James S Saint

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.

Re: James S Saint

Postby barbarianhorde » Wed Aug 28, 2019 9:13 pm

obsrvr524 wrote:
barbarianhorde wrote:James completely opposed socialism because he opposes anything besides the Constitution of the US, which he intended to amend with this laborious procedure of perfectly justified adaptation to new circumstances which is partly outlined above. He didn't intend to begin from scratch.

Are you referring to his proposal to make US laws obligated to their statutory goals? I' not finding anything else concerning James being a fanatic about the USC.

Lol I spent years discussing it with him in dozens of threads. If thats all unsearchable, forget it, its pointless.

James S Saint » Mon May 10, 2010 4:43 pm wrote:The US Constitution needs merely ONE small change from its original form in order to repair all damages that have taken place as well as rise to far, far greater heights.

That one change is merely to require that the reasoning behind each and every law be recorded for public view and open debate.
James S Saint » Wed Apr 30, 2014 8:41 am wrote:All of that is exactly antithetical to the New USA under Global Socialism.
And that is why you couldn't even begin to go in that direction.
The G8 would shut you down in a heart beat.

But yes, that is the way it was supposed to be. People in authority were NOT allowed even as much freedom of speech as private citizens due to having more authority. Just like on this forum, once you become a mod, you have an obligation to be more careful of what you are saying to or about people. But also like almost every forum, mods, people in authority, immediately begin to dictate what others can say while allowing themselves more freedom to say whatever they want.

The intent of the US Constitution was to be the opposite of the historical tendencies toward totalitarian socialism. The USA was strictly anti-socialist. Yet now, due to leaving a very small window open, the USA is merely pretending to not be socialist and preparing for marshal law when they finally can no longer pretend (pretending is expensive).

He really prophetically hit the mark on that one. They aren't hiding it any more. Trump bumped their timeline.

He wasn't prophetic, he was just not sedated. Neither am or was I ever sedated, I feel anyone could have seen this coming.

Trump made sure its not going to happen under your radar. In their insane response to Trumps election the totalitarians have revealed themselves to you and to about a billion other reasonably sentient humans.
It is true that liberty is precious; so precious that it must be carefully rationed.
~ Владимир Ильич Ульянов Ленин

THE HORNED ONE
User avatar
barbarianhorde
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2454
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 2:26 pm
Location: VALUATOR LOGIC

Re: James S Saint

Postby obsrvr524 » Thu Aug 29, 2019 10:08 am

barbarianhorde wrote:
obsrvr524 wrote:
barbarianhorde wrote:James completely opposed socialism because he opposes anything besides the Constitution of the US, which he intended to amend with this laborious procedure of perfectly justified adaptation to new circumstances which is partly outlined above. He didn't intend to begin from scratch.

Are you referring to his proposal to make US laws obligated to their statutory goals? I' not finding anything else concerning James being a fanatic about the USC.

Lol I spent years discussing it with him in dozens of threads. If thats all unsearchable, forget it, its pointless.

Then could you provide a link to any of it?
obsrvr524
 
Posts: 180
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:03 am

Re: James S Saint

Postby barbarianhorde » Wed Sep 04, 2019 4:03 pm

Could be it was mostly in PMs actually, but definitely not just.
There be some in the beforethelight.forumotion links.

In short his view was that the Consitutions only flaw is that it doesn't have a proper process for accepting and rejecting amendments. His whole deal here with me and mine at first was to try and create a hermetically rational consensus-building protocol, which he wanted to see realized somehow into a legislature of the future.
It is true that liberty is precious; so precious that it must be carefully rationed.
~ Владимир Ильич Ульянов Ленин

THE HORNED ONE
User avatar
barbarianhorde
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2454
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 2:26 pm
Location: VALUATOR LOGIC

Re: James S Saint

Postby Magnus Anderson » Sun Oct 06, 2019 12:16 am

Power is "the ability or capacity to do something or act in a particular way".
That's Google.

One can think of Superman who has numerous super powers such as "the ability to fly" or Heracles who was able to hold the world on his shoulders.

WTP, short for Will to Power, is the idea that everything we do we do in order to attain as much power as possible.

This means that we'd rather live a life that is short but powerful rather than a life that is long but powerless.

This is different from what JSS thinks to be the case. Using Nietzsche's naming convention, you can say that his position is WTMIJOT (short for Will to Maximum Integral Joy Over Time.)

