To clarify: wanting to break out of the circle is characteristic of the Machiavellian age. As its polar opposite, then, the Homeric age is incommensurable with such a wish. A Machiavellian becomes pre-Homeric (Nietzschean!) by willing the whole cycle!
A picture is dawning on me, Occident -
A picture of a dusk, evidently -
it is fleeting, it was written here, now it is not.
It was merely a vision, it could hold no claim.
A vision of Florentine reason that echos Homers style, and announces the fullness of the world at Nietzsche’s cusp.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zC9Hw14QqsU[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxzHIzeTokY[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1V1E_62WAE[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKpTWBZsyrQ[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hctjd-UKds8[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrHN6xIdXpw[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jP0Rr0T6UFE[/youtube]
barbarianhorde
Self IS what you are. Multitudinous aspects to us capable of change.
The problem is that we have yet to discover those through consciousness.
Ego as in self-identity or hubris?
Ego is part of our consciousness, our human awareness.
I wouldn’t have worded it the way in which you did.
One might say that “ego” as hubris can “get in the way of” self and reality. True ego doesn’t separate self from reality. Self and reality, at least to me, flow in the same waters. True ego gathers them in.
.
So then who or what is it which is doing the remembering?
Why would you want to deny self, your self?
Oh but the wind does matter and it matters how hard the wind blows. It can pawn your pace at any moment. But if you allow the wind to take you forward, it will. You just cannot fight it. It’s like the seagull which rides the waves to shore.
Why would the seagull fight that?
What really matters is that you just keep on walking and if that gets to be too much, you stop, find a tree and hug it. 
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pRi48tJSsGI[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rcn1wSc7zt8[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rISn8k01cfM[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4OTj-d6YZXE[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PgZ8ytYXLOU[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pM-unzlTno4[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2DZTq2zseZo[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VE7UDmGdUPo[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8l0oEdLFVI[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2zMbD8CaBU[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A77bVY0uj8s[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMag-KqLjt4[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCd17FP3Gyw[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lg-lUHcgNgY[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCqfagQKFz0[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sb8XJtonwLA[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Shkdw99sRI[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfwmIvVKUWo[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZzU40a_xigk[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ehp5MVxgog[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKpIZ07Y3-8[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LUXzjwvd1Q8[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KBFC0UR7zcY[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-GrLp-lPeU[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_9D6M-oHSo[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsb0sjpFyYE[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZxB_srBhyQ[/youtube]
Sauwelios, I commend you for this series, which contains truly an unprecedented wealth of ideas, often in the noble form of questions. Far more than I can address.
A comment on the opening of episode 10:
what if the notion of an infinite universe implies also that man is infinite?
Furthermore an advice, or a request: that you provide each video with a specific description consisting of keywords, searchterms representing the major themes of each episode.
It’s not required that massive audiences hear your words, but those rare individuals that may prove of worth in the coming time of political conquests must be given opportunity to stumble upon your work, also these first works wherein so many seeds are scattered in the dark Earth of your “game”.
so I’m currently listening to this.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsb0sjpFyYE[/youtube]
A veritable library it is, what you have brought into being in this first season. A crepuscular library, demanding one brings ones own torch.
This is what “esoteric” means.
Even as you become less obscured, it is natural for the first layer of ground to be pitch-black.
Thanks. And: I don’t see how it implies that, but it would mean that the whole is still finite compared to man–meaning to him it is a whole–enclosed by “nothing”…
Yes, I ‘should’ do that, but for the time being that’s too much of a secretarial task for me to actually do. I might be able to do it at work, which is pretty much a secretarial job, anyway. This night, I’ve been going through my ILP “Sent messages” and “Inbox” folders, deleting what was not worth keeping.
Well, even though I may still be underground, I have already felt like I was flowering several times while making my videos, and in between: this Sunday night, I plan on making one on erôs, will to power, and self-valuing. And episodes 11 and 12 are already online, though I’ve still to post them here. But now I have to go to bed.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8v-qEtcPP0[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4iXJ0wWG-V4[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJggLq9UFBI[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZApG20L3T0[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=995ieM-xEbw[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-G3hxTqLBI[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rj7awtYHTsk[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q5TtWPubMR0[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-TTGxukS8Ws[/youtube]
I do think it implies it, as if the universe is infinite, and man relates to it directly, which he does, he must relate directly to infinity, so he must also be infinite.
