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 Mitra-Sauwelios » Mon Feb 12, 2018 7:54 am

Pedro I Rengel wrote:"The abyss is what, in that same post, I called the Nothing/Chaos/Ginnungagap. It may be what Heidegger called "Being". It has no substance; there can be no substance without entity (subject)."

Two things here. First, you admit you believe in substance (once entity is).


Not true, for I had said: "What really creates is the abyss 'beneath' all semblance of entities." _Semblance_ of entities, ergo _semblance_ of substance.


Second, substance isn't really palpable. That is why Nietzsche called it not strictly real. It is a supposition of existence of something that, strictly speaking, isn't there. This nothing or abyss has substance, even if it is not a subjective experience, because it is posited as something that exists, for its own sake, and is a catalyst for genesis. Even though it isn't really there.

Or, more simply, what gives entities substance? I can see, between your abyss and your entity subject substance, infinite explications, one after the other, each of the previous, without ever arriving at anything other than "because magic." And if magic, why bother with the abyss?


"Because magic" is just another way of saying "because some abyss".
User avatar
Mitra-Sauwelios
religious philosopher
 
Posts: 119
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2017 5:24 am
Location: Mad Master

Re: The Philosophers

Postby Jakob » Mon Feb 12, 2018 2:15 pm

All of you seem to still believe in "God". That is, all of you seem to have the misconception that being is a function of origin. In reality, origins are functions of being. Being cant have an origin. Origins also are.

The abyss, this unfathomable "magic" or whatever "from" which you see being as having to have emerged, is simply the consistency, "truthfulness" of being that you have, in the deep offer thoughts, not yet attained. This is why I say that most humans do not exist; they walk around as functions of ideas that don't pertain to existence. They live as functions of non-existence. So they vote for Clinton and horrible shit like that.

See you gotta turn this around, humans.
You dont have the right or power to question existence.
You have the humble power to attain to it, to partake in it.

It is not your right to know the origin of all origins.
And yet I have offered you the power of that knowledge.

So what is my offering other than a challenge to become more than you are? And therefore most take offence. Understanding VO is work; effort; understanding it is tantamount to being the origin of existence itself.

Or more properly, being origin to existence without the little title words.

Who is to say the future didn't come first? It is after all ahead of us.
Last edited by Jakob on Mon Feb 12, 2018 6:57 pm, edited 4 times in total.
Image
For behold, all acts of love and pleasure are my rituals
User avatar
Jakob
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5903
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:23 pm
Location: look at my suit

Re: The Philosophers

Postby Pedro I Rengel » Mon Feb 12, 2018 2:42 pm

"_Semblance_ of entities, ergo _semblance_ of substance."

Ok. Semblance of what? What is it that these entities are semblances of?

Because, if you are saying that there is never substance but only the idea of substance, then it is just a made up thing, and the abyss nothing is some made up thing. What makes it up? I have an answer that doesn't use made up substance to explain it: will to power.

"'Because magic' is just another way of saying 'because some abyss'."

Neither explains its own genesis. Will to power explains the genesis of both.

Or, another way. They are both imaginary, without a link to the real. Now, I have no problem with this. Leibniz's answer was "because God," and he wrote some damn fine philosophy. My problem is hierarchical. You claim Value Ontology stands at the base of will to power. But will to power explains VO without using imaginary solutions, without appealing to substance. Leaving nothing out.
Pedro I Rengel
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2018 2:55 pm

Re: The Philosophers

Postby Pedro I Rengel » Mon Feb 12, 2018 2:53 pm

Jakob:

Origins are not. There is no origin.

It is this that is hard to attain to. Genesis is not origin. It is already a thing. But being has genesis.
Pedro I Rengel
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2018 2:55 pm

Re: The Philosophers

Postby Arcturus Descending » Mon Feb 12, 2018 3:53 pm

Pedro I Rengel wrote:Jakob:

Origins are not. There is no origin.

It is this that is hard to attain to. Genesis is not origin. It is already a thing. But being has genesis.


