The Philosophers

Defenders of the Earth
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 5478
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : Freedom

PostSubject: New idea about gravity Mon Jan 02, 2017 4:57 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
bigthink.com/paul-ratner/remarka … -was-wrong

Damn this is interesting.

If I understand this correctly, this guy is attempting to derive gravity from quantum-level distributions of information and how “volume” really just means, at the fundamental level, a kind of surface-area which can be most basically described qua area or “3D area (volume)” as the plank length ^2 (to get the most basic unit of area) * the total number of informational bits or qbits (quantum bit of info, a little stabilization or polarization). This would actually seem to break down 3D into 2D, or rather just unite them together, because the planck length ^2 is the smallest possible physical area, and would have no real dimensionality to speak of in so far as it can build up into larger conglomerate structures as either 2D or 3D geometries, but ultimately either a 2D or 3D geometry can always be reduced down to the exact same model of little planck lengths ^2 as total number of qbits.

2img.net/h/s30.postimg.cc/3tkri … _25_AM.png

Look at how he relates all these equations to each other, to finally reach a derivation of Newton’s equation of gravity. Working backwards, force is related to mass * acceleration, and then this is related through temperature to average energy in the equipartition theorem, which is then related back to the total number of qbits with regard to surface area over planck length ^2, to arrive at the holographic principle whereby a 2D geometry produces what appears as or acts like a volumed 3D space, again because of how a 3D space can be broken down into “1D” qbits that combine to create 2D geometries. This makes me think of the classic logical problem of how do you ever actually move from 1D to 2D, and from 2D to 3D, when you can’t even imagine 1D without also imagining a 2D reference frame or context (try thinking about a 1D (pure line) that doesnt exist in 2D, it isnt possible), likewise how do you take a 2D plane and think about it without 3D (if you try to do so, the “plane” shrinks out of existence as its third dimension is impossibilized). Likewise, a mathematical point (something with no dimensions) is equally logically impossible to clearly conceive.

So instead of that mathematical abstraction, which is really just a language of approximation, we have planck lengths ^2 that form the basic unit of “space”, the smallest unit of area into which a single qbit of information falls. This qbit already includes two aspects, length and width, namely a planck length on either side, and therefore is binary or polarized (because these two dimensions cannot be reduced to each other any further; or rather, they are “reduced” to each other only in so far as they are integrated upwardly into a single unit or value which includes both of them at once): now we can think of space itself as basically just an infinite stretch of these little planck lengths ^2 each of which can contain one binary qbit of information, and then that information relates to information in other little qbit-areas. This means that information stacks upward into larger configurations, these new larger ones are derived from the smaller out of which they are assembled, and therefore implicitly indicate these smaller ones; eventually you have informational geometries that prescribe a kind of “boundary” around themselves, where the boundary or edge is distinct from what is inside that area, and this is what creates a “surface area”; the surface area, once created, is therefore what gives rise holographically to the notion of volume or 3D space.

This also reminds me of an idea of gravity at Parodites wrote about a couple of years ago, where gravity is the result of quantum pressure whereby larger aggregate objects are pressurized toward those other objects to which they are statistically more likely to collide, because when such objects are larger they have less degrees of freedom relative to smaller such objects and therefore smaller objects tend to escape the quantum cloud while larger objects tend to pressurize toward the center of that cloud (if I am understanding his idea). This is basically describing the same thing as this physicist is describing, I think: “volume” is created holographically when qbit-level geometries “stack” or integrate-combine in sufficient number and complexity to produce derivative quantum objects that are capable of prescribing a boundary around themselves, namely a “surface area”, and therefore for other objects of their own scale and beyond are therefore encountered as if they were “volumed” or 3D; for all such objects, they are always interacting with each other stochastically and as a result and within a given cloud of such objects (a quantum geometrical space) larger objects will end up being pressurized toward the center due to the fact these objects have less degrees of freedom relative to the smaller objects within the cloud, therefore larger objects will tend to collide with (“be attracted to”) each other more than smaller objects will tend to collide with each other (but note that if you varied the number of smaller and/or larger objects enough, you could potentially reverse this situation, at least in theory). This statistical emergent effect of larger objects pressurizing toward the center of informational-geometric clouds is what we experience as the gravitational attraction of massed objects, and it must also be what holds matter together at the sub-atomic level (at the level before electromagnetic forces take over to molecularly bind things).