A finite thing can not be brought in the same context as an infinite thing.
similar approach: man is a result of his environment, if his environment is infinite, he must be conditioned by an infinity of factors, at least indirectly - which makes no difference.
There is, to my mind, simply no way of separating the notion Man from the notion Universe, at least not as fundamentally as defining them in terms of irreconcilable contexts.
But man to himself also appears infinite to me. I see no limit to a human being. Wherever we investigate it, either by roots or by consequence, it appears infinite.
And yet defies Aristotelean ogic, as it refers to that which we cant measure - it thus defies the law of identity.
and I think that is what we always have to accept when using that term: Infinity is not an identity, and doesnt belong to any identity -
man thus also is unidentifiable - we can indicate a man, but we can never fully circumscribe him - as he is infinite, and thus circumscribed, indeed, by nothing and no one.
Yes, it’s a big hassle, I agree.
This is great to hear.
You produce content far quicker than I ever did, so I can only assume an well that wants to overflow is being tapped.
In the meantime, I noticed that sharevid.com is going offline in a few days, I just saw this in time to salvage Zoots videos, which would have been lost forever if I hadnt downloaded them just now.
I’ve uploaded four of them to youtube so far, I’ll post them below.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khQiY3SlLJ4[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7KFnM88YpQ[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wMfe0Ac-61Q[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhSlsLgNPkI[/youtube]
Good work with the Zoot videos. I agree about the infinity thing and indeed mention that in episode 14. But first, episode 13, in which I was really far out, so it isn’t very good as an episode but it was great as an experience, leading up to even greater things. I will not post the first six parts here.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PykSajJfzwM[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbdpiFbhUB0[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=daN9l5QeW3I[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-TB3tHbt6NI[/youtube]
Stay tuned for episode 14, which I’m uploading now and in which I was completely sober!
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kay2bhWeFyA[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MB1f5uh9z8k[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYEv7sfRe4w[/youtube]
TERRIBLE NOSTALGIA
i have just hauled down the stairs the couch that Pezer first owned, then was in the studio, and then in my own apartment served as comfort to the most beautiful woman in the world.
It feels fucking sad.
Yeah its not much to look at like this. Im so sorry old couch that I could make a better portrait.
Farewell.
Sauwelios, I may need your help here - my Latin turns out to have gotten a little rusty.
I could look for a translation online but wheres the fun in that.
-Descartes:
: Principiorum, Philosophicorurn Part. 3,
Articulo 47, his verbis : " Atque omnino parum refert, quid hoc
pacto supponatur, quia postea justa leges naturae est mutandurn.
Et vix: aiiquid supponi potest ex quo non idem effectus, quanquam
fortasse operosius, deduci possit. Cum enim illarum ope materia
formas omnes quarum est capax successive assumat, si formas istas
ordine consideremus, tandem ad illam quae est hujus mundi pote-
rimus devenire, adeo ut hie nihil erroris ex falsa hypothesi sit
timendum."
Descartes appears to state here the same suggestion you made to me recently when you were trying to penetrate my thinking on self valuing.
You asked me if not everything could possibly exist, whereupon I answered: no, only the best can exist.
The same dialogue appears to have occurred between Descartes and Leibniz. That is to say, Descartes proclaimed, in the above, that the world can and must take any shape, due to its infinity, but Leibniz, who is like I am a monadologist (Impenitent was early in identifying this), discerns the absurdity in this - though his terms are not nearly as sound as mine, as all this was before Nietzsche, he has requirement of the term God, his underlying deduction is based on the same understanding of necessity. “God” is merely the ultimate meritocrat.
Yes, it is just like those people who claim that given infinite time a group of monkeys pounding on keyboards would produce Hamlet. That is simply false. Just as it is false to assume that given an infinite amount of time, frogs would eventually build a space shuttle and reach the moon (assuming they remained frogs, rather than evolving into something else).
It is an analytic mistake. Just like in quantum physics where they make a similar mistake by misinterpreting statistical probability curves as if that were ontology.