The Philosophers

This is the place to shave off that long white beard and stop being philosophical; a forum for members to just talk like normal human beings.

Moderator: MagsJ

Re: The Philosophers

Postby URUZ » Thu Feb 15, 2018 1:18 am

Fixed Cross wrote:

Wow, this guy is righteous.



Oh yeah.

I wish I lived in Massachusetts so I could vote for him.
EIHWAZ PERTHO NAUTHIZ

ANSUZ
User avatar
URUZ
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2049
Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2015 12:14 am
Location: The topoi

Re: The Philosophers

Postby Jakob » Thu Feb 15, 2018 1:09 pm

With the new speck-a-dust version of Pezer, lemme just say that this "flurrying of valuing" that I enthused over has nothing to do with VO itself, as self-valuing is about power, not about flurrying. But then a speck of dusts will to power, probably, is the experience of a flurry.

Pure self-valuing is what you see in Napoleon and Caesar, as well as Nietzsche, but it also got pretty pure in Goethe.
Self-Valuing means to be the catalyst of the transformation of ones environment and the model for its eventual form.

Butterflies will still self-value as a flurry of encountering. But neither as we can understand the Will to Power through butterflies alone, nor can we understand VO through a speck of dust.

(Always better than traitor)
Image
For behold, all acts of love and pleasure are my rituals
User avatar
Jakob
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5917
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:23 pm
Location: look at my suit

Re: The Philosophers

Postby URUZ » Thu Feb 15, 2018 2:53 pm

“Self-Valuing means to be the catalyst of the transformation of ones environment and the model for its eventual form.”


Well put, I agree. All being tries to do this, there are countless overlapping spheres of this going on at all tiers of existence. Learn how to negotiate those tiers and separate elements, as Trump did, and you change the world. By creating a “butterfly effect” that is so much more than mere flurrying.
EIHWAZ PERTHO NAUTHIZ

ANSUZ
User avatar
URUZ
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2049
Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2015 12:14 am
Location: The topoi

Re: The Philosophers

Postby iambiguous » Thu Feb 15, 2018 5:10 pm

UrGod wrote:“Self-Valuing means to be the catalyst of the transformation of ones environment and the model for its eventual form.”

Well put, I agree. All being tries to do this, there are countless overlapping spheres of this going on at all tiers of existence. Learn how to negotiate those tiers and separate elements, as Trump did, and you change the world. By creating a “butterfly effect” that is so much more than mere flurrying.


In other words, well put as a "general description" of human interactions. Well, providing those who embrace it share your own moral and philosophical values. Or, as I prefer to put it, existential prejudices rooted in dasein, conflicting goods and political power.

On the other hand, there are any number of objectivists around who share this rendition of an intellectual scaffold but insist that only those who share in turn their own political prejudices are qualified to become "one of us".

Thus there are folks here at ILP who hold in contempt folks like Satyr over at KT. They both hold Liberals/Leftists in contempt but are outraged all the more that others do not hold them in contempt for the Right Reasons.

And, in turn, there are the Liberals/Leftists who hold Conservatives [and Trump] in contempt yet are far more outraged at those in their own political camp who refuse to hold them in contempt for [once again] the Right Reasons.

But trust me: Sooner or later someone from your political camp notes something that does not entirely fit into your own rendition of The Whole Truth. At KT they have a "dungeon" for that. And I've always championed the idea of creating one here.

A dungeon for the fiercest of objectivists. I'd even volunteer to moderate it. :wink:
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 26578
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: The Philosophers

Postby Jakob » Thu Feb 15, 2018 5:28 pm

UrGod wrote:“Self-Valuing means to be the catalyst of the transformation of ones environment and the model for its eventual form.”


Well put, I agree. All being tries to do this, there are countless overlapping spheres of this going on at all tiers of existence. Learn how to negotiate those tiers and separate elements, as Trump did, and you change the world. By creating a “butterfly effect” that is so much more than mere flurrying.