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

“Cause I’m just a man… flesh and venom.” -Cowboy Troy
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Sisyphus
Path
Path

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

Gravity sucks.

Fixed Cross
Doric basterd
Doric basterd
avatar

Posts : 6666
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : the black ships

PostSubject: Visible effects of orgone generators Fri Feb 03, 2017 9:22 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster

quebecorgone.com/image/data/ … plants.jpg[/img]

quebecorgone.com/image/data/ … garden.jpg[/img]

quebecorgone.com/image/data/ … gonite.jpg[/img]

quebecorgone.com/docs/image/effe … urvegs.jpg[/img]

quebecorgone.com/docs/image/effe … zh4odg.jpg[/img]

quebecorgone.com/en/visible- … -of-orgone[/img]

quebecorgone.com/en/visible- … -of-orgone

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

• Thucydides
  Back to top Go down
  View user profile Send private message Send e-mail Online
  Defenders of the Earth
  Tower
  Tower
  avatar

Posts : 5478
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : Freedom

PostSubject: Re: Visible effects of orgone generators Fri Feb 03, 2017 12:01 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Wow. How do you recommend I learn how to make my own orgon generator?

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

“Cause I’m just a man… flesh and venom.” -Cowboy Troy
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Doric basterd
Doric basterd
avatar

Posts : 6666
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : the black ships

PostSubject: Re: Visible effects of orgone generators Fri Feb 03, 2017 1:53 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Here’s a classical method of basic orgonite I think
youtube.com/watch?v=12LC8S8pAWA
The lady that makes my stuff is riduculously sophisticated and generous he orders all kinds of metals and minerals and crystals to enhance the things, they look like artworks beyond postmodernism

What my friend always uses is a (double) coil, which she turns out of copper wire.
She in turn is in awe of these people
ethericwarriors.com/gifting-compendium
this site has a forum I think, or at least links to it, where people who make this and gift it write about it - I havent been there but I have seen her write after a mission.
They’re very serious and yet light hearted. You hav eto do with such overwhelming odds against you and such a great deal of mockery - or it is just that the orgone uplifts - or all of that is tied in.

Anyway it’s remarakbly simple to make this stuff, but to get it right, to make it powerful and specific, this comes down to will and skill.

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

• Thucydides
  Back to top Go down
  View user profile Send private message Send e-mail Online
  Fixed Cross
  Doric basterd
  Doric basterd
  avatar

Posts : 6666
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : the black ships

PostSubject: Re: Visible effects of orgone generators Fri Feb 03, 2017 1:54 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Then you have the electrically powered ones, these are fucking insane. But you have to ask them, Ive never even built a circuit. To my shame…

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

• Thucydides
  Back to top Go down
  View user profile Send private message Send e-mail Online
  Fixed Cross
  Doric basterd
  Doric basterd
  avatar

Posts : 6666
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : the black ships

PostSubject: Re: Visible effects of orgone generators Fri Feb 03, 2017 1:56 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Oh, you dont have to believe the things these people believe.
Ive learned to not dismiss some of these things either -
but it is irrelevant.
The orgonite formula is atomic - a simple acknowledgement of the division between metals and non metals. And then the coil to set it in motion.

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

Fixed Cross
Doric basterd
Doric basterd
avatar

Posts : 6666
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : the black ships

PostSubject: Big Bangism Fri Feb 17, 2017 5:08 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
The Big Bang is the greatest chunk of horseshit ever devised.
Atheists believe in it. They believe in an even more irrational notion than God.
God is simply not built of reason, you arrive at it through a more complete psychic process. It is a stage of mind, a humanity. And the poems about gods creating the world, are all about elements and logics, not about bearded old men.
The Big Bang however, this is fully and actively contrarational. I is onsensical to posit a beginning of time including a state before that, which was supposedly singular and yet gave birth to something that is not - so, you mean, god exists, we just call him “science” now, and destroy science, but dont mind because we’re morons anyway not to be trusted with it… the belief of the Last Man: a seismic event in time space occurred, thus this was the god that died and we are now ashamed to believe in, because ae sin and do nothing but sin and waste out lives. Fuck Big Bangers -

The error: tto push causal logic through a state defined as negative of the causalitylogics you are working with, so as to arrive at the conclusion that everything was created in an instance out of a timeless all-being.