[b]or·i·gin
ˈôrəjən/Submit
noun
1.
the point or place where something begins, arises, or is derived.
"a novel theory about the origin of oil"
synonyms: beginning, start, commencement, origination, genesis, birth, dawning, dawn, emergence, creation, birthplace, cradle;
[/b]


genesis
noun [ U ] US ​ /ˈdʒen·ə·səs/

the time when something came into existence; the beginning or origin:
the genesis of life on earth


Basically, I see both these words as having the same meaning.

What to you is already a *thing*? Genesis or origin? Insofar as both can be said to be "events" I suppose one can say that they are things being that they eventually cause the *physical* to happen.


It is this that is hard to attain to.


You mean the concept that the Universe to you has no origin, genesis or beginning?
If it IS hard to attain to, to grasp, then why are you seemingly absolutist about your conclusion?
Do scientists in actuality know enough to be able to say that they know beyond the shadow of a doubt that there is/was no origin or genesis to the Universe[s]? Might this just your subjective thinking, Pedro?

In the conventional picture of the origin of the universe, the Big Bang is the beginning of time. This is one of the greatest mysteries in science, and I’ve spent the last few years trying to work out how to make sense of the moment when, in that picture, the universe emerged from a point of infinite density and temperature—what’s known as the initial singularity. I’m exploring the idea that the singularity was not the beginning of time. In this new view, time didn’t have a beginning, and the Big Bang resulted from a collision of branes, sheetlike spaces that exist within a higher-dimensional reality. These collisions might happen repeatedly, creating an eternal, cyclic universe. We are now close to having the first mathematically and logically complete, consistent description of the passage of a universe through a singularity.

http://discovermagazine.com/2010/oct/13 ... ing-or-end

That being the case, would it not stand to reason that there was some kind of an origin/genesis Somewhere?
True, time and these words are human constructs BUT his hypothesis suggests to me that there had to be a beginning although it suggests to him that there was not. Would we, could we, discount these branes within a higher-dimensional reality, as evidence toward some kind of a genesis?
Of course, I may be completely wrong here.

If there is no time outside of existence, then "what's it all about Alfie" and what is it, Alfie?

I think that our puny brains as of yet (and perhaps never) do not have the capacity to KNOW either way. But wouldn't it be nice.
Joseph Joubert ~~

It is better to debate a question without settling it than to settle a question without debating it.


The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory but progress.


“We love repose of mind so well, that we are arrested by anything which has even the appearance of truth; and so we fall asleep on clouds.”


You have to be like the pebble in the stream, keeping the grain and rolling along without being dissolved or dissolving anything else.
Arcturus Descending
Consciousness Seeker
 
Posts: 15163
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 5:15 pm
Location: A state of unknowing

Re: The Philosophers

Postby Jakob » Mon Feb 12, 2018 6:02 pm

Pedro I Rengel wrote:Jakob:

Origins are not. There is no origin.

Not of Being, in any case. There are many origins but they are all embedded into being.

It is this that is hard to attain to. Genesis is not origin. It is already a thing. But being has genesis.

But such genesis is no different from the being it... engenders.
Heidegger refers to this as "physis", or "sprouting-commanding", unfortunately translated.

Being is its own genesis. But when man is grounded in memories and wishes, he is not actually there. (Dasein is being-there)
Image
For behold, all acts of love and pleasure are my rituals
User avatar
Jakob
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5903
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:23 pm
Location: look at my suit

Re: The Philosophers

Postby Jakob » Mon Feb 12, 2018 6:11 pm

Pedro I Rengel wrote:Neither explains its own genesis. Will to power explains the genesis of both.

Consider that not all understand the WtP as well as you do.
Consider that we might need your full disclosure. Synthesis of substances proves substance, proves it to exist as a function of its reacting with another substance.
The being that is inside the reacting is self-valuing. Willing.

Or, another way. They are both imaginary, without a link to the real. Now, I have no problem with this. Leibniz's answer was "because God," and he wrote some damn fine philosophy.

HAHA. Faust preferred God exists therefore blah blah over blah blah therefore God exists. I suppose Leibniz combined the two.
Do you remember or even know Impenitent?
He was early to recommend Leibniz to me.
search.php?author_id=1617&sr=posts

My problem is hierarchical. You claim Value Ontology stands at the base of will to power. But will to power explains VO without using imaginary solutions, without appealing to substance. Leaving nothing out.

