. At least that is how Spinoza finally approached God as a concept within that language-magic that had evolved finally to catch up with the system of hallucinations its imperfection (namely its non locality, which prevents it from Being, to speak Heidegger, prevents it from emerging and unfolding in time) had produced in time on the soft bed of the human brain.







In 70-90 percent of cases a politician will speak as unnaturally to the full truth as possible before an unwitting audience - and an audience to a politician is almost by definition unwitting -, merely as a basis technique to give the opponent a maximum of trouble in setting things straight, before a counter statement can be made.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Arch-Native Philosophy - Sumerian Bill and Ted - The Magical Tree of Life Academy
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10533
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Wed Jun 03, 2020 10:34 pm

Parodites
Tower
Tower
Parodites

Posts : 790
Join date : 2011-12-11

Penseroso. Empty
PostSubject: Penseroso. Penseroso. Icon_minitimeSat Aug 11, 2012 2:59 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
PENSEROSO,
A Poetic Interlude.

1.

Time, everywhere by grim oblivion
encircled, as when in the ring of flames
the scorpion does plunge into its breast
the fearsome barb: so Time does swallow up
its very potency,
and quaff the dusty glass of life;-
that from whose bitter pharmacy
we had so long abstained to seek
alleviance for all our ills in Death.
Befouled with earth's o'er-childed mass,
Time's the rat that nips at the heel of man
which Death drives out, when it does purge
the overrun sullage of generation
from which it feeds- and gives us peace.
Speak of the dead's justice, or their virtue,
for the living but drain their cup of life,
insensate, till the dregs consume;
their philosophy unmade in heaven,
their deepest moral but mere confession.
Immortal longings ingress upon the mortal heart,
to comprehension's failure; till life's ailing flood
bank at heaven's shores. Save for life and death,
all can be forgiven. The soul still further mounts,
it's but for this that life benignant proves,-
that all life's seeming seems to fly as we do seek
its current prodding ceaseless, thus to smooth
the pebble-soul of love and loss in quiet deep.
The fevered heart does anguished keep,
when pleasure's secret lies still undiscovered,
thus yearning immortal does itself beseech
the ever-pregnant thought of the eternal;
thus strange presage our soul makes ere we do sleep
with device of symbol, thus to announce,
amidst our youth, high case of love and crime-
and war, which age but does allegorize.
It is but in the muddied spring of death
that all the world's show is cast upon,
like trembling stars in the pale waters
whose light wavers with the dithering wind;
the whole plethory of man is list upon,
his passions vincible, and kingdom's pomp,
his love, all the glory of his raving tribe,
and bend all the more, the more gently urged
with the quiet thoughts of death.

2.

Thus the beasts plod on, who upon their course
find neither love nor hope, and no remorse,
while man, in all-comprehending avarice complains
that fearsome war did not secure his name,
nor brazen monument did mark his progeny.
Alas, though full of grief, man's like that bird,
vitiated, and who, with broken wing,
calls out, and the more beautifully does sing,
for how solemn the work of life to us appears,
and all the world seems a living prayer,
hieratic chorus of immortal powers;
the stars, which in their lonely splendor hang,
over heraldic seas, which aver their light;
their light to baptize for our human eyes,
which cannot long bear to stare into the night.
So though of death I grieve, yet it is to death
I bend accordance; thus my part I play
in this life's supplication to unknown Gods;
and am Man, in whose soul the tired breath
of gathered creation thereby allays
of thought wandering, which onward plods
into the dim clime of high philosophy;
till' love and pain, hope, and ambition's lost,
amidst the wreck of time and sense,
for changed, they are what they were not.
For when man's balmed heart has quieted
the fire in which our passions had been tempered,
so love's tired pleasure love then steals away;
our love the thought of love therein divests
of the desire which this thought confounds,
while in our hope desire does recess;
and hope, most roving, like pain itself renounces. 1
Like the wintered grace of the arresting seas
all that's fair grows pale before it disappears
and empties into its native waters.

3.

As life is death's greatest consolation,
so too is death life's most perfect solace;
for with the earth, thy sacrificial fire,
equally is prepared the first-born of man,
the high cast of the world's infancy;
the melancholy ocean, whose intimation
of mute age, and endless time do pierce
the brooding soul; statesmen just and mighty,
young beauty, with all her fledgling virtue;
the ruined column of the stony earth,
whose prized mountains crumble, the golden sun
and his companion stars, grown pale with time;
kings, princes, learned men and benefactor- all
without distinction perish thus to feed
that all-embracing fire, nor with pride
the nobler lot to shame the commoner,
but with the only justice known in heaven
or on earth, to bend and pass, that others 2
in their stead may do the same.
Till in the strange accent of recorded time
our favorite phantom cleaves the rounded way 3
to dusty death, into the long twilight 4
the murmuring steep of years rolls onward,
into that plaintive vale the living sweep
o'er like shadows. Till light dispel us;
the living, but the first born of the dead,
of clodden field, immense of empyrean,
and puissant sun. Thus we live;
the bitter will mock, while the somber weep,
while bud of Sephalica, or aliment
make of Lotus flower, the soft-hearted
shall glory in the temple of the flesh.
In what eloquence of natural beauty
we might list to the wind our own heart's compact
as children of the earth, 'longside those butterflies,
song-spun into leaves of gold and silver,
the whispered angels upon threads of dawn-
and that, until resolved to earth again,
we gently perish.

4.

It is but our thoughts, that are the ages
of our life, by which we do measure out
passion horary, till action's stifled
that no moment but could be filled by it,
and the brim of life spills to indiscretion.
Life's but a nascent sun, that illumines 5
the shadowed dream; and this light we share,
the world, and but all we know of it,
till we pall of knowing. Then thy image
is undone, in the first morning of the world,
left nothing of its memory to the blear seas
as yawn wearily over their wasted kingdoms,
nor any of the houses, and darkness
only is the universe. 6
The margin of thy subtle frame is lost;
by a flower's root thy cast is broken,
and by a drop of rain thy human pride
discovered. Survey the earth, thy great tomb:
this dust in which you shall be laid
which itself once lived and breathed;
or suffered, rejoiced, and prayed,
yet no more weeps, or laughs, or bleeds.
So form but with thy human speech-
mere hissing sputum in thy chest,
a word to cast upon the coruscant sea;
search thy soul's deepest ecstasy,
and from thy mortal conceit thus confess,
to name all this choiring beauty
of the world- death. 7 For
all thy world is but a drop of rain,-
the moon-gilded tear of the yet un-dawned,
whose yearning were poised upon a flower;
though who could endure but that single tear,
if not to fall yielding upon the heart,
in what peerless bower of solitary witness?
Its beauty is its descent, and of the world
we do read the weight of things: all beauty
that cannot be endured kindly spares us
of the grief we feel, when we do know it,
and the sorrow- though to be spared
that drop of rain were unkindly.