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

• Thucydides
  Back to top Go down
  View user profile Send private message Send e-mail Online
  Fixed Cross
  Doric basterd
  Doric basterd
  avatar

Posts : 6666
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : the black ships

PostSubject: Re: Big Bangism Fri Feb 17, 2017 5:15 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Of course whatever exists came into being gradually, as we very well know it does, as we can see how stars are formed. No doubt, atoms are formed in the same way - gradually the sheer possibility of existence assimilates by attraction, possibility enhancing possibility, collapsing into near-certainties on the atomic scale, remaining in the realm of pure potential on the electrical scale, the uncertainty principle is the veil that has possibility-as-such recede beyond the horizon of the urge for certainty that life, and consciousness is. “God” is merely the acknowledgement that there is an abyss where that veil is. Psychosis is merely that abyss.

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

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

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

PostSubject: Re: Big Bangism Sat Feb 18, 2017 2:40 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Yes, the Big Bang is stupidity. The truth lies with those who imagine how the universe was created. I mean, really, God created the entire universe in six days and rested on the seventh. God created everything exactly as it is, the universe is static.

Only those who believe in religions know the truth. Science knows nothing.

But then, over one hundred creation myths exist and every one says that theirs is the only truth. No room for questions. Mythical facts are the Truth!
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Doric basterd
Doric basterd
avatar

Posts : 6666
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : the black ships

PostSubject: Re: Big Bangism Sat Feb 18, 2017 2:56 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Sisyphus wrote:
Yes, the Big Bang is stupidity. The truth lies with those who imagine how the universe was created. I mean, really, God created the entire universe in six days and rested on the seventh. God created everything exactly as it is, the universe is static.

Only those who believe in religions know the truth. Science knows nothing.

But then, over one hundred creation myths exist and every one says that theirs is the only truth. No room for questions. Mythical facts are the Truth!

Well now my friend, you are having a bit of a religious conversion late in age? Haha. But no, you are wrong.
I realize youre not much interested in physics, you dont need to respond to posts you dont understand. That is like the media responding to Trump. Youre making a bit of a show based on smallish beliefs, and you ignored my actual words.

Dont worry, it is no big deal but please, keep to the standards of the forum and address reality.

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

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

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

PostSubject: Re: Big Bangism Sat Feb 18, 2017 3:55 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Fixed Cross wrote:
Sisyphus wrote:
Yes, the Big Bang is stupidity. The truth lies with those who imagine how the universe was created. I mean, really, God created the entire universe in six days and rested on the seventh. God created everything exactly as it is, the universe is static.

Only those who believe in religions know the truth. Science knows nothing.

But then, over one hundred creation myths exist and every one says that theirs is the only truth. No room for questions. Mythical facts are the Truth!

Well now my friend, you are having a bit of a religious conversion late in age? Haha. But no, you are wrong.
I realize youre not much interested in physics, you dont need to respond to posts you dont understand. That is like the media responding to Trump. Youre making a bit of a show based on smallish beliefs, and you ignored my actual words.

Dont worry, it is no big deal but please, keep to the standards of the forum and address reality.

But the problem is not your total knowledge of everything but rather the fact that I am not wrong.

Religious conversion I am having is it? You have lost it as you are suggesting something that doesn’t exist. Of course, you do that all the time with your various gods so it’s nothing new.

And BTW, when a discussion sinks to the level of attacking the individual instead of the topic one has already lost the argument.

You negated the theory of a Big Bang. Therefore you are saying that Einstein and Georges Lemaître are wrong any only you are correct. How vain!!!
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Doric basterd
Doric basterd
avatar

Posts : 6666
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : the black ships

PostSubject: Re: Big Bangism Sat Feb 18, 2017 4:11 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Let it out.

Einstein is a god to you, an unquestionable authority who created your truth, which you are not allowed to think about critically.

This is precisely what I mean.

How arrogant I am to the religious, for thinking for myself…
haha.

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

• Thucydides
  Back to top Go down
  View user profile Send private message Send e-mail Online
  Fixed Cross
  Doric basterd
  Doric basterd
  avatar

Posts : 6666
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : the black ships

PostSubject: Re: Big Bangism Sat Feb 18, 2017 4:16 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I was so right, again…
I need only to mention a criticism of the Big Bang theory, and we have an uprising with passion and without argument.
It is sort of special to so easily provoke the normally levelheaded Sisyphus to a dogmatic rant by just stating a fact about logic.