I don't mean to speak for Sauwelios.
But:
It is precisely because WtP left a question (to me) that I cracked it open into VO.
I did not find the WtP to logically follow from itself. I had to amend it by including all of experience into the notion. One way of saying what I did. I had to show how one quantum of WtP can touch another, in concrete, practical, scientific terms.

In "valuing", all of the world is palpably and inevitably included. It is the touchstone to validify WtP operations.
It refers the WtP to itself by referring ourselves, through the WtP, to ourselves.

Mind.
The Abyss is the Mind.
When man finds himself standing before it, he is deciding whether or not he will dare to attain to full consciousness, including total honesty before his instincts. A prolonged trepidation here is what is what Kierkegaard lived through and named Sickness unto Death.

As Bill advised me way back

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O8OE4gedQuc
Image
For behold, all acts of love and pleasure are my rituals
User avatar
Jakob
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5903
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:23 pm
Location: look at my suit

Re: The Philosophers

Postby Jakob » Mon Feb 12, 2018 6:40 pm

Mitra-Sauwelios wrote:"Because magic" is just another way of saying "because some abyss".


A definition of magic: the opposite of fear.

Thinking happens through relating concepts in ways that crack open these concepts so that the implications of their constructs flow out like Nektar.
What happens between concepts is the WtP. Even what happens between the Will to Power and the Will to Power!
Yes, that is precisely where I found the self valuing logic of being.

HAIL!
Image
For behold, all acts of love and pleasure are my rituals
User avatar
Jakob
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5903
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:23 pm
Location: look at my suit

Re: The Philosophers

Postby Pedro I Rengel » Mon Feb 12, 2018 10:24 pm

Hiedegger I will leave, out of hygene, well and alone.

I do notice that you use Being and being similarly to Oliver's abyss and entity. So the questión remains, what brings these substantial things into existence. You say Being has no origin. Well nothing does. Things just are. But something makes them be. We call this moment when they come to be, genesis. Being has a genesis.

The genesis of things is when they begin to matter. They don't exist outside that.

See, you want to trace the substance that begat substance. I need only know when this started to matter. The big bang and alternate theories are only expansions of physics. But genesis, even of the world, is not physical.

That physics works when tested? Well, it is called will to power, not will to imagination. Again, that power exists doesn't prove the unity or constancy of standards of power, because contradicting standards work and produce power. It is not power that produces power, but will to power. And will to power wills only will to power.

What goes for physics goes for logic. Will to power is not explained by logic, it is rather the other way around. Logic exists within genealogy.
Pedro I Rengel
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2018 2:55 pm

Re: The Philosophers

Postby Jakob » Mon Feb 12, 2018 11:13 pm

Will to power is not explained by logic, it is rather the other way around. Logic exists within genealogy.

My point exactly.
Image
For behold, all acts of love and pleasure are my rituals
User avatar
Jakob
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5903
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:23 pm
Location: look at my suit

Re: The Philosophers

Postby Jakob » Mon Feb 12, 2018 11:15 pm

Fancy ways of agreeing with me don't mean you form a challenge.
Up your game.

Don't tell me what I "want" when all I can do is overflow.
I don't have anything to prove.
I can just enjoy, like the Sun, those who bask in my glory.
Image
For behold, all acts of love and pleasure are my rituals
User avatar
Jakob
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5903
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:23 pm
Location: look at my suit

Re: The Philosophers

Postby Jakob » Mon Feb 12, 2018 11:17 pm

Don't you get it? Will and representation.
You just have to like it, unlike Schopie.
Image
For behold, all acts of love and pleasure are my rituals
User avatar
Jakob
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5903
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:23 pm
Location: look at my suit

Re: The Philosophers

Postby Jakob » Mon Feb 12, 2018 11:20 pm

Hey Mitrapriest, do you think thats the case, that Shopenhauer basically understood the principle of will to power as the interpeter-usurper nature behind all appearances, but just dreaded it because he wasn't sanguine enough?