1. An adaptation of Propertius.
2. "Favorite phantom" , Bryant, Thanatopsis.
3. Emerson.
4. Dusty Death, phrase in Macbeth.
5. Browne: We live by an invisible sun within us.
6. Byron: "... And darkness was the universe."
7. Pointed allusion to Yeats:
Crying amid the glittering sea,
Naming it with the ecstatic breath,
Because it had such dignity,
By the sweet name of Death.



___________
ΑΝΤΗΡΟΠΑΡΙΟΝ,
in formis perisseia mutilata in omnia perisarkos mutilatum;
omniformis protosseia immutilatum in protosarkos immutilata.

[ The Ecstasies of Zosimos, Tablet
the First.]

BTHYS TOU ANAHAT KHYA-PANDEMAI.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Arch-Native Philosophy - Sumerian Bill and Ted - The Magical Tree of Life Academy
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10533
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Nietzsche's Higher Man

Postby Fixed Cross » Wed Jun 03, 2020 10:36 pm

This is quite an interesting combination fo images.
Seeing as how churches normally have roofs, might be said to protect the meek from the Eagle, the predatory forces.
Nietzsche spoke in contempt of the fact that churches have roofs - how can a temple to the divine shield the worshipper from the sky? He spoke fondly of overgrown ruins of churches, or just buildings, I can't remember, as proper temples.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail Online
Arcturus Descending
arrow
arrow
Arcturus Descending

Posts : 293
Join date : 2011-12-07
Location : Hovering amidst a battle of Wills

Sensational Surrational Mutter Empty
PostSubject: Re: Sensational Surrational Mutter Sensational Surrational Mutter Icon_minitimeFri Aug 31, 2012 3:02 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Fixed Cross wrote:
This is quite an interesting combination fo images.
Seeing as how churches normally have roofs, might be said to protect the meek from the Eagle, the predatory forces.
Nietzsche spoke in contempt of the fact that churches have roofs - how can a temple to the divine shield the worshipper from the sky? He spoke fondly of overgrown ruins of churches, or just buildings, I can't remember, as proper temples.
The church which I now attend has no roof.
But there was a time when I did attend a church which had one. One way to look at it is to realize that the roof might 'contain' or 'retain' that which is sacred; it would also help to drown out noise from the outside.
For myself, I don't actually see 'predatory' depicted here. I see an Eagle who might be said to be 'protecting' what is left of the church. I see a look of determination on the Eagle's face.
It's actually an amazing picture to me - I love Scott Mutter's perceptions.


The picture is called A More Perfect World. I don't see any danger to one's imagination in revealing what he had in mind with it. His words:

This picture is my most baroque, in the way it fills the frame with imagery and in its nonlinear thrust. I see its pull as a desire for the spirit to wrench itself free from matter..."

So, the Eagle represents the Spirit soaring and as you can see and I'm sure know, the Spirit is greater and larger than anything it is capable of soaring above...and it IS capable of soaring above anything and setting itself free.

I can't be sure but there appears to be a stream running through the fissure created. The more I look at it, the picture actually gives me the chills - it is just so much larger-than-life in a way.

I once stood 'inside' of a church which had become simply a ruin in Costa Rica and it was one of the most poignant and ethereal experiences I've ever had. I didn't want to leave the place for some reason.

I don't necessarily see church goers or believers as the "meek' though many may be. As with everything else, it is an 'individual' thing. We all have our own form of "religion" which we rely on for support and for the need to worship.



___________
Each of our lives is a part of the lengthy process of the universe gradually waking up and becoming aware of itself.


Philosophy is the childhood of the intellect, and a culture that tries to skip it will never grow up."


"If I thought that everything I did was determined by my circumstancse and my psychological condition, I would feel trapped."

Thomas Nagel
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Sensational Surrational Mutter Empty
PostSubject: Re: Sensational Surrational Mutter Sensational Surrational Mutter Icon_minitimeSun Sep 16, 2012 11:25 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
VaerosTanarg wrote:
Fixed Cross wrote:
This is quite an interesting combination fo images.
Seeing as how churches normally have roofs, might be said to protect the meek from the Eagle, the predatory forces.
Nietzsche spoke in contempt of the fact that churches have roofs - how can a temple to the divine shield the worshipper from the sky? He spoke fondly of overgrown ruins of churches, or just buildings, I can't remember, as proper temples.
The church which I now attend has no roof.
Interesting. What does it look like?

Quote :
But there was a time when I did attend a church which had one. One way to look at it is to realize that the roof might 'contain' or 'retain' that which is sacred; it would also help to drown out noise from the outside.
For myself, I don't actually see 'predatory' depicted here. I see an Eagle who might be said to be 'protecting' what is left of the church. I see a look of determination on the Eagle's face.
It's actually an amazing picture to me - I love Scott Mutter's perceptions.
I can see the quality but it's not a church I would walk into.

Quote :
The picture is called A More Perfect World. I don't see any danger to one's imagination in revealing what he had in mind with it. His words:

This picture is my most baroque, in the way it fills the frame with imagery and in its nonlinear thrust. I see its pull as a desire for the spirit to wrench itself free from matter..."

So, the Eagle represents the Spirit soaring and as you can see and I'm sure know, the Spirit is greater and larger than anything it is capable of soaring above...and it IS capable of soaring above anything and setting itself free.
If by spirit you mean what I mean with self-valuing, then I see. But I am not sure this is what you mean precisely.
Spirit differentiates. It is densest in minerals, finds a balance in the animal in light atoms, fluids and gasses, which form the basis for the scattered and differentiated electrical field that a human being is, which produces a gradually self-harmonizing rabble of forces as complex as unpredictable. What is in the end always the result is genius, the means by which a person, incomplete by nature, completes itself in some way in accordance (harmony, 'soundness') with an environment it has found for itself.

Quote :
I can't be sure but there appears to be a stream running through the fissure created. The more I look at it, the picture actually gives me the chills - it is just so much larger-than-life in a way.