Yes.
I took Pezer as referring to an initial liberating effect of approaching VO from a distance. Then, he turned out to think he had actually penetrate into VO.
BWAHAHAHA
Noobs crack me up. Always insisting on retaining their noobileness.

Anyway, bitches and boys across the internet forum philosophy, all they talk about now is that VO exits. How it is so mean to them. How they can't understand it. How it tries to make them think. Terrible. All great things must first wear monstrous masks. Thought is perhaps the greatest thing.

I should feel compassion for these feeble chickenhearts. But really, my compassion goes out to real humans that dare to exist, and have to endure all this fucking crap from the pseudo-entities they've tried to ennoble.
Image
For behold, all acts of love and pleasure are my rituals
User avatar
Jakob
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5917
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:23 pm
Location: look at my suit

Re: The Philosophers

Postby URUZ » Thu Feb 15, 2018 6:07 pm

I often forget just how difficult and weird it is for noobs.
EIHWAZ PERTHO NAUTHIZ

ANSUZ
User avatar
URUZ
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2049
Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2015 12:14 am
Location: The topoi

Re: The Philosophers

Postby Fixed Cross » Thu Feb 15, 2018 7:00 pm

But thats the sucky part I don't pretend to respect. Its not as if it wasn't dangerous and terrifying for me. The difference I guess is I didn't respect my fearful mode. I had to risk it. This is what Mars does when ruling a horoscope. Also I don't give a penny for the moron that thinks he can judge anything, including astrology, without studying it.

My respect goes out to the people that are honestly trying to dig into it and amplify and synthesize their own preexisting complex of understanding with it. So indeed Ill grant Mitra the rank he requested when it wasn't yet appropriate. Truth be told he has contributed to the development of Nietzsches strain of mind in a crucial way simply because it was, or so it looked, a matter of life or death for him at one point. This was, if I may be so free to suggest, before the Shivaic revolution; this became the religious adoption of Nietzsches spirit as the opening of the 21st century. My own involvement has much to do with the experience of seeing philosophy rule a life completely like the unseen life force rules a lonesome tree in a perpetual storm. It is understandable that Mitra doesn't care to regress a the way back to that complete honesty before the evil storm that the world is, if you let it - and it is moving that he has dared to dip back into it again. All this serves as an introduction to the message that my idea for this The Philosophers clan has to do with breaking the bounds individualism, and becoming a support mechanism for philosophy, which I will humbly call the genius that allows courage. It is a fruit that is passed along. I am a guardian of it, as I was a beneficiary of it when I was still a sapling. It has had many guardians but not a as many of them had any chances of defining and supporting their governments, or even furthering scientific method of the time. In the case of the Logos, it has directly predicted an described Trumps presidency. America First is self-valuing. Make America Great Again is powering America to value to complete a cycle. Trump adapts and pushes forth as C says precisely according to the formula. As a result of the rhetoric and policies, other nations have been welcomed to look at their own interests as well. We get a more pluralized, sane and exciting world. And this is just step 1.

It would be great if some people could pay some more attention. Gods be willing, to the point of trying to make a valuing ontological argument. See what happens.
Before the Light - Tree of Life
Image
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 7777
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: The Philosophers

Postby iambiguous » Thu Feb 15, 2018 7:33 pm

Fixed Cross wrote:I don't give a penny for the moron that thinks he can judge anything, including astrology, without studying it.


Let's think about this. Whether the subject is ethics, political economy, God and religion, human sexuality, just war, race, gender, astrology or whatever, what does it mean to "study it".

It seems there would be two approaches here:

On the one hand, some will argue that they have studied it [whatever] and that only if others reach the same conclusions about it [whatever] as they do can they be said to have truly studied it too.

Or one can acknowledge that given the complexity of all the variables intertwined in any particular set of relationships, and given the extent to which we live in a world awash in contingency, chance and change, we are not likely to have accumulated all of the knowledge necessary to state definitively that how we have come to study and understand it [whatever] reflects the optimal or the only rational understanding.