I think thats very possible. Probably Nietzsche hid behind his contradiction to Wagner his real mirror-image. Schopenhauer needs perhaps to be appreciated to fully gain knowledge of VO. I must admit that reading Will and Imagination in 2003 was a feverish experience of power. Of a power too great to be health for me at that point. Perhaps it wasn't even power, but the precise antithesis of it that Schopenhauer first built, as a context for the will to it to crystallize. I can't truly be sure, as reading it was indeed a fever.
Image
For behold, all acts of love and pleasure are my rituals
User avatar
Jakob
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5903
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:23 pm
Location: look at my suit

Re: The Philosophers

Postby Jakob » Mon Feb 12, 2018 11:35 pm

The transition from Kant to Schopenhauer is from the Thing to the Phenomenon.

In Kant, the Thing is Noumenal. In Schopenhauer the Noumenon is destroyed. But the thing survives, and, having shed its immortal coil, appears to Schopenhauer as a terribly flat screen of projection. Nietzsche realized the blissful eternal reality that exists in parallel to all thin appearances; the apparently existing will to such an image, which apparently possesses magical powers to pull off such a thing and have us live inside it.

This is how art mesmerizes, because it shows us the will of the artist. But that is for real art, Greek art, Roman art, and good films and cathedrals. Novels like the Lord of the Rings, too. It mesmerizes because it is superhuman to will something like that into existence. It defies all logic. Why would you need something like that? (War.) Only because the world is will and representation. But we can't know that. So we opt to look at the story and disappear into it and drink in every aspect of life through its vessels. All of it is deep nothingness.

Our will for there not to be nothing mesmerizes us in the presence of artistic genius which is the power for there to be something.

Dionysos terrifies and shakes up the order of things but this chaos is only to distract us, intoxicate us so as to be able to endure the deeper presence, which is the non-being of identity, the fact that all belong to a giant consuming flame; the identity of experience is restored with Apollo.

But what I have deciphered through Apollo is what lies within Dionysos. What is the cause to the consuming flame. It is the very same hardness that Apollo manifests, to allow for the experience of the loss and gain of identity. Identity is nothing but a relatively stable flame. In stormy season, look for you identity in the flickering shadows on the wall. But at the core of identity is power, configuration, ability to demonstrate, to appear.

Phenomenon is the end goal. Theory traces the path toward it. Science tells its story. But the plot has thickened as of late.
Image
For behold, all acts of love and pleasure are my rituals
User avatar
Jakob
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5903
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:23 pm
Location: look at my suit

Re: The Philosophers

Postby Fixed Cross » Tue Feb 13, 2018 1:06 am

Lets reroute this to the old philosophers too.
If Power is the Thing, then Power is the Good.

Power is will to power because being happens through time.
it needs to constantly establish what it is. Thus it perpetuates time, as it weaves a tapestry of it.
the future is power. Thus, the present is a tapestry of timelines begging for our attention. Wills to power are timelines.
Orlog is the war inside of genealogy. Different timelines colliding and birthing third ones, inside of which they compete. Nietzsche prescribes politics vis a vis such drives, he wishes for us to rank our drives, our ancestral gifts, all of them problems, and rank them so as for all problems together to form a solution. The solution is a unified will;

“Let us face ourselves. We are Hyperboreans; we know very well how far off we live. 'Neither by land nor by sea will you find the way to the Hyperboreans'—Pindar already knew this about us. Beyond the north, ice, and death—our life, our happiness. We have discovered happiness, we know the way, we have found the exit out of the labyrinth of thousands of years. Who else has found it? Modern man perhaps? 'I have got lost; I am everything that has got lost,' sighs modern man. This modernity was our sickness: lazy peace, cowardly compromise, the whole virtuous uncleanliness of the modern Yes and No."

Ice is bark of rivers
and roof of the wave
and destruction of the doomed.


“Rather live in the ice than among modern virtues and other south winds! We were intrepid enough, we spared neither ourselves nor others; but for a long time we did not know where to turn with our intrepidity. We became gloomy, we were called fatalists. Our fatum—abundance, tension, the damming of strength. We thirsted for lightning and deeds and were most remote from the happiness of the weakling, 'resignation.' In our atmosphere was a thunderstorm; the nature we are became dark—for we saw no way. Formula for our happiness: a Yes, a No, a straight line, a goal.”
Thunderbolt steers all things.
http://beforethelight.forumotion.com - Tree of Life Academy
Image
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 7421
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: The Philosophers

Postby Mitra-Sauwelios » Tue Feb 13, 2018 1:26 am

Pedro I Rengel wrote:"_Semblance_ of entities, ergo _semblance_ of substance."