This is why I called the OP “Big Bangism” - I know it is a religious anti-logical doctrine defended only by the passion of faith.

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

• Thucydides
  Back to top Go down
  View user profile Send private message Send e-mail Online
  Defenders of the Earth
  Tower
  Tower
  avatar

Posts : 5478
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : Freedom

PostSubject: Re: Big Bangism Sat Feb 18, 2017 4:18 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I am generally ok with the idea of the Big Bang, namely that it could have taken place, although I do not accept the ontological implication that this was “the beginning of reality”. Reality has no beginning, that’s what’s makes it real-ity.

The observation that the universe around us appears to be expanding gives some evidence for the notion of Big Bang. I also like the idea that there were various stages of production of the various elements over time as the universe expanded and cooled. I think it’s an interesting theory, and I don’t yet have any reason to think the Big Bang never took place, but of course I’m not religious about it either.

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

“Cause I’m just a man… flesh and venom.” -Cowboy Troy
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Sisyphus
Path
Path

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

PostSubject: Re: Big Bangism Sat Feb 18, 2017 4:25 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Fixed Cross wrote:
Let it out.

Einstein is a god to you, an unquestionable authority who created your truth, which you are not allowed to think about critically.

This is precisely what I mean.

How arrogant I am to the religious, for thinking for myself…
haha.

Great. I’m glad we aren’t taking our disagreements personal.

Actually, I know very little about Einstein or his work.

He did say that invoking god into his hypothesis of the Big Bang was his biggest blunder. And I agree with him.

And I don’t agree with Hawking that the universe was create from nothing. It was created out of Singularity.

And believe me, I question what I do not understand but feel a need to understand or new information that is contradictory to my present understanding.

And yes, if we are living our life according to someone else’s standards then all we are doing is living another life for that or those other people. The key to living is to self-actualize.

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

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

PostSubject: Re: Big Bangism Sat Feb 18, 2017 4:30 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Fixed Cross wrote:
I was so right, again…
I need only to mention a criticism of the Big Bang theory, and we have an uprising with passion and without argument.
It is sort of special to so easily provoke the normally levelheaded Sisyphus to a dogmatic rant by just stating a fact about logic.

This is why I called the OP “Big Bangism” - I know it is a religious anti-logical doctrine defended only by the passion of faith.

No, Fixed Cross, you are wrong again. Sorry.

Passion? I am without passion but I have a very healthy ego.

So your alternative to the Big Bang is magic. Yeah, very logical

So you are seeing yourself in what you are presenting me to be. Isn’t that some type of psychological disorder?

At some point you might consider presenting a definition of the word “religion”. I think you might have it confused with the term “belief system”.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Defenders of the Earth
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 5478
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : Freedom

PostSubject: Re: Big Bangism Sat Feb 18, 2017 4:33 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
And we should be careful connecting the Big Bang to atheism, because many religious people also believe the Big Bang. They think it was God’s way of setting things in motion.

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

“Cause I’m just a man… flesh and venom.” -Cowboy Troy
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Sisyphus
Path
Path

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

PostSubject: Re: Big Bangism Sat Feb 18, 2017 4:38 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Thrasymachus wrote:
I am generally ok with the idea of the Big Bang, namely that it could have taken place, although I do not accept the ontological implication that this was “the beginning of reality”. Reality has no beginning, that’s what’s makes it real-ity.

The observation that the universe around us appears to be expanding gives some evidence for the notion of Big Bang. I also like the idea that there were various stages of production of the various elements over time as the universe expanded and cooled. I think it’s an interesting theory, and I don’t yet have any reason to think the Big Bang never took place, but of course I’m not religious about it either.

Well pointed out. And science still has many unanswered questions, some of which will never be answered.

But it is none-the-less the best theory available without the magic of creation by some god.

Everything that presently exists was at some point within the boundaries of Singularity. That’s a bunch of stuff. How did all that stuff get into the boundaries of Singularity? Blame it on Black Holes.

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

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

PostSubject: Re: Big Bangism Sat Feb 18, 2017 4:40 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Thrasymachus wrote:
And we should be careful connecting the Big Bang to atheism, because many religious people also believe the Big Bang. They think it was God’s way of setting things in motion.