I once stood 'inside' of a church which had become simply a ruin in Costa Rica and it was one of the most poignant and ethereal experiences I've ever had. I didn't want to leave the place for some reason.
Very nice. You share this sentiment with Nietzsche, apparently. Even though it's often unpleasant for honest to God good people to agree with Nietzsche, he is often very accurate when it comes to what we refer to as sacred.
In essence he is a philosopher of Birth. This is of course a feminine matter in the phenomenological sense, but as Bill Clinton referenced: all politicians want to tell you they were born in the log cabin they built themselves.
Philosophers are 'spiritual politicians' - they realize that to truly build the cabin, one has to build the whole cosmos.

I once read a book that described Jesus as the last Pharao. An interesting point was that the word translated as 'carpenter' can also mean 'architect' - and Pharao's were known as cosmic architects.

A philosopher is either a Pharao or a failure.

Quote :
I don't necessarily see church goers or believers as the "meek' though many may be. As with everything else, it is an 'individual' thing. We all have our own form of "religion" which we rely on for support and for the need to worship.
It is true that there have been ferocious people who have subjected their will to prophets.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail Online
Arcturus Descending
arrow
arrow
Arcturus Descending

Posts : 293
Join date : 2011-12-07
Location : Hovering amidst a battle of Wills

Sensational Surrational Mutter Empty
PostSubject: Re: Sensational Surrational Mutter Sensational Surrational Mutter Icon_minitimeMon Sep 17, 2012 3:44 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Quote :
Fixed Cross

The church which I now attend has no roof.

Interesting. What does it look like?
It looks like many things, depending on the time of day. But it IS the most beautiful church...

Quote :
For myself, I don't actually see 'predatory' depicted here. I see an Eagle who might be said to be 'protecting' what is left of the church. I see a look of determination on the Eagle's face.
It's actually an amazing picture to me - I love Scott Mutter's perceptions.

I can see the quality but it's not a church I would walk into.
If you can see the quality, why would you not venture there? You've got to be kidding. You would not walk into this amazing place that looks like no other church you've ever been in before? Where is your curiosity, where is your sense of adventure? Can you even imagine what you might find in these ruins? Is it the Eagle which you are afraid of? Can you even begin to imagine trying to communicate with him to let you into his domain?

Quote :
If by spirit you mean what I mean with self-valuing, then I see. But I am not sure this is what you mean precisely.
I'm not so sure what you mean by self-valuing. Spirit is sort of a happening, it is just something which rises up in you. In my sense of self-valuing, in part anyway, spirit is that which flows through us and brings on meaning. In that is self-valuing. Aside from that, self-valuing is a particular action taken in a particular moment where we come to an awareness of ourselves, to free ourselves from those shackles which keep us down and do us harm.

Quote :
What is in the end always the result is genius, the means by which a person, incomplete by nature, completes itself in some way in accordance (harmony, 'soundness') with an environment it has found for itself.
What you wrote above sounds more like "adaptation" to me but I may be misunderstanding you here.
Genuis to me is something which someone, not many, is born with. It's kind of a fire within which burns, which has no other choice but "to be" and it brings forth something which has never been before, something original and something far beyond that which has been seen. Genius does not replicate nor does it adapt except as it sees fit, but not according to anyone else.


Quote :
You share this sentiment with Nietzsche, apparently. Even though it's often unpleasant for honest to God good people to agree with Nietzsche, he is often very accurate when it comes to what we refer to as sacred.
I'll have to dive into Nietzsche's kind of sacredness and see if I really agree with him.


Quote :
Philosophers are 'spiritual politicians' - they realize that to truly build the cabin, one has to build the whole cosmos.
Or at the very least, to know where the best place is in it (the cosmos) to begin their building.

Quote :
I once read a book that described Jesus as the last Pharao. An interesting point was that the word translated as 'carpenter' can also mean 'architect' - and Pharao's were known as cosmic architects.
I can see how a carpenter would be an architect. Christ supposedly was a carpenter but his material was of a spiritual essence.

Quote :
A philosopher is either a Pharao or a failure.
That's the way You view it.

Quote :
I don't necessarily see church goers or believers as the "meek' though many may be. As with everything else, it is an 'individual' thing. We all have our own form of "religion" which we rely on for support and for the need to worship.
It is true that there have been ferocious people who have subjected their will to prophets. [/quote]
I wasn't speaking of "religion" in that sense. I doubt that Nietzsche would either, at least in the much broader sense.
My "religion" doesn't rely on the prophets.
I somehow do not equate 'ferocious" with sublimating one's will to another.



___________
Each of our lives is a part of the lengthy process of the universe gradually waking up and becoming aware of itself.


Philosophy is the childhood of the intellect, and a culture that tries to skip it will never grow up."


"If I thought that everything I did was determined by my circumstancse and my psychological condition, I would feel trapped."

Thomas Nagel
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Sensational Surrational Mutter Empty
PostSubject: Re: Sensational Surrational Mutter Sensational Surrational Mutter Icon_minitimeFri Sep 21, 2012 12:10 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
VaerosTanarg wrote:
Quote :
Fixed Cross

The church which I now attend has no roof.

Interesting. What does it look like?
It looks like many things, depending on the time of day. But it IS the most beautiful church...
Feel welcome to post a picture.

Quote :
Quote :
For myself, I don't actually see 'predatory' depicted here. I see an Eagle who might be said to be 'protecting' what is left of the church. I see a look of determination on the Eagle's face.
It's actually an amazing picture to me - I love Scott Mutter's perceptions.

I can see the quality but it's not a church I would walk into.
If you can see the quality, why would you not venture there? You've got to be kidding. You would not walk into this amazing place that looks like no other church you've ever been in before? Where is your curiosity, where is your sense of adventure? Can you even imagine what you might find in these ruins? Is it the Eagle which you are afraid of? Can you even begin to imagine trying to communicate with him to let you into his domain?
Who said anything about fear?

Quote :
Quote :
If by spirit you mean what I mean with self-valuing, then I see. But I am not sure this is what you mean precisely.
I'm not so sure what you mean by self-valuing. Spirit is sort of a happening, it is just something which rises up in you. In my sense of self-valuing, in part anyway, spirit is that which flows through us and brings on meaning. In that is self-valuing. Aside from that, self-valuing is a particular action taken in a particular moment where we come to an awareness of ourselves, to free ourselves from those shackles which keep us down and do us harm.
Yes, except it would not exist if it wasn't for its 'vehicle'.
It is us communicating in terms of self-valuing. Spirit is perhaps simply value.