And that's before we get to the gap between what we think we know about it [whatever] and all that would need to be known about the very nature of Existence itself, in order to know anything definitively.

Finally, there's the distinction between the either/or world [of mathematics, the laws of nature, empirical fact and the logical rules of language] and our is/ought reactions to any particular set of facts that we can all agree upon about it.

As it relates philosophically to what I construe to be the most important existential question of all: How ought one to live?

To live, in other words, in a problematic world that is clearly awash in conflicting goods and in political economy.

I merely put my own "spin" regarding dasein on all of this.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 26578
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: The Philosophers

Postby iambiguous » Tue Feb 20, 2018 7:06 pm

...paging Zoot Allures...paging Zoot Allures... :wink:
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 26578
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: The Philosophers

Postby encode_decode » Wed Feb 21, 2018 12:31 pm

iambiguous wrote:...paging Zoot Allures...paging Zoot Allures... :wink:

You can find him here.
    Neosophi | HOME | FORUM

    Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony
    (James S Saint)


    It’s not that truth itself is being eroded per se, it’s that fragmental falsification appears to be increasing.
    (Anomaly654)


    Mind is an ever changing dimension that is bound to reality, logic and emotion.
    (Myself)
    User avatar
    encode_decode
    Philosopher
     
    Posts: 1180
    Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm

    Re: The Philosophers

    Postby URUZ » Thu Feb 22, 2018 2:23 am

    Value Ontology is the final truth, because it is the fundamental. No truth exists without reference to (a) self-valuing.

    Well many such non-valued ‘truths’ sort of ‘exist’, just not really. I propose two new categories: truths that actually exist, because self-valued, and truths that “exist” because they can be said to be the case despite not actually being valued by anything.

    But does anything even fall into this latter category? I can’t think of any examples. It remains basically an empty category of inverted possibility, something posited like “nothingness” because everything else already exists to both disprove it and to imply it as a mere edge case and limit-point.

    Now we find what Nietzsche lacked: the means of achieving transvaluation. Self-valuing is this means. But as far as I know, only Fixed and now (as of today) myself are the only ones who truly understand this.

    All others are lodged in the matrix. But still they at least self-value... as matrix. Also as reality, sometimes and oftentimes in spite of “themselves” (of the false matrix-self).

    Hahaha.

    Can’t wait until reality is revaluated along these lines of VO. Lots of wonderful work ahead for us to do.
    EIHWAZ PERTHO NAUTHIZ

    ANSUZ
    User avatar
    URUZ
    Philosopher
     
    Posts: 2049
    Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2015 12:14 am
    Location: The topoi

    Re: The Philosophers

    Postby Arcturus Descending » Fri Feb 23, 2018 4:04 pm

    Self-valuing is this means. But as far as I know, only Fixed and now (as of today) myself are the only ones who truly understand this.


    :lol: Not much hubris here.

    When was the last time you were in touch with every human being in existence?

    But my question: How does one learn to transvalue when the starting point is hubris, which can only muddy the waters or the lenses of perception?
    Remember what happened to Icarus?


    We had each of us some whimsy in the brain, which we believed more than anything else, and which discoloured all experience to its own shade.”
    ― Robert Louis Stevenson, Virginibus Puerisque and Other Papers


    It happens to the best!
    “How can a bird that is born for joy
    Sit in a cage and sing?”
    ― William Blake


    “Little Fly
    Thy summers play,
    My thoughtless hand
    Has brush'd away.

    Am not I
    A fly like thee?
    Or art not thou
    A man like me?

    For I dance
    And drink & sing:
    Till some blind hand
    Shall brush my wing.