Totally agree. The same is true regarding the fact of evolution.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Defenders of the Earth
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 5478
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : Freedom

PostSubject: Re: Big Bangism Sat Feb 18, 2017 4:44 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I have met religious atheists for whom the Big Bang is a sort of creation myth, thus I very much get Fixed’s point here. But I prefer to ignore such people and focus on the sane ones, of which admittedly there seem to be few.

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

“Cause I’m just a man… flesh and venom.” -Cowboy Troy
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Sisyphus
Path
Path

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

PostSubject: Re: Big Bangism Sat Feb 18, 2017 4:53 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Thrasymachus wrote:
I have met religious atheists for whom the Big Bang is a sort of creation myth, thus I very much get Fixed’s point here. But I prefer to ignore such people and focus on the sane ones, of which admittedly there seem to be few.

Yes, I too understand Fixed’s point of view but I feel he has been using an incorrect word when he refers to the Big Bang Theory as a religion. (And more importantly, as Tao being the same thing as a god.)

Yes, there are many pissed off Atheists who are really pissed off at the Church but still hold to creation myths and actually still believe in the gods. And yes, these are confused people. Their anger is more powerful than is there logic in determining why they are pissed off.

I enjoy arguing with Fixed because I know he has a log of knowledge he can share with me.

Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Doric basterd
Doric basterd
avatar

Posts : 6666
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : the black ships

PostSubject: Re: Big Bangism Sat Feb 18, 2017 5:45 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Big Bangism really makes me laugh out loud now. It is constructed of ingenious stupidities.
For example - the singularity, in which all potential time space is enclosed, explodes (contradicting it being a singularity)… into space ( contradicting its having enclosed space time)…

Just, wow. My compliments to anyone who can believe it. True religion.

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

• Thucydides
  Back to top Go down
  View user profile Send private message Send e-mail Online
  Defenders of the Earth
  Tower
  Tower
  avatar

Posts : 5478
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : Freedom

PostSubject: Re: Big Bangism Sat Feb 18, 2017 8:49 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Yes it is making a more philosophical (logical) claim than what most people/scientists seem to understand. Obviously if something is expanding into something else, there existed the “other outside” into which that something is expanding. Defining the something as “reality” or “everything” is a contradiction to then claim this something is then “expanding”.

I tend to think of it tectonically: there are two categories of ontological space, for this example anyway, with the first category being a maximally-collapsed potentiation grid with near-zero substance, and the second category being actual substance that occupies or sits atop the first categorical grid. I think of the first category as as close to a pure mathematical space as could possibly exist, wherein nothing is really “there” except the minimum energy distribution to sustain that grid-space; what we think of as energy, space and time, the quantum foam and everything scaled up from that foam (quarks, atoms etc.) is part of the second category.

Given this framework, we can then imagine that within an infinitely extended category one pure mathematical/maximally collapsed grid there existed a singularity-point in which was contained all the energy/substance that would eventually come to constitute our universe. For some reason that point existed as a point, approaching zero-dimensionality and containing all energy we see around us in the universe today… it would be interesting to speculate as to why this point existed at all, but for our present purposes we hypothesize its existence. So then this point suddenly reaches a critical threshold and can no longer remain point-like (perhaps because it had previously been collapsing further and further but hit a point where further collapse was impossible, as total energy caused a chain reaction that reversed the collapse into a sudden expansion). The expansion took over and fed on itself, exponentially increasing into the Big Bang.

This caused energy-substance to differentiate and occupy more volume per unit energy, leading to cooling and eventually enough space per unit energy to where sub-atomic particles could form out of the quantum foam.

So naturally there are a few questions necessitated by this hypothesis: 1) if the first category mathematical grid is infinite in all directions (and logically I think it must be) then there must also be more, even infinite, number of singularity-points in various stages of contraction or expansion? Yes I think that is the case. 2) When a universe reaches its end and (hypothetically) dissolves into the maximum expansion whereby even atoms are stretched apart and dissolve, what then happens? How does that situation reset back into another singularity-point?

I don’t have a good theory on that second question.

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

“Cause I’m just a man… flesh and venom.” -Cowboy Troy
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Sisyphus
Path
Path

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

PostSubject: Re: Big Bangism Sat Feb 18, 2017 11:32 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Fixed Cross wrote:
Big Bangism really makes me laugh out loud now. It is constructed of ingenious stupidities.
For example - the singularity, in which all potential time space is enclosed, explodes (contradicting it being a singularity)… into space ( contradicting its having enclosed space time)…

Just, wow. My compliments to anyone who can believe it. True religion.