Quote :
Quote :
What is in the end always the result is genius, the means by which a person, incomplete by nature, completes itself in some way in accordance (harmony, 'soundness') with an environment it has found for itself.
What you wrote above sounds more like "adaptation" to me but I may be misunderstanding you here.
Genuis to me is something which someone, not many, is born with. It's kind of a fire within which burns, which has no other choice but "to be" and it brings forth something which has never been before, something original and something far beyond that which has been seen. Genius does not replicate nor does it adapt except as it sees fit, but not according to anyone else.
Yes, and all life that makes a mark for itself, carves out a space to exist, does this by genius.
The absence of genius is far more common, but only genius survives the test of time.
Of course in many of mans stupidities must be understood as genius in terms of effective regulation of impulses, at least if one is to contend with them.

Quote :
Quote :
You share this sentiment with Nietzsche, apparently. Even though it's often unpleasant for honest to God good people to agree with Nietzsche, he is often very accurate when it comes to what we refer to as sacred.
I'll have to dive into Nietzsche's kind of sacredness and see if I really agree with him.
Spontaneously I would recommend the chapter On The Blissful Isles, from Zarathustra.

Quote :
Quote :
Philosophers are 'spiritual politicians' - they realize that to truly build the cabin, one has to build the whole cosmos.
Or at the very least, to know where the best place is in it (the cosmos) to begin their building.
You assume an objective cosmos - but yes, that is a way of saying it.

Quote :
Quote :
I once read a book that described Jesus as the last Pharao. An interesting point was that the word translated as 'carpenter' can also mean 'architect' - and Pharao's were known as cosmic architects.
I can see how a carpenter would be an architect. Christ supposedly was a carpenter but his material was of a spiritual essence.
Hence , 'Building thought to disclose the future'. Philosophy needs to have consistency to be a dwelling for the spirit.

Quote :
Quote :
A philosopher is either a Pharao or a failure.
That's the way You view it.
What, according you your view, is philosophy besides the architecture of the human cosmos? Kosmos, I should add, is Greek for order. Philosophy, as far as I'm concerned, is the work of devising benefic ordering methods for the unrestrainable phenomenon of humanity.

Quote :
Quote :
Quote :
I don't necessarily see church goers or believers as the "meek' though many may be. As with everything else, it is an 'individual' thing. We all have our own form of "religion" which we rely on for support and for the need to worship.
It is true that there have been ferocious people who have subjected their will to prophets.
I wasn't speaking of "religion" in that sense. I doubt that Nietzsche would either, at least in the much broader sense.
My "religion" doesn't rely on the prophets.
I am glad to hear it.

Quote :
I somehow do not equate 'ferocious" with sublimating one's will to another.
Me neither. But a lot of ferocious hunting and killing goes on in the name of some president or prophet.




___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail Online
Arcturus Descending
arrow
arrow
Arcturus Descending

Posts : 293
Join date : 2011-12-07
Location : Hovering amidst a battle of Wills

Sensational Surrational Mutter Empty
PostSubject: Re: Sensational Surrational Mutter Sensational Surrational Mutter Icon_minitimeSat Sep 22, 2012 7:13 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Quote :
It looks like many things, depending on the time of day. But it IS the most beautiful church...

Feel welcome to post a picture.
There are many. Which time of day speaks to you?


Quote :
Who said anything about fear?
Then why would you choose NOT to walk into this church or ruins of Mutter. I can readily understand why some would not want to and it would be out of some kind of a fear. I don't know how anyone could possibly feel there is nothing worthy of value in there. Just think of the philosophizing albeit self-philosophizing one could do there. Just about anything could be looked at as a self-reflection, no?

Quote :
If by spirit you mean what I mean with self-valuing, then I see. But I am not sure this is what you mean precisely.
Perhaps your kind of 'spirit' with regard to self-valuing is a coming of consciousness and self-awareness.

Quote :
I'm not so sure what you mean by self-valuing. Spirit is sort of a happening, it is just something which rises up in you. In my sense of self-valuing, in part anyway, spirit is that which flows through us and brings on meaning. In that is self-valuing. Aside from that, self-valuing is a particular action taken in a particular moment where we come to an awareness of ourselves, to free ourselves from those shackles which keep us down and do us harm.

Yes, except it would not exist if it wasn't for its 'vehicle'.
The vehicle being the organism which you are? We can't actually know that though, can we? I'm just saying...


Quote :
It is us communicating in terms of self-valuing. Spirit is perhaps simply value.
I don't know about that. I think that spirit can give way to value - spirit is what "gives birth" to value by means of its (spirit's) own essence interfacing with self-interpretation. Value becomes the child given birth to. Perhaps we are saying the same thing though.


Quote :
Yes, and all life that makes a mark for itself, carves out a space to exist, does this by genius.
I still do not know if I necessarily agree with this. I think in terms of my having done this - along with so so so many others, but I would still not call myself genius though there are those rare moments when perhaps I sense it in myself. Rolling Eyes "Reality" or illusion? scratch
What you expressed above and what I think of genius is kind of the difference between what is mundane and what is sublime.

Quote :
The absence of genius is far more common, but only genius survives the test of time.
Agreed as to the first part but not as to the second. What is not of genius also survives by way of our mediocre way of seeing and desiring things. But still...it takes all kinds to perpetuate the world.

Quote :
Of course in many of mans stupidities must be understood as genius in terms of effective regulation of impulses, at least if one is to contend with them.
So you would also include genius as part of that? I'm not so sure that genius would be able to regulate itself as such. Is a burning bush or even better, a supernova, able to regulate its impulses or what is natural to it? True, genius does require discipline but at the same time it must at times defy regulating impulses. Isn't true and original creativity spontaneous and at times explosive in nature? As organisms, we are pretty much a replicating bunch.


Quote :
Spontaneously I would recommend the chapter On The Blissful Isles, from Zarathustra.
Thank you for sending me to that Blissful Isles. I've been to many of them and I will maybe be getting back to you on that.

Quote :
You assume an objective cosmos - but yes, that is a way of saying it.
I actually do not like to assume and try not to assume anything. But that too is a learning experience when we are able to see the errors of our ways. Assuming is for asses. I have no idea how objective the cosmos is...Can we consider it as objective UNLESS there is for us...a first cause and depending on what that first cause had in mind or ....even didn't? Would the fact that the cosmos is and continues to be a process, and perhaps a random one at times despite its orderly design, make it objective? Insofar as WE are a micro cosmos, the cosmos is indeed a very subjective place....but at the same time, it groans also to be objective.