    If thought is life
    And strength & breath:
    And the want
    Of thought is death;

    Then am I
    A happy fly,
    If I live,
    Or if I die”
    ― William Blake, Songs of Innocence and of Experience


    “No bird soars too high if he soars with his own wings.”
    ― William Blake
    User avatar
    Arcturus Descending
    Consciousness Seeker
     
    Posts: 15251
    Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 5:15 pm
    Location: A state of unknowing

    Re: The Philosophers

    Postby iambiguous » Sat Feb 24, 2018 9:42 pm

    Zoot wrote:

    come over here dude! somebody go get him please. and tell him to bring his hanger-ons with him.


    Thanks for the invite, zoot. And, sure, I'll pop in here from time to time. But only insofar as I find discussions revolving around that which is [still] of utmost importance to me: probing the extent to which the tools of philosophy are relevant in assessing conflicting value judgments rooted in dasein out in a particular world embedded in one or another rendition of political economy.

    In other words, helpful in yanking me out of the fucking hole that I've dug myself into.

    As for this:

    you called him 'biggy'. how strange. i had a theory once (and still might) that iambiguous is, in fact, a poster that went by 'biggy' at a yahoo philosophy group over a decade ago. i had just discovered philosophy forums and that was one of the first i ever joined. the administrator of the forum was a kantian lawyer (might of had a PhD), and most of the members were all philosophy majors or graduates. the discussions and debates at this forum were top rate; these guys didn't chat or banter around. these motherfuckers 'got it in', man. i've never seen before nor since, anything of that caliber. i was fresh out of my will durant's story of philosophy so i was really green. man all i could do was watch. if i even dared to try to argue, these dudes would pulverize me; wayyyyy over my head. extremely technical.

    but there was this one loner there named biggy, and everyone was against him. remember you have a forum full of objectivists of all flavors, and these dudes know their shit. but biggy- and here is the strange part- was right beside them the whole way... chopping them down, blow for blow. for every argument they put out, biggy would counter it with something just as technical. all the other existentialists and relativists would be like 'yeah, what biggy said'. i look back at it now and get a laugh. great memories.

    anyway, if this iambiguous is biggy, he's toned it down immensely. he isn't cutting loose at ILP like he could if he wanted. if he is biggy, i think he thinks it would be a waste of his time... so what he's done, as a real veteran of philosophy fora, is narrow down his platform to a simple formula... a formula that keeps on working and requires less effort; the dasein and conflicting good and whatever.

    another coincidence; both biggy and iambiguous are vietnam vets.


    Yep, that's me. I've been squabbling with the objectivists now for years. In part as, well, "entertainment" while "waiting for godot"... and in part in the hope that someone may well actually succeed in nudging me in a less despairing and brutally bleak direction.

    Oh, and thanks for this:

    you're not just arguing with biggy, but a small army of great thinkers as well. Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Stirner, Jaspers, Ponty, Sartre, Camus, Marcel, Frankl, Rorty, the list goes on, and these dudes aren't forum board philosophers. they're the real deal, man. it's not for nothing that they are world renowned.

    biggy's a little repetitious...well, very repetitious, but that's not the point. his position is critically important in philosophy, and at ILP there are very few who so eloquently understand and represent that existential position.

    i like em, even though he frustrates me in the same way woody allen would frustrate me if i was getting ready to rob a bank, as he sits beside me in the car bugging me to reconsider because i couldn't be sure what i was doing was right.


    On the other hand as I noted above:

    Zoot Allures wrote:
    don't ask yourself 'would it be wrong to rob this bank', since that's a nonsensical question. instead ask yourself 'what kind of risk is this and what are the possible consequences.'


    We're on the same page here. I agree. It's just that, for me, nothing of what I note above really goes away. It's not like any particular individual can think through the question "should I rob this bank?" and come up with a moral narrative that settles it. At best she can come to believe that her own narrative is the most reasonable. And then in a world of contingency, chance and change, her experiences, relationships, sources of information etc., evolve/devolve and she comes to think differently about it.