Einstein felt that way too until he was shown to have fucked up. It was his theory, you know. I just can’t find it in my mind to think that you hold yourself more knowledgeable than Einstein and all the other astronomers who hold firmly to the theory.

So you hold to magic over scientific investigation. That’s okay Fixed. There are billions of people who believe similar to you. It is your right to believe whatever you wish regarding the creation of the universe. But you have to ignore many scientific facts in order to do so.

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

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

PostSubject: Re: Big Bangism Sat Feb 18, 2017 11:39 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Thrasymachus wrote:
Yes it is making a more philosophical (logical) claim than what most people/scientists seem to understand. Obviously if something is expanding into something else, there existed the “other outside” into which that something is expanding. Defining the something as “reality” or “everything” is a contradiction to then claim this something is then “expanding”.

The theory of “Absolute Nothingness” speaks very well to this. This suggests that the universe is expanding into an area, at a rate faster than the speed of light, that was previously void. So it is not actually expanding into something else.

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

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

PostSubject: Re: Big Bangism Sat Feb 18, 2017 11:47 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Thrasymachus wrote:

Given this framework, we can then imagine that within an infinitely extended category one pure mathematical/maximally collapsed grid there existed a singularity-point in which was contained all the energy/substance that would eventually come to constitute our universe. For some reason that point existed as a point, approaching zero-dimensionality and containing all energy we see around us in the universe today… it would be interesting to speculate as to why this point existed at all, but for our present purposes we hypothesize its existence. So then this point suddenly reaches a critical threshold and can no longer remain point-like (perhaps because it had previously been collapsing further and further but hit a point where further collapse was impossible, as total energy caused a chain reaction that reversed the collapse into a sudden expansion). The expansion took over and fed on itself, exponentially increasing into the Big Bang.

If you ask any type of physicist what Singularity is they will say something like, “We don’t know.”

But it is consistent with the concept of reversion and cycles. That is, Singularity - Big Bang - maximum potential of the expansion of the universe - the shrinking of the universe as a result of gravity - new Singularity - new universe.

However, the most accepted theory of the universe is that of a cold death. That is, expansion continues so that gravity no longer has an effect on anything in the universe.

I prefer the theory of reversion and cycles.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Sisyphus
Path
Path

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

PostSubject: Re: Big Bangism Sat Feb 18, 2017 11:52 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Thrasymachus wrote:

So naturally there are a few questions necessitated by this hypothesis: 1) if the first category mathematical grid is infinite in all directions (and logically I think it must be) then there must also be more, even infinite, number of singularity-points in various stages of contraction or expansion? Yes I think that is the case. 2) When a universe reaches its end and (hypothetically) dissolves into the maximum expansion whereby even atoms are stretched apart and dissolve, what then happens? How does that situation reset back into another singularity-point?

I don’t have a good theory on that second question.

Yes, there are a few hypotheses suggesting multiple universes. I even have one: there are six more universes, they exist in different dimensions and they account for what science calls Dark Matter.

Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Doric basterd
Doric basterd
avatar

Posts : 6666
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : the black ships

PostSubject: Re: Big Bangism Sat Feb 18, 2017 5:02 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I just don’t take that step, I don’t grant the notion of singularity if it isn’t also mono-tectonic.
I understand any quantum field however thin just as manifest as a star or an organism. From such a field, anything can be formed. Anything will be formed, simply because it is possible.
What we know is that there was a seismic event in the cosmos that basically shaped the way it is now. That could have been any collision of axes of gravity, such as black holes, which when they would ‘spill their guts’ might also cause some kind of big bang and paradigmatic, law-setting causation.
There are lots of things that may very well have other sides, that may be veils to other systems - we can perceive so little and the math of the superelliptical galaxies shows it.

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

• Thucydides
  Back to top Go down
  View user profile Send private message Send e-mail Online
  Fixed Cross
  Doric basterd
  Doric basterd
  avatar

Posts : 6666
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : the black ships

PostSubject: Re: Big Bangism Sat Feb 18, 2017 5:04 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I honestly think the Big Bang is purely the reinvention of God in secular terms - but with an even less rational ground.