Quote :
Hence , 'Building thought to disclose the future'. Philosophy needs to have consistency to be a dwelling for the spirit.
I've just posted something elsewhere by Montaigne which is actually quite beautiful to me. He says that "to philosophize is to learn the art of dying". Although I do sort of understand what you are trying to say, I think, IF what you are saying is that philosophy does need 'logical thought'... I also think philosophy needs its great inconsistencies...well, perhaps doesn't need them - they are just a part of philosophy being that we are only human and subject to error. Life is inconsistencies, don't you think? And we do not philosophize or go in search of truth and/or find it by smoothly sailing on the ocean of life. We find it by diving into those waters and allowing ourselves or at least risking the dying in ourselves (spiritually and intellectually). If philosophy isn't freely flowing or keeping a number of balls in the air at the same time and looking at them, well, then, it becomes boring, don't you think?


Quote :
Philosophy, as far as I'm concerned, is the work of devising benefic ordering methods for the unrestrainable phenomenon of humanity.
Well, I also like that definition. I like that phrase - "unrestrainable phenomenon of humanity".
As long as it doesn't put shackles on humanity...wouldn't you say that there is a kind of beauty in disorder. Though I realize there is beauty in order ...ah, but to balance that.

Quote :
My "religion" doesn't rely on the prophets.

I am glad to hear it.
What I rely on is what I see and sense. Perhaps the prophet within.

Quote :
I somehow do not equate 'ferocious" with sublimating one's will to another.
Me neither. But a lot of ferocious hunting and killing goes on in the name of some president or prophet.
Yes, the herd will always have its way.



___________
Each of our lives is a part of the lengthy process of the universe gradually waking up and becoming aware of itself.


Philosophy is the childhood of the intellect, and a culture that tries to skip it will never grow up."


"If I thought that everything I did was determined by my circumstancse and my psychological condition, I would feel trapped."

Thomas Nagel
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Sensational Surrational Mutter Empty
PostSubject: Re: Sensational Surrational Mutter Sensational Surrational Mutter Icon_minitimeSat Oct 13, 2012 11:20 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
VaerosTanarg wrote:
Quote :
It looks like many things, depending on the time of day. But it IS the most beautiful church...

Feel welcome to post a picture.
There are many. Which time of day speaks to you?
High noon, magic hour - whichever is the most dramatic.

Quote :
Quote :
Who said anything about fear?
Then why would you choose NOT to walk into this church or ruins of Mutter. I can readily understand why some would not want to and it would be out of some kind of a fear. I don't know how anyone could possibly feel there is nothing worthy of value in there. Just think of the philosophizing albeit self-philosophizing one could do there. Just about anything could be looked at as a self-reflection, no?
I can't put my finger on it, it's a question of architectural taste. Let everyone choose, preferably build, his own temple.

Quote :
Quote :
If by spirit you mean what I mean with self-valuing, then I see. But I am not sure this is what you mean precisely.
Perhaps your kind of 'spirit' with regard to self-valuing is a coming of consciousness and self-awareness.
Spirit originally means breath, which is the humans most basic activity.
James recently equated spirit with activity itself. What do you think about that? It does not have to be an activity bound to an individual - one can also find oneself in the collective spirit of revolution, for example.

Quote :
I'm not so sure what you mean by self-valuing. Spirit is sort of a happening, it is just something which rises up in you.
Indeed then an activity. Albeit one not (necessarily) deliberately caused by the conscious mind.

Quote :
In my sense of self-valuing, in part anyway, spirit is that which flows through us and brings on meaning. In that is self-valuing. Aside from that, self-valuing is a particular action taken in a particular moment where we come to an awareness of ourselves, to free ourselves from those shackles which keep us down and do us harm.
This is actually close enough in subjective phenomenological, psychological terms. Note that this act is performed constantly on a multitude of levels by every surviving particle and being, else they are subsumed and/or dissolved in other entities or chaos.

Quote :
Quote :
Yes, except it would not exist if it wasn't for its 'vehicle'.
The vehicle being the organism which you are? We can't actually know that though, can we? I'm just saying...
We can look at our actions and compare them to the behavior of inanimate particles, and we can become certain of a few things.

Quote :
Quote :
It is us communicating in terms of self-valuing. Spirit is perhaps simply value.
I don't know about that. I think that spirit can give way to value - spirit is what "gives birth" to value by means of its (spirit's) own essence interfacing with self-interpretation. Value becomes the child given birth to. Perhaps we are saying the same thing though.
Then spirit is perhaps valuing, giving value.

Quote :
Quote :
Yes, and all life that makes a mark for itself, carves out a space to exist, does this by genius.
I still do not know if I necessarily agree with this. I think in terms of my having done this - along with so so so many others, but I would still not call myself genius though there are those rare moments when perhaps I sense it in myself. Rolling Eyes "Reality" or illusion? scratch
What you expressed above and what I think of genius is kind of the difference between what is mundane and what is sublime.
I think that existence is genius (and sublime) to begin with. Whenever a human invents or sees or does something that is yet another step deeper into existence, this is what I call genius. "Every genius is born in a prison" - which means that every act of genius opens a world.

I don't think Parodites would agree with me though. He writes well on genius and takes a more delicate approach, where genius is more of a rare instance.

Quote :
Quote :
The absence of genius is far more common, but only genius survives the test of time.
Agreed as to the first part but not as to the second. What is not of genius also survives by way of our mediocre way of seeing and desiring things. But still...it takes all kinds to perpetuate the world.
Actually I agree with that. But only that non-genius survives which benefits in some way from pre-existing works of genius.

Quote :
Quote :
Of course in many of mans stupidities must be understood as genius in terms of effective regulation of impulses, at least if one is to contend with them.
So you would also include genius as part of that? I'm not so sure that genius would be able to regulate itself as such. Is a burning bush or even better, a supernova, able to regulate its impulses or what is natural to it? True, genius does require discipline but at the same time it must at times defy regulating impulses. Isn't true and original creativity spontaneous and at times explosive in nature? As organisms, we are pretty much a replicating bunch.
Yes, but the very first act of genetic replication was surely the greatest instance of genius since the coming into existence of entities at all. The hypothesizing of DNA by man was genius of a high order as well -
not all genius is the artistic, "Dionysian" type.

Quote :
Quote :
Spontaneously I would recommend the chapter On The Blissful Isles, from Zarathustra.
Thank you for sending me to that Blissful Isles. I've been to many of them and I will maybe be getting back to you on that.
Is there any Island in particular that has your special preference?