JSS would rather live a life that is short and powerless but high in IJOT than a life that is long and powerful but low in IJOT.

The difference is a very subtle one.
User avatar
Magnus Anderson
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3787
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:26 pm

Re: James S Saint

Postby promethean75 » Sun Oct 06, 2019 1:16 am

There is also the WTETMASBIFOM (will to eat this mushroom and Swiss burger in front of me).
promethean75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1657
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:10 pm

Re: James S Saint

Postby Magnus Anderson » Sun Oct 06, 2019 4:17 am

Is it a universal will, Mr Frank?
User avatar
Magnus Anderson
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3787
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:26 pm

Re: James S Saint

Postby promethean75 » Sun Oct 06, 2019 2:42 pm

That's not fair, ANDY. I haven't posted a Zappa song in at least a month, so stop sweatin me, haus.
promethean75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1657
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:10 pm

Re: James S Saint

Postby obsrvr524 » Sun Oct 13, 2019 10:41 am

Magnus Anderson wrote:WTP, short for Will to Power, is the idea that everything we do we do in order to attain as much power as possible.

This means that we'd rather live a life that is short but powerful rather than a life that is long but powerless.

This is different from what JSS thinks to be the case.

I never saw the "Will to Power" thing having anything to do with how long someone lived although the greater the power, the better the chance of using it for longevity.

Using Nietzsche's naming convention, you can say that his position is WTMIJOT (short for Will to Maximum Integral Joy Over Time.)

JSS would rather live a life that is short and powerless but high in IJOT than a life that is long and powerful but low in IJOT.

The difference is a very subtle one.

Perhaps I am misunderstanding something but doesn't IJOT require longevity?
In Sight of SAM, I Am: James S Saint » Thu Jun 25, 2015 6:12 pm wrote:Acquisition is not the goal. SAM maintains focus on Maintaining = Anentropy (anti-corruption). It does that through its decision making process which involves IJOT, an ongoing calculation of the eternal maintaining of joy throughout its populous.

And then he also defines "joy":
Challenge to the Agonists: James S Saint » Sat Oct 21, 2017 9:11 pm wrote:Joy ≡ inner perception of progress, or conquest - offspring of the Perception of Hope - Positive psychological affectance
AO vs VO: a friendly challenge: James S Saint » Sun Oct 29, 2017 11:42 pm wrote:all of the insane efforts of the history of homosapiens sprang forth as he attempts threats and false hopes in an effort to control all things. All joy is caused by an inner perception of progress toward that harmony and hope (thus the continual effort). Such is the very make of the deepest devoted love, survival

IJOT seems to be an idea that forms what he considered the "supreme goal", MIJOT.
Democratic vs undemocratic: James S Saint » Thu Aug 03, 2017 2:53 pm wrote:Since MIJOT, Maximum Integral of Joy Over Time, is the "supreme goal", all reasoning is based upon that concern.

So MIJOT must then require a maximum power to form eternal survival in a state of highest joy.

I am not seeing the "short and powerless" that you mention. He has very many other references concerning the idea. I hadn't read many of them so I am glad you brought it up.
obsrvr524
 
Posts: 180
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:03 am

Re: James S Saint

Postby Magnus Anderson » Sun Oct 27, 2019 8:51 pm

WTP and WTMIJOT (an ancronym I invented for the sake of convenience) are merely two different ways of valuing i.e. two different ways of ranking lives. They are two different formulas for calculating the value of any given life.

WTMIJOT is well defined and learning how to calculate the value of any given life is straightforward. You need not concern yourself with how JSS defines the word "joy". We all know what happiness is. We know it's a specific type of feeling and that's enough. In order to calculate the value of any individual's life, all you have to do is measure how happy they are at regular intervals. You could represent happiness on a scale from -100 to +100. Negative numbers would represent pain and positive would represent pleasure. At the end of their life, you'd take these numbers and sum them up, and the result would be IJOT -- Integral of Joy Over Time -- which would also be the value of their life.

The question you're asking is: does IJOT require longevity?

Suppose you have a man who died at 40 but who experienced around 100 points of joy each year. The value of his life would be equal to 40 x 100 = 4,000. Compare that to a man who lived to be 100 but who experienced around 20 points of joy each year. The value of his life would be equal to 100 x 20 = 2,000. According to JSS, the man who died at 40 had a much better life than the man who lived to be 100. This shows that according to WTMIJOT not every life that is long is better than every life that is short. WTMIJOT does not prioritize longevity. An eternal life of hell is not better than a finite life of heaven.