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

• Thucydides
  Back to top Go down
  View user profile Send private message Send e-mail Online
  Fixed Cross
  Doric basterd
  Doric basterd
  avatar

Posts : 6666
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : the black ships

PostSubject: Re: Big Bangism Sat Feb 18, 2017 5:06 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
There can simply not be a The Whole.

Its a dense contradiction.
There are wholes, many different ones, that is the case.
But to posit a single whole is to contradict the notion of a whole.

It’s hard to put in language, just imagine a whole that is not part of something else, and notice how the lines of logic and even cognition blur at the ‘edge of the whole’ which is obviously an illogical notion. The Whole must be infinite, because if it has borders, it borders on something else. But infinity didnt come out of the Big Bang.

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

• Thucydides
  Back to top Go down
  View user profile Send private message Send e-mail Online
  Fixed Cross
  Doric basterd
  Doric basterd
  avatar

Posts : 6666
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : the black ships

PostSubject: Re: Big Bangism Sat Feb 18, 2017 5:14 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
When I was 12 or so I figured oh cool, they scientifically proved that science can not explain the origin of what it explains. I took that for something very freedom loving.
Only later on I realized people actually tried to pretend that this singularity actually makes sense.

I piss on singularity. It’s bullshit, it can take it.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXGXTzjWPak[/youtube]

One hero talking about another.

why would anyone who happened to be the first to bring into reality something that was the next logical step anyway, be revered as a genius? think about the situation; the idea of electric cars has been in the minds of human beings for a century or more… then somebody comes along who has the money to invest in such a technology, and is all of a sudden a genius and a hero. moreover, the guy who has the money is probably not the real brain behind the actual creation of the technology. the actual production of the idea would belong to those who specialize in the fields necessary to create it (engineers, mathematicians, mechanics, software designers, etc.)

so what is going on here with this peculiar kind of mythologizing? ah, it’s the cult of the personality of capitalism; a gross exaggeration of the actual role and presence of the capitalist for the celebratory purposes of western culture fantasy. the idolization and emulation of the entrepreneurial spirit… which, when examined more closely, reveals nothing close to the wonderful depth and dynamism first thought to be representative of the glorious heroics of the noble capitalist.

some guy has a shit ton of money and hires a bunch of people to develop an electric car. now he’s on the cover of popular mechanics and booked for seventeen talk show interviews. but what exactly are we celebrating here if not a myth, a transparent hoax concealing (denying credit to) the real source of the progress about to be made in mankind’s next logical step in technology. who brings this idea into reality? the guy with the shit ton of money? no, but that’s what the cult of the western persona of capitalism would have everyone believe. one does not need capitalism to make the logical next step (e.g., soviet union was the first in space)… but if these steps are made in a capitalistic system, everyone mistakenly believes such steps couldn’t have been made elsewhere and/or otherwise.

none of this is for the purposes of dissing this guy musk. i’m sure he’s a somewhat interesting fellow. all i wish to show is the irony surrounding the image that capitalism has engendered for itself as it promotes itself in the mythologies of modern western culture. like everything else shallow and transparent in the cult of celebrity culture, the same empty bluster is found in the reverence of the capitalist icons western society so much admires.

always remember this; a john galt is nothing without the proletariat… but the proletariat is everything with or without a john galt.

oh and i am aware of musk’s credentials and education, so i’m not saying he’s useless or can’t be productive. i’m only saying if he is to receive credit for anything, it certainly would not be ‘financing’ a project that is fully organized and produced by other people who, because they happen to work for him, are thought to be totally dependent on the necessity of musk’s ‘genius’ in order to be realized. this, of course, in nonsense.

please don’t interpret this as ‘hating on musk.’ i am quite serious when i say i am unable to ‘hate’ anything here, because the context of the situation surrounding him and his popularity is so transparent it is incapable of warranting anything as serious as hate. there is simply the irony of the joke and the utter lack of substance in the reverence guys like this receive.

what the world admires about his guy… what they see when they look at him and his story, is not some genius or pioneer… but the dollar signs. like pavlonian dogs, western culture comes running whenever they hear the ‘cha-ching’, and drops to its knees in grotesque idol worship of a completely farcical image of prosperity.

you want musk to impress me… tell him to give 90% of his profits to his engineers, scientists, mechanics, software designers, and everyone else on his payroll who develop the ideas which are by no means original to him, and be happy they let him keep that 10%.

p.s. that most recent joint you did was by far the best i’ve heard. you weren’t trying to sound cool in that one, and as a result, you sounded cool. cool how that works, eh?