Quote :
Quote :
You assume an objective cosmos - but yes, that is a way of saying it.
I actually do not like to assume and try not to assume anything. But that too is a learning experience when we are able to see the errors of our ways. Assuming is for asses. I have no idea how objective the cosmos is...Can we consider it as objective UNLESS there is for us...a first cause and depending on what that first cause had in mind or ....even didn't? Would the fact that the cosmos is and continues to be a process, and perhaps a random one at times despite its orderly design, make it objective? Insofar as WE are a micro cosmos, the cosmos is indeed a very subjective place....but at the same time, it groans also to be objective.
Indeed - I think that there is a 'first cause' in all of us, constantly. There is also the interconnected actions of these first causings. This can be said to be objective, behave in accordance with verifiable rules of prediction, 'natural law'. But it all depends on the individual 'efforts to exist', which we may call our spirit.
On a basis of yoga this effort is drawn out from the depth of our spinal chord into consciousness as 'kundalini'... no doubt you're familiar.

Quote :
Quote :
Hence , 'Building thought to disclose the future'. Philosophy needs to have consistency to be a dwelling for the spirit.
I've just posted something elsewhere by Montaigne which is actually quite beautiful to me. He says that "to philosophize is to learn the art of dying". Although I do sort of understand what you are trying to say, I think, IF what you are saying is that philosophy does need 'logical thought'... I also think philosophy needs its great inconsistencies...well, perhaps doesn't need them - they are just a part of philosophy being that we are only human and subject to error.
What you are talking about is what I would register as art.
Philosophy has contained many errors and inconsistencies but the work of the philosopher is to eliminate these and arrive, with the use of both logic and creative imagination, at cultivating truths.
Take Jesus, for example. That was what I would call a philosopher, he understood a certain consistency in human nature, and found a means to address this systematically, and as a result of people internalizing this addressing, a cultural movement arose, if now a whole world. Of course Jesus truth was not 'objective', and it defeated certain truths that had made the Greeks and Romans great. Yet it synthesized with the fruits of these truths, because philosophy is nothing if not fertile ground for thought and evolution.

That is what we are producing here, beginning to produce since last year - a fertile ground for man to grow, mature, become greater-to-himself, to more life and less chaos.

Quote :
Life is inconsistencies, don't you think? And we do not philosophize or go in search of truth and/or find it by smoothly sailing on the ocean of life. We find it by diving into those waters and allowing ourselves or at least risking the dying in ourselves (spiritually and intellectually). If philosophy isn't freely flowing or keeping a number of balls in the air at the same time and looking at them, well, then, it becomes boring, don't you think?
Do you mean that philosophy should allow you to think whatever comes into your mind? No, I think consistency builds substance, and substance is life itself - how can that be boring?

But philosophy is forced to keep many things in the air as long as it has not developed the understanding yet to address those things that do exist but do not fall under existing logic. I am not dogmatic, but once I discover that something is really true, I don't find that boring at all, it is rather "thrilling" to the very core.

Quote :
Quote :
Philosophy, as far as I'm concerned, is the work of devising benefic ordering methods for the unrestrainable phenomenon of humanity.
Well, I also like that definition. I like that phrase - "unrestrainable phenomenon of humanity".
As long as it doesn't put shackles on humanity...wouldn't you say that there is a kind of beauty in disorder. Though I realize there is beauty in order ...ah, but to balance that.
Of course. Man and art can not be restrained - all true-to-life logic and structure in the end serves to make the dance more powerful, regardless whether this is the intention of the order-bringer or not.

Parodites talks about excess - the substance of being that refuses to be categorized, designated and 'ordered' - every concept will produce an excess to that concept, forcing philosophy to expand beyond its concepts and integrate more and more, creating ever more excess - at one point this excess must simply be accepted in gratitude - but not before the order has been arranged in such a way as to be able to feel grateful for experiences at all - that is to say, before ones consciousness has been 'enlightened' into a certain order.

It takes a strong inner order to allow for many disorderly activities and not perish. The human body is of course a great order to begin with - but any of its definition leaves an incredible excess, surplus-being - consciousness simply produces excess. It is important to note what one does want to include in the known, in the definition - so that the excess (that which defies ,terra incognita, the lure/threat of the unknown) can be enjoyed instead of suffered.

Quote :
Quote :
My "religion" doesn't rely on the prophets.

I am glad to hear it.
What I rely on is what I see and sense. Perhaps the prophet within.
"Alas, there are so many things between heaven and earth of which only the poets have dreamed. And especially above the heavens: for all gods are poets' parables, poets' prevarications." (Zarathustra)

Quote :
Quote :
I somehow do not equate 'ferocious" with sublimating one's will to another.
Me neither. But a lot of ferocious hunting and killing goes on in the name of some president or prophet.
Yes, the herd will always have its way.
Ah but the herd has no way of itself - that would make it a 'pack'.



___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail Online
Arcturus Descending
arrow
arrow
Arcturus Descending

Posts : 293
Join date : 2011-12-07
Location : Hovering amidst a battle of Wills

Sensational Surrational Mutter Empty
PostSubject: Re: Sensational Surrational Mutter Sensational Surrational Mutter Icon_minitimeFri Oct 19, 2012 3:45 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Fixed Cross...

I will have to beg your kind indulgence with this but I will have it for you shortly. I haven't forgotten about it.



___________
Each of our lives is a part of the lengthy process of the universe gradually waking up and becoming aware of itself.


Philosophy is the childhood of the intellect, and a culture that tries to skip it will never grow up."


"If I thought that everything I did was determined by my circumstancse and my psychological condition, I would feel trapped."

Thomas Nagel
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7168
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Sensational Surrational Mutter Empty
PostSubject: Re: Sensational Surrational Mutter Sensational Surrational Mutter Icon_minitimeFri Oct 19, 2012 9:38 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Don't feel pressured please, I don't like the element of haste. Sometimes it is necessary, but not here.
Speed is not a concern here, only content, and depth.

Besides it would be unreasonable of me to take as much time as I do and then expect you to hurry.








___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail Online
Arcturus Descending
arrow
arrow
Arcturus Descending

Posts : 293
Join date : 2011-12-07
Location : Hovering amidst a battle of Wills

Sensational Surrational Mutter Empty
PostSubject: Re: Sensational Surrational Mutter Sensational Surrational Mutter Icon_minitimeSat Nov 17, 2012 4:52 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Quote :
High noon, magic hour - whichever is the most dramatic.