On the other hand, JSS does think that a society consisting of individuals who are very good at maximizing their IJOT is much more durable than any other. But that's a separate issue.
User avatar
Magnus Anderson
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3787
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:26 pm

Re: James S Saint

Postby obsrvr524 » Tue Oct 29, 2019 8:59 am

Magnus Anderson wrote:WTP and WTMIJOT (an ancronym I invented for the sake of convenience) are merely two different ways of valuing i.e. two different ways of ranking lives. They are two different formulas for calculating the value of any given life.

I believed but had to verify the thought that Nietsche's WTP was primarily about social and political power rather than personal power - the will of the people to rise up and take over.
Compare Nietzsche’s concept of the 'Will to Power' wrote:Nietzsche has a completely different outlook than everyone else has. He believes that the will to power means “manipulating characters of fragility and frailty, to indulge on one’s supremacy, and to pamper one’s self with praise, are admirable traits of the good” (O’Sullivan and Pecorino).

That form of WTP is what the current democratic or socialist deep state party in the US Congress is attempting to use to overthrow President Trump. It is largely associated with James' PHT and hidden subtle affectance.

President Trump along with a few republicans are more about your WTMIJOT. And Trump is winning for that reason. WTMIJOT is about a functioning momentum and is more structured, goal oriented, and openly solid. WTMIJOT seems more associated with James' signature statement - "Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony". That is very precisely what Trump has been doing against the US Deep State, solidifying a foundation for long term national and even global security.

Recently I have realized some interesting associations between Trump, the globalists, and James. But that is another subject.

Magnus Anderson wrote:WTMIJOT is well defined and learning how to calculate the value of any given life is straightforward. You need not concern yourself with how JSS defines the word "joy". We all know what happiness is. We know it's a specific type of feeling and that's enough. In order to calculate the value of any individual's life, all you have to do is measure how happy they are at regular intervals. You could represent happiness on a scale from -100 to +100. Negative numbers would represent pain and positive would represent pleasure. At the end of their life, you'd take these numbers and sum them up, and the result would be IJOT -- Integral of Joy Over Time -- which would also be the value of their life.

I guess that I can agree but I'm not comfortable with how you use the word "value". It seems to me that value is something that a person assigns to something else in reference to their own goals rather than something they would assign to their own life. But I think that I know what you mean.

Magnus Anderson wrote:The question you're asking is: does IJOT require longevity?

Suppose you have a man who died at 40 but who experienced around 100 points of joy each year. The value of his life would be equal to 40 x 100 = 4,000. Compare that to a man who lived to be 100 but who experienced around 20 points of joy each year. The value of his life would be equal to 100 x 20 = 2,000. According to JSS, the man who died at 40 had a much better life than the man who lived to be 100. This shows that according to WTMIJOT not every life that is long is better than every life that is short. WTMIJOT does not prioritize longevity. An eternal life of hell is not better than a finite life of heaven.

I wasn't asking that question. I was stating that MIJOT must require it. In this case the "M" is important. In order to maximize the "integral" (or the sum of those measures you mentioned) the most time must be allowed, the greatest longevity.

If both person A and person B get 20 points every year but B lives longer than A, person B gained a higher MIJOT score (or "value to their life").

And I agree that according to James, if person B was certain to get only negative scores for the rest of his life, his greater score would be acquired by dying sooner. I am going to have to see what he had to say about mercy killing.

And now I have to wonder if Abu Bakr was absolutely certain of a miserable future or merely suicidal.

Magnus Anderson wrote:On the other hand, JSS does think that a society consisting of individuals who are very good at maximizing their IJOT is much more durable than any other. But that's a separate issue.

Yes that does seem to be the case and gets back to Trump's solidifying of the USA through a WTMIJOT or "Clarify .. to Anentropic Harmony" strategy.

More everyday I'm getting that gut feeling that James knew far more about the deep state in America than meets the eye. He stated that Trump was going to win but that they will try to give it to Hillary - exacty what they are still trying to do.
obsrvr524
 
Posts: 180
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:03 am

Previous

Return to Non-Philosophical Chat



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users