    I'm still back to grappling with my own intellectual contraption: That in an essentially absurd and meaningless world that ends in oblivion, there is no way [philosophically or otherwise] to know how one ought to live.

    Unless of course there is and I am just not privy to it here and now.


    I'll be sticking with ILP for now. I only allot so much time a day for this sort of thing. And why not contribute here yourself from time to time. If only because there are actually a lot more folks around here who might learn something they had never even considered before. You might even persuade the more sophisticated among them to give your own forum a chance.

    http://pathos-of-distance.forumotion.com/t2p25-ahem#265
    He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

    Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
    Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
    User avatar
    iambiguous
    ILP Legend
     
    Posts: 26578
    Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
    Location: baltimore maryland

    Re: The Philosophers

    Postby Jakob » Sun Feb 25, 2018 7:14 pm

    Here is my grandfather punishing the then prime minister. (The guy in the thumbnail is the prime minister, Dries Van Agt. My grandfather, Marcus Bakker, is the guy who makes him squirm)



    Beautiful times. The Cold War wasn't so bad.
    Image
    For behold, all acts of love and pleasure are my rituals
    User avatar
    Jakob
    ILP Legend
     
    Posts: 5917
    Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:23 pm
    Location: look at my suit

    Re: The Philosophers

    Postby Jakob » Sun Feb 25, 2018 11:13 pm

    Image
    For behold, all acts of love and pleasure are my rituals
    User avatar
    Jakob
    ILP Legend
     
    Posts: 5917
    Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:23 pm
    Location: look at my suit

    Re: The Philosophers

    Postby A Shieldmaiden » Mon Feb 26, 2018 12:43 am

    Jakob wrote:
    But thats the sucky part I don't pretend to respect. Its not as if it wasn't dangerous and terrifying for me. The difference I guess is I didn't respect my fearful mode. I had to risk it.

    This is what Mars does when ruling a horoscope.


    It is more than likely that women rather than men think astrology is scientific and has some merit, but it has been dubbed "a metaphysic of dunces". My question....... is not astrology similar to religion inasmuch as there is conformity and deference to higher authority of some kind, which in turn resembles "the mentality of the authoritarian personality."

    Also I don't give a penny for the moron that thinks he can judge anything, including astrology, without studying it.,


    People high on authoritarianism tend to have high respect for acknowledged authorities and there are also those who are aggressive towards those who think differently.
    The man that walks his own road, walks alone

    Old Norse Proverb
    User avatar
    A Shieldmaiden
    Philosopher
     
    Posts: 1972
    Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 6:13 am

    Re: The Philosophers

    Postby Jakob » Mon Feb 26, 2018 12:16 pm

    If I had fear of heights, Id get Vertigo from looking down at you here, SM.

    I like you, but it is beyond me how someone can do something as stupid as you are doing here. To judge something you havent researched. It is just beyond me how shitty life must be for people who live like that.

    Up your game.

    At least granted that you don't have a truly shitty chart, which may explain peoples dislike of astrology - they see they were born worthless, and they resent that so they claim ignorance of it.

    Possible too!
    Image
    For behold, all acts of love and pleasure are my rituals
    User avatar
    Jakob
    ILP Legend
     
    Posts: 5917
    Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:23 pm
    Location: look at my suit

    Re: The Philosophers

    Postby Arcturus Descending » Mon Feb 26, 2018 4:07 pm

    Jakob,


    ...which may explain peoples dislike of astrology - they see they were born worthless, and they resent that so they claim ignorance of it.


    On the other hand, does your sense of great worth and identity come from your own astrological readings?
    It works both ways I would think.



    they see they were born worthless, and they resent that so they claim ignorance of it


    I would imagine that it would be quite ignorant (not knowing or understanding a thing in the first place) to assume that one's self was born "worthless" based on what astrology says of that person.