Are you saying that "high noon" is your magic hour or that any hour can be?
I think that in "reality" any hour may be magical depending on how that wonderful brain chemistry interacts with what we see/when we see it. But for me, mostly it is at twilight time/dusk. But then, to say even THAT, might rob us of a magic moment which we didn't expect to flow into - because of our biases.


Quote :
I can't put my finger on it, it's a question of architectural taste. Let everyone choose, preferably build, his own temple.

Okay, I understand that...aesthetics. And the most wonderful temples do not have to be built- they rise up from within us and wrap themselves around and above us.
Perhaps if I was to build a temple it would look like the Jefferson Memorial in Washington, D.C. I was there visiting one evening and I was so taken in by the ambience of that building. Of coure, perhaps the reflecting pool overlooking it might have had something to do with it --- ah, water, water, water --- but I don't think so. That building is so airy and ethereal - just something about it that spoke of sacredness and freedom and openness to me. And of course, there was the twilight in the moment.


Sensational Surrational Mutter Still_14
Still Presence


Sensational Surrational Mutter Surren11
Surrender


Sensational Surrational Mutter My_tem11
My temple within[img]



Each of these images when gazed upon may become a temple which flows into and rises up within us. They become a part of our internal lanscape. What need do we have for a temple or for a church. We become the temple to our Selves...lovingly surrounded by these Presences.

They may also BECOME the sacred physical temples in a sense, wherein our Beings go to find the true Self and to become inter-connected with the whole of the universe when contemplated.


Quote :
Spirit originally means breath, which is the humans most basic activity.
James recently equated spirit with activity itself. What do you think about that? It does not have to be an activity bound to an individual - one can also find oneself in the collective spirit of revolution, for example.

I think that spirit influences activity, causes it, activity "flows" through spirit - gives rise to it lol - I agree with James. Spirit in that sense can also be what gives rise to the mob...spirit is infectious and in that may give rise to revolutions...a sense of solidarity.

Quote :
I'm not so sure what you mean by self-valuing. Spirit is sort of a happening, it is just something which rises up in you.
Indeed then an activity. Albeit one not (necessarily) deliberately caused by the conscious mind


I certainly agree with that. Very often it is brought about by an [un]conscious mind. Spirit can be reined in or it can be allowed to run freely and destructively. It can influence for good or chaos...notwithstanding that chaos may eventually lead to creativity and new life.

I don't so much though equate spirit as "simply" being "activity" but what rather what brings forth activity. For example, Sibelius' beautiful musical piece called "Finlandia" which was written when Finland was struggling to obtain their independence against Czar Nicholas II's policies. Sibelius wrote it to stir patriotism within Finland. And it's spirit or essence did just that. Music is a wonderful example of Spirit's urgings to influence thought and deed.



Quote :
We can look at our actions and compare them to the behavior of inanimate particles, and we can become certain of a few things.

In that we are capable of being as unpredictable as they can be? Are particles aware of themselves in the same way in which we are - or are not? What things may be become certain of?



Quote :
It is us communicating in terms of self-valuing. Spirit is perhaps simply value.

Hmmm...I'm not quite sure how to respond to this. I suppose it would depend on what "direction" spirit decided to flow into? Did that make sense? is anything of value before it causes movement?


Quote :
I think that existence is genius (and sublime) to begin with. Whenever a human invents or sees or does something that is yet another step deeper into existence, this is what I call genius.

I do agree with you that existence may ALSO be sublime and amazing in terms of evolution and I do agree with your definition of genius...at least insofar as something completely new or different.


"
Quote :
Every genius is born in a prison" - which means that every act of genius opens a world.

But why call it a "prison"? Maybe it is that genius is truly free and opens the doors to us?
But at the same time, I intuit that i understand what you mean. A genuis must be quite confined and disciplined and sacrifice so much - sometimes everything - for the sake of what it is to be born. And then it is free to burst forth out of itself. But I have a feeling that that would also depend on the nature of the individual. I'm not so sure that every genius would be made from fire - some might be made from cold hard steel. If that made sense to you.



Quote :
I don't think Parodites would agree with me though. He writes well on genius and takes a more delicate approach, where genius is more of a rare instance.

I suppose that I would probably MORE agree with Parodites - otherwise a genius could be just about anyone at a particular moment. I think that geniuses ARE more rare.


Quote :
Agreed as to the first part but not as to the second. What is not of genius also survives by way of our mediocre way of seeing and desiring things. But still...it takes all kinds to perpetuate the world.

Actually I agree with that. But only that non-genius survives which benefits in some way from pre-existing works of genius.

You'll have to give me an example of what you mean by "pre-existing works of genius". Humanity is not capable of surviving except through genius? I'm not saying you're wrong - I just don't know if I go along with this. For instance, would you consider Thomas Edison to have been a genius? Would we have/could we have survived without his "genius" his inventions?

Aside from that, could you please elaborate what you mean by "only non-genius survives......"


Quote :
Spontaneously I would recommend the chapter On The Blissful Isles, from Zarathustra.

Thank you for sending me to that Blissful Isles. I've been to many of them and I will maybe be getting back to you on that.

Is there any Island in particular that has your special preference
?

I was actually speaking in the figurative sense there. But to answer your question, Fixed Cross, my favorite island is called the Solitude of Self - especially when I am completely surrounded by water. I become so deeply-connected - a mysteriously, floating island, a sunken one -- where darkness and light equally share moving space and stars are seen dancing on the surface of my fluid moments. Just call me Atlantis.


As for Zarathustra, it is beautiful. Freddie was such an awesome philosopher, poet, psychologist - love his writings. When you read him, you sometimes find a home you never knew you had or you forgot you had. He's a beacon when you've come lost within the wild ocean of life.

"Away with you, you blissful hour. With you there came to me an involuntary bliss. I stand here ready for my deepest pain -- you came at the wrong time."

Sometimes we just cannot contain ourselves, can we? Something that we have seen simply wraps itself around us - qualia - and those brain chemicals take hold and we have no choice but to rise up - spirit takes hold. As in Scott Mutter's surrational piece above (let's not forget that lol). Some things simply grab at our heartstrings and we hear the music reverberating within and we rise up.

But alas we must at times forego our bliss for the sake of truth and personal evolution - we must run from bliss, quickly -- to struggle and to grow. We must wrap ourselves around those 'abysmal thoughts" which Nietzache spoke of.

"When shall I find strength to hear you burrowing and no longer tremble?"