Ok. Semblance of what? What is it that these entities are semblances of?


The entities are not semblances of something, something is the semblance of entities. What is? Well, logically it must be that from which that semblance springs, the abyss itself (e.g., the absolute flux).


Because, if you are saying that there is never substance but only the idea of substance, then it is just a made up thing, and the abyss nothing is some made up thing. What makes it up? I have an answer that doesn't use made up substance to explain it: will to power.


Isn't that just a phrase, though? Isn't will to power a made-up thing, and if not, isn't it a substance? I think the will to power is the abyss. Your question of "what makes it up" already suggests to me that you haven't understood the notion of an abyss in the sense I mean. More below.


"'Because magic' is just another way of saying 'because some abyss'."

Neither explains its own genesis. Will to power explains the genesis of both.


If so, then what explains the genesis of will to power?


Or, another way. They are both imaginary, without a link to the real. Now, I have no problem with this. Leibniz's answer was "because God," and he wrote some damn fine philosophy. My problem is hierarchical. You claim Value Ontology stands at the base of will to power. But will to power explains VO without using imaginary solutions, without appealing to substance. Leaving nothing out.


Yes, God is another example of such an abyss, and so is the singularity Arcturus cites. In that post I've quoted multiple times in this thread already, I listed pure flux (as Picht's Nietzsche proffers), nothing (as Heidegger seems to proffer), and a circularity (as VO proffers) as examples. Another example would be an infinite regress, including "X has simply always existed" (turtles all the way down, or will to power all the way down, or whatever).
User avatar
Mitra-Sauwelios
religious philosopher
 
Posts: 119
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2017 5:24 am
Location: Mad Master

Re: The Philosophers

Postby Fixed Cross » Tue Feb 13, 2018 1:47 am

Mankind is more of a soil than a species; to all intents and purposes anyway. Perhaps even a primordial soup. From it in any case things can be tor, such as cultures, in which such pseudo-isolated beings as personalities can exist. But the schizophrenic is simply honest here, this is madness.

In reality we are part of a larger scope of beings, some of us are more like apes, others like tigers, there are many different types of man-kind. There is a richer tapestry than this pyramid of evolution. Not all men are more powerful than an Eagle. Very few in fact. Very few are able to determine their own course. Nietzsches final word is a pledge of brotherhood he is the first to make, inviting others to make it too, facing the earthly side of the horizon. No hypocrisy; where the chin goes up the jaw comes forward. And the rest follows from the curve in the back.

In genealogy is is matter of becoming animals, so as to reveal our godly powers.
Because man is only a bridge from ape to superman, the superman is really the Superanimal.

And thats exactly what it feels like to know the will to power inside out. And we all know this. There is hope at last; man will overcome his frugality at one point in time and become the god of all animals amidst a thriving jungle of truth, and the book will be the king of the animal kingdom.

This is chapter one of such book. The first bit after the introduction, which was nice and succinct was long and dreary. Heidegger is where Tolkien goes on about Tom Bombadil, The Pentad is the Council of Elrond. All narrative is metaphor. I wish to do the Brits the courtesy of recognizing their great storytellers. To connect all good things to each other, build a fellowship of good things.

It was a slow day
And the sun was beating
On the soldiers by the side of the road
There was a bright light
A shattering of shop windows
The bomb in the baby carriage
Was wired to the radio

These are the days of miracle and wonder
This is the long distance call
The way the camera follows us in slo-mo
The way we look to us all

The way we look to a distant constellation
That's dying in a corner of the sky
These are the days of miracle and wonder
And don't cry baby, don't cry
Don't cry

It was a dry wind
And it swept across the desert
And it curled into the circle of birth
And the dead sand
Falling on the children
The mothers and the fathers
And the automatic earth

These are the days of miracle and wonder
This is the long distance call
The way the camera follows us in slo-mo
The way we look to us all, oh yeah

The way we look to a distant constellation
That's dying in a corner of the sky
These are the days of miracle and wonder
And don't cry baby, don't cry
Don't cry

It's a turn-around jump shot
It's everybody jump start
It's every generation throws a hero up the pop charts
Medicine is magical and magical is art
The boy in the bubble
And the baby with the baboon heart