    Your above statement also reeks of ignorance, Jakob. Try contemplating and considering in your spare time, all of the African Americans, let us say, who were thought to be ignorant and worthless and eventually flew and soared higher than you could ever imagine or reach for yourself?
    You might also ask yourself the question: "Who was given the greater opportunities?

    I wonder ~ how much higher can a person really fly when their own sense of self is at least partly measured and/or judged based on those who they deem as worthless, and so much less so than their own selves?
    “How can a bird that is born for joy
    Sit in a cage and sing?”
    ― William Blake


    “Little Fly
    Thy summers play,
    My thoughtless hand
    Has brush'd away.

    Am not I
    A fly like thee?
    Or art not thou
    A man like me?

    For I dance
    And drink & sing:
    Till some blind hand
    Shall brush my wing.

    If thought is life
    And strength & breath:
    And the want
    Of thought is death;

    Then am I
    A happy fly,
    If I live,
    Or if I die”
    ― William Blake, Songs of Innocence and of Experience


    “No bird soars too high if he soars with his own wings.”
    ― William Blake
    User avatar
    Arcturus Descending
    Consciousness Seeker
     
    Posts: 15251
    Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 5:15 pm
    Location: A state of unknowing

    Re: The Philosophers

    Postby iambiguous » Tue Feb 27, 2018 6:21 pm

    zoot wrote: biggy wrote:
    In other words, helpful in yanking me out of the fucking hole that I've dug myself into.

    i have a theory about this, biggy. sit down.

    i'm gonna get straight to the point. i think you are suffering from PTSD; post traumatic subjectivist disorder. i think your experience at The Philosophy Cafe was like vietnam all over again, dude... your arch nemesis being Friedrich, with Hawk and J.H. Bowden bringing up the rear. you were literally surrounded by kantian objectivists, and they're like the green berets of continental philosophy. how could such a traumatizing experience not effect you, man? seriously.


    Hell, even back then the exchanges revolved more [rather than less] around "waiting for godot". Besides, how are my own speculations not "ineffably and inextricably" embedded in what must surely be a gigantic gap between what "I" think is true here and now about all this and all that one would need to know about the very nature of Existence itself.

    I always start there. Trust me: only a fool would suppose that infinitesimally tiny specks of existence like us can actually put more that just a few hapless dings in it.

    No, my subjective stressors reside more in the future than the past. But how on earth can I explain what that means to someone who really hasn't a clue as to what motivates the shit "in my head" here and now. These exchanges can only go so far in rooting out the variables that configure and reconfigure [from the cradle to the grave] the eixstential parameters of my own particular "I".

    On the other hand, sure, maybe you know me better than I imagine anyone ever could:

    zoot wrote: you remember those essays Friedrich used to post. they were like something straight outta stanford for christ's sake! it took everything you had to stay alive... and i watched you fight for your life, biggy... i watched you become an animal. you had to, man. and that's what has shaken you. you're still recovering from that terrible war; the battle with the kantian cong... friedrich chi minh at the front.


    Still, it really is all just a blur now.

    zoot wrote: i'm gonna tell you why you transformed from the original relativist you once were to the cynic you are now. everytime you tried to assert yourself and express a relative moral judgement, Friedrich chi minh shot at you with a fully automatic self-referential contradiction ak-47... and you had to duck and cover. so you gave up. you stopped even having an opinion and simply took the position that any position was absurd.


    Again, this may well be more perceptive than anything that I can come up with. And yet my cynicism still seems embedded more in that dwindling future than the ever expanding past. And here folks like Moreno were very effective in reminding me that the points I was making really were just political prejudices rooted in existential contraptions rooted in dasein. That kind of shook me up.


    zoot wrote: now i want you to go to a forum somewhere, take a position, and defend it. i don't give a damn what it is. just believe in it and fight for it.


    I can only assume that perhaps you are being ironic. And, if not, I'll weep for your future. Not to mention the future of some who will cross your path.

    zoot wrote: you still got your old keyboard? good. take it down from the mantle, oil it up, and lock and load.... because biggy's back.