Quote :
Indeed - I think that there is a 'first cause' in all of us, constantly. There is also the interconnected actions of these first causings. This can be said to be objective, behave in accordance with verifiable rules of prediction, 'natural law'. But it all depends on the individual 'efforts to exist', which we may call our spirit.

On a basis of yoga this effort is drawn out from the depth of our spinal chord into consciousness as 'kundalini'... no doubt you're familiar.

I don't know if I would call it a first cause constantly. I look at us in terms of an ongoing process. All actions ARE interconnected - they flow from one to the other. I suppose it just depends on one's perspective. One can see things in terms of a first cause which then becomes an "ad continuum" (if that made sense) or one can see things as interruptions...cause and effect...cause and effect. But when you really "look back" well, I can at least "see" how everything rides on the back of everything else.


Quote :
I've just posted something elsewhere by Montaigne which is actually quite beautiful to me. He says that "to philosophize is to learn the art of dying". Although I do sort of understand what you are trying to say, I think, IF what you are saying is that philosophy does need 'logical thought'... I also think philosophy needs its great inconsistencies...well, perhaps doesn't need them - they are just a part of philosophy being that we are only human and subject to error.

What you are talking about is what I would register as art.
Just to be clear here, you ARE speaking of ART which encompasses all of LIFE, right? You don't simply mean the art which is hanging in museums and in poetry books and works of fictions...etcetera? That would be the narrower perspective of it and not what he was talking about. But then, you are the true philosopher here, not myself.

Philosophy ought to also be practical - a tool or containing in part the tools with which we sculpt our lives - our lives being works of art.



Quote :
Philosophy has contained many errors and inconsistencies but the work of the philosopher is to eliminate these and arrive, with the use of both logic and creative imagination, at cultivating truths.

True. And perhaps this is also what Montaigne meant. In order to do the above, do we not have to die to self, to sacrifice our false selves, our egos, to detach from them, in order to discover the truth? Do you realize just how difficult a thing that can be, especially when our so- called philosophical "beliefs" or leanings have become so engrained within us? Well, of course, you do.



Quote :
Take Jesus, for example. That was what I would call a philosopher

I also kind of always felt that he was a philosopher too - he always seemed to guide his life through wisdom and truth. He said "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. (right order?) According to the books, he traveled to China and India to pursue eastern philosophy, before his public mission.


Quote :
he understood a certain consistency in human nature, and found a means to address this systematically, and as a result of people internalizing this addressing, a cultural movement arose, if now a whole world.


That would have also made him a psychologist. According to your above words though, Hitler or Stalin might also have been philosophers but they were despots! But i wasn't calling Christ a despot.
Of course, there is still also the quesiton of his existence and divinity.


Quote :
Of course Jesus truth was not 'objective', and it defeated certain truths that had made the Greeks and Romans great. Yet it synthesized with the fruits of these truths, because philosophy is nothing if not fertile ground for thought and evolution

We can't any more know that Christ's truth was not "objective" as we can know that any philosophers' truth is objective. But let's forget about that. What truths of the greeks and romans are you referring to which Christ demolished?



Quote :
That is what we are producing here, beginning to produce since last year - a fertile ground for man to grow, mature, become greater-to-himself, to more life and less chaos.
I understand this. Wouldn't you say that this is the practical side to philosophy?
But doesn't philosophy or the seeking after truth and wisdom at times bring more chaos into our lives? I'm just saying.


Quote :
Life is inconsistencies, don't you think? And we do not philosophize or go in search of truth and/or find it by smoothly sailing on the ocean of life. We find it by diving into those waters and allowing ourselves or at least risking the dying in ourselves (spiritually and intellectually). If philosophy isn't freely flowing or keeping a number of balls in the air at the same time and looking at them, well, then, it becomes boring, don't you think?


Do you mean that philosophy should allow you to think whatever comes into your mind? No, I think consistency builds substance, and substance is life itself - how can that be boring
?

I think that whatever will come into our minds will come, irregardless of what philosophy "allows". But maybe I'm wrong here. Maybe a really disciplined and learned mind would not take in just anything randomly. But let us not throw the baby out with the bathwater, at least not at first. Don't you think that it is sometimes those 'uninvited" thoughts that can make a difference in finding truth?

But aside from that, I do think that discipline and mindfulness and remaining focused on the real issues is important. I don't think that that is boring. But holding to a certain idea or so-called "objective" truth - which may only be based in sentiment and opinion, may be boring...it isn't allowed to die a natural death to make way for the new.


Quote :
But philosophy is forced to keep many things in the air as long as it has not developed the understanding yet to address those things that do exist but do not fall under existing logic.

True, and even that itself is quite fascinating, don't you think? So very many things waiting in the wings of the Universe to become known and revealed and explained.

But is truth always logical? Doesn't it sometimes defy reason?
How does one come to define morality and ethics? Through logic? Isn't philosophy at times about the beating heart rather than the throbbing brain?


Quote :
I am not dogmatic, but once I discover that something is really true, I don't find that boring at all, it is rather "thrilling" to the very core.

Yes, truth can be thrilling and exhilarating but how do you know for sure that something is really "true" or "truth" and not just something which you want to be true? Of course, that is where the discipline of philosophy takes over. I may be wrong here. I'm wrong about a great many things. in fact, I think I sometimes thrive on that because it becomes such an eye opener.


Quote :
Of course. Man and art can not be restrained - all true-to-life logic and structure in the end serves to make the dance more powerful, regardless whether this is the intention of the order-bringer or not.

Is it logic that cannot hold back the deluge or is it Man's passion for expression, creativity and truth? Perhaps logic simply balances and directs it after a time.





___________
Each of our lives is a part of the lengthy process of the universe gradually waking up and becoming aware of itself.


Philosophy is the childhood of the intellect, and a culture that tries to skip it will never grow up."


"If I thought that everything I did was determined by my circumstancse and my psychological condition, I would feel trapped."

Thomas Nagel
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Abstract
Oracle
Oracle
Abstract

Posts : 142
Join date : 2011-11-15
Age : 32
Location : The Moon

Sensational Surrational Mutter Empty
PostSubject: Re: Sensational Surrational Mutter Sensational Surrational Mutter Icon_minitimeMon Nov 19, 2012 2:50 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Arcturus Descending wrote:
Ultimately, man should not ask what the meaning of his life is, but rather must recognize that it is he who is asked.


OR as some say, we are God trying to figure itself out.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Arch-Native Philosophy - Sumerian Bill and Ted - The Magical Tree of Life Academy
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10533
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

PreviousNext

Return to Philosophy



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users