And I believe
These are the days of lasers in the jungle
Lasers in the jungle somewhere
Staccato signals of constant information
A loose affiliation of millionaires
And billionaires and baby


(Paul Simon, the Boy in the Bubble)

All solid threads are woven together in a basket of truth, in which the infant form of a real human culture is sent along they river of fate.
"The difference between fate and destiny is preparation." IV

Give the Earth her leverage and she will share it with you.
- Lady of the Lake
Thunderbolt steers all things.
http://beforethelight.forumotion.com - Tree of Life Academy
Image
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 7421
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: The Philosophers

Postby Mitra-Sauwelios » Tue Feb 13, 2018 2:04 am

Jakob wrote:Hey Mitrapriest, do you think thats the case, that Shopenhauer basically understood the principle of will to power as the interpeter-usurper nature behind all appearances, but just dreaded it because he wasn't sanguine enough?


Well, in WP 550, which I quoted in full a couple of pages back, Nietzsche seems to suggest the doctrine of the will to power in not so many words, using the word "intention" instead of the phrase "will to power". And "intention" is Absicht in the German, which derives from the verb absehen in its use of es auf etwas abgesehen haben, "to be out for something" with the added sense of "to be on the lookout for something".

However, elsewhere (can't tell you where exactly, as I'm at work; I'm pretty sure it's on several occasions), Nietzsche criticises Schopenhauer for musing about the will without a "to". For Schopenhauer, it seems, it was just blind will. Nietzsche, on the other hand, seems to merge will and representation (as Martha Nussbaum points out, this can even be seen in the BT already, where Nietzsche characterises the Apollonian as well as the Dionysian as a drive): compare BGE 19 (which is one of the passages I was thinking of before, I realise now), where Nietzsche says that "in every willing, there is [...] the feeling of the state towards which" and "the feeling of this [...] 'towards' itself" (among other feelings); and not just feelings, but also thinking.

Other than that, _yes_.


I think thats very possible. Probably Nietzsche hid behind his contradiction to Wagner his real mirror-image. Schopenhauer needs perhaps to be appreciated to fully gain knowledge of VO. I must admit that reading Will and Imagination in 2003 was a feverish experience of power. Of a power too great to be health for me at that point. Perhaps it wasn't even power, but the precise antithesis of it that Schopenhauer first built, as a context for the will to it to crystallize. I can't truly be sure, as reading it was indeed a fever.


I have a German edition lying around somewhere if you want. Also, Lampert's new book has just come out, and it's in large part about Nietzsche's relation to Schopenhauer and Wagner.
User avatar
Mitra-Sauwelios
religious philosopher
 
Posts: 119
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2017 5:24 am
Location: Mad Master

Re: The Philosophers

Postby Pedro I Rengel » Tue Feb 13, 2018 3:10 am

"If so, then what explains the genesis of will to power?"

Nothing does, because nothing has to. There is nothing from which will to power comes. It is itself the begenning, where all begins.

Because, and here is what the key is, it is where anything begins to matter. And nothing is that doesn't matter. Go ahead, tell me something that doesn't matter. The very idea is laughable: even if magic and you said something that doesn't matter, I wouldn't care, you wouldn't care, nobody would care. It would be as if you didn't say it.

Now, if that's the abyss you mean, where one attempts to will nothing, there is a reason it looks back. And this whole thing, the abyss, looking at it... is will to power. Created by will to power willing will to power.

Will to power has no need of it to be explained.

There is no absolute flux. There is no being without direction. And in the end, that is all will to power is: the directionality of existence. Or, to a poetic mind like Jakob's, the existence of directionality.

Jakob, you say I am saying the same thing as you in fancy ways. It is VO that says the same thing as will to power, but with one addition. This addition already makes it a product of will to power rather than will to power. One of the unscrutable infinity of products (a good one, says I). It is the static moment where a thing already exists before it acts: that which values and/or is valued.
Pedro I Rengel
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2018 2:55 pm

Re: The Philosophers

Postby Mitra-Sauwelios » Tue Feb 13, 2018 4:19 am

Pedro I Rengel wrote:"If so, then what explains the genesis of will to power?"