    Oh, he's back alright. Back to the future.
    He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

    Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
    Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
    User avatar
    iambiguous
    ILP Legend
     
    Posts: 26578
    Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
    Location: baltimore maryland

    Re: The Philosophers

    Postby A Shieldmaiden » Wed Feb 28, 2018 11:33 am

    Jakob wrote:
    At least granted that you don't have a truly shitty chart,


    What are you talking about?

    I have no chart.
    The man that walks his own road, walks alone

    Old Norse Proverb
    User avatar
    A Shieldmaiden
    Philosopher
     
    Posts: 1972
    Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 6:13 am

    Re: The Philosophers

    Postby Fixed Cross » Wed Feb 28, 2018 6:45 pm

    A chart is generated from your birth date, time and place.

    It is the perspective on the cosmos from your birth moment. It is your root in time space.

    Most people have suboptimal charts. Everyone has a difficult or disappointing chart. Astrology is intensely cruel. Thats probably why Jesus forbade it.
    Before the Light - Tree of Life
    Image
    The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
    - Thucydides
    User avatar
    Fixed Cross
    Doric Usurper
     
    Posts: 7777
    Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
    Location: the black ships

    Re: The Philosophers

    Postby Fixed Cross » Wed Feb 28, 2018 6:49 pm

    You can avoid ever knowing yourself fine, just be a spectator to other peoples self discovery.
    https://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/

    you'll see.
    Its far harsher and raw-life than philosophy tends to be.
    Before the Light - Tree of Life
    Image
    The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
    - Thucydides
    User avatar
    Fixed Cross
    Doric Usurper
     
    Posts: 7777
    Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
    Location: the black ships

    Re: The Philosophers

    Postby Fixed Cross » Wed Feb 28, 2018 6:59 pm

    Of all the astrological systems, the Vedic one is the cruelest. Its matter of emphasis. Since astrology involves exploring all the potential weaknesses of a constitution to their cosmic consequences, there is unlimited potential for creating psychological hells. There is only one way into astrology that doesn't damage the psyche - will to power.
    Before the Light - Tree of Life
    Image
    The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
    - Thucydides
    User avatar
    Fixed Cross
    Doric Usurper
     
    Posts: 7777
    Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
    Location: the black ships

    Re: The Philosophers

    Postby Fixed Cross » Wed Feb 28, 2018 7:07 pm

    You, SM, come across to me as Saturnian Virgonic. What appeals to you in my art is the melancholic depths I reach, the truths that connect only in these depths. Death, lack of meaning, meaning therein.

    I think you have Earth and a touch of air, a lot of water that is still and quite deep, there is consideration, time.
    Hesitation before what isn't tried and tested, but little inclination to try and test - enough has been discovered already.

    Image

    Compare this to a Fire-Air person like Trump, a Gemini Sun, with Jupiter andNeptune in Libra and Moon in Sagittarius, he can work with hypotheticals and beat the game without having any prior grounds. Air-Fire works from the future more than from the past. Earth-Water are entirely susceptible to precedent.
    Before the Light - Tree of Life
    Image
    The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
    - Thucydides
    User avatar
    Fixed Cross
    Doric Usurper
     
    Posts: 7777
    Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
    Location: the black ships

    Re: The Philosophers

    Postby A Shieldmaiden » Wed Feb 28, 2018 7:48 pm

    You, SM, come across to me as Saturnian Virgonic.


    Not even close.

    Have another guess.

    I will give you a kick start......Incompatibility: Fire signs, like Aries, Leo, which is you, no?
    Last edited by A Shieldmaiden on Wed Feb 28, 2018 8:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    The man that walks his own road, walks alone

    Old Norse Proverb
    User avatar
    A Shieldmaiden
    Philosopher
     
    Posts: 1972
    Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 6:13 am

    PreviousNext

    Return to Non-Philosophical Chat



    Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: No registered users