Nothing does, because nothing has to. There is nothing from which will to power comes. It is itself the beginning, where all begins.


It was a trick question, being secretly rhetorical. Will to power comes from nothing; will to power comes from itself...


Because, and here is what the key is, it is where anything begins to matter. And nothing is that doesn't matter. Go ahead, tell me something that doesn't matter. The very idea is laughable: even if magic and you said something that doesn't matter, I wouldn't care, you wouldn't care, nobody would care. It would be as if you didn't say it.


Isn't that just another way of saying it isn't of _value_ to anyone?

https://www.etymonline.com/word/matter


Now, if that's the abyss you mean, where one attempts to will nothing, there is a reason it looks back. And this whole thing, the abyss, looking at it... is will to power. Created by will to power willing will to power.


Apparently.


Will to power has no need of it to be explained.

There is no absolute flux. There is no being without direction. And in the end, that is all will to power is: the directionality of existence. Or, to a poetic mind like Jakob's, the existence of directionality.


I'd say, following Picht, that a "direction" (and compare "directive"!) is a telos-eidos, an Absicht. Aren't such "ideals" themselves, too, phenomena though? And thereby in an eternal flux, so that the direction of the flux is itself also in flux?
User avatar
Mitra-Sauwelios
religious philosopher
 
Posts: 119
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2017 5:24 am
Location: Mad Master

Re: The Philosophers

Postby Fixed Cross » Tue Feb 13, 2018 1:22 pm

Pedro I Rengel wrote:Jakob, you say I am saying the same thing as you in fancy ways. It is VO that says the same thing as will to power, but with one addition. This addition already makes it a product of will to power rather than will to power. One of the unscrutable infinity of products (a good one, says I). It is the static moment where a thing already exists before it acts: that which values and/or is valued.

What you're say is more or less "You can actually use a sword to smear peanut butter on toast and so many other cool things, not just to fight."

VO is the meaning of the WtP. There is no other meaning.
Thunderbolt steers all things.
http://beforethelight.forumotion.com - Tree of Life Academy
Image
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 7421
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: The Philosophers

Postby Fixed Cross » Tue Feb 13, 2018 2:22 pm

You see Nietzsche stands in a chain of thinkers. There is a genealogy to my idea that extends all the way back to Thales. In terms of pure intellectual might=right, one should see Nietzsche as leading up to this here philosophy.

If you wish to have some sort of alternative history, then go for it. But you won't succeed.
I rather suggest you read the works of your philosopher that you havent read yet.
Thunderbolt steers all things.
http://beforethelight.forumotion.com - Tree of Life Academy
Image
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 7421
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: The Philosophers

Postby Fixed Cross » Tue Feb 13, 2018 2:32 pm

There is no absolute flux. There is no being without direction. And in the end, that is all will to power is: the directionality of existence. Or, to a poetic mind like Jakob's, the existence of directionality.


No dude. Your cleverness doesn't cut it. You also need heart.
There is no directionally without an objective.

AND NOT EVERY OBJECTIVE WILL DO.

Hence, valuing, and not just "moving".
Thunderbolt steers all things.
http://beforethelight.forumotion.com - Tree of Life Academy
Image
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 7421
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: The Philosophers

Postby Fixed Cross » Tue Feb 13, 2018 2:42 pm

Western philosophy is a monolithic effort. There are no side-branches that become their own thing. They either die off or become expressions of the main stem.

The main stem is the power to identify nature. The balls to do that.

You can say "a man is also a man because of his gold'n locks, not just his balls" all you want.
And allow me to make up more funny metaphors.
But Im right, might, so this fucking plight is mine.

The poetic mind, the mathematical-logical mind and the comedic mind are akin. They are all actual mind. The rest is just banal faith in grammar and the arrogance of thinking that has anything do with logic.
Thunderbolt steers all things.
http://beforethelight.forumotion.com - Tree of Life Academy
Image
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 7421
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: The Philosophers

Postby Fixed Cross » Tue Feb 13, 2018 3:03 pm

If you want it poetic

Image

"valuing"
Thunderbolt steers all things.
http://beforethelight.forumotion.com - Tree of Life Academy
Image
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 7421
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

PreviousNext

Return to Non-Philosophical Chat



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

cron