I will allow myself the slack to believe that you really believe this, but there could be very few statements in which I find less truth. Remember, I always go by experience. Never by theory. I fucking hate theory. It always fails to predict or describe the human.

The proletariat, in my experience, is just as much as a whiny parasitic bitch as is any old Owner.

I am not a Nietzschean without reason. My overwhelming experience from since I can remember, and I have a damn good memory, is that only the exception is worth the trouble of humanizing.

Most people, when you start to humanize them, i.e. idealize, think they are great cause they’re human, they’ll fucking suck your guts out.

That said theres no way I revere Musk or any industrialist. I didn’t even read any Ayn Rand novels. I cant stand that conceptual idealist art from any direction. Cant read Tokstoy either. Give me Dostoyevski, thats real, that tells you what the proletariat is. Daughter-selling drunks whose stinking sweat is their best feature. Fuckups. Just as useless cunts as your run of the mill millionaire.

The people I have learned to trust are farmers. They can be considered both owners and workers, they escape the silly cosmopolitan Londonese dichotomy that Marx hallucinated.

then you’re not clear about the difference between the capitalist and proletarian class. the proletariat sells his labor as a commodity. he receives a wage for his labor. the capitalist buys the proletariat’s labor, and then sells what that labor produced. the critical difference here is that the capitalist cannot profit without buying labor and selling commodities/services, because he doesn’t sell his own labor. so, without the wage worker to offer his labor in exchange for a wage, and without the product of the wage worker’s labor being sold, the capitalist would have no way to generate wealth. hence, the capitalist is nothing without the proletariat. like literally, this is not a figure of speech… he’s as helpless as he is useless.

this is why i prefer the analogy of the host and parasite. it’s quite fitting to describe the relationship between these two classes. the parasite cannot survive without the host, and the host is significantly weakened by the presence of the parasite.

i can’t stand them either… at least nine out of ten of em. but, i understand why they’re like that… and nearly every factor and/or cause responsible for such a condition is traceable to both democracy and capitalism/consumerism. it isn’t just that most workers are aware that they’re being exploited that causes them to have that shitty attitude… but several other things contribute to their overall character as well. lack of strong work ethic due to a generally easy and privileged lifestyle. the sense of entitlement their indirectly conditioned to feel because of all the media they consume; ‘you’re unique… be an individual… express yourself… get dat money… yada, yada, yada.’ this instills in everyone the expectation that they should be able to be successful and wealthy without having to work for it. essentially, western democracy makes everyone believe they’re super special and that ‘work’ is something only the lowly do, something everyone should avoid if they can help it. now out of this mess emerges only a couple types; a minority of career oriented people who have pride in their talents and productivity, and the stragglers… those who end up on the lower tier of the working class. these are the one’s with the shitty attitude… and every bit of it is the result of the state’s failing to exercise its authority in preventing these perverse forces from making such people happen.

when i see some white trash alcoholic piece of shit on the job, i don’t blame him for becoming what he has. i blame the environment and those who have the power, but lack the incentive and ambition, to control that environment so that he doesn’t become what he has.

but to call out this piece of shit and then say ‘fuck the concept of the proletariat’, is misinformed. this trash is your creation… you’re the one who endorses the system that allows them to happen. of course you can despise such trash, but you can’t complain about it and be taken seriously.

we’ve got to assume that radical changes in society in the direction of socialism could very well eliminate everything that is responsible for creating this image you, and most, have of the lower working classes. and we’re pretty fucking sure that if things stay the way they are, we’ll see plenty more of em.

but no. you can’t point at such an abomination and say ‘that’s why socialism sucks’. that abomination has nothing to do with socialism and everything to do with western capitalist democracy.

Ah, but I caught you in a fallacy. One that does not necessarily have a name.

For if you can see what made the proletarian such a scumbag and use that reason as your argumentative substance, then you should also be able to identify what makes the owner one, to juxtapose it and see how the proletarian, when derived from his circumstances, is better than the capitalist, as derived from his circumstances.

Because until youve done so Im free to state that a proletarian is a scumbag simply because he is human, because look, an Ivy League breeze of a life in the absence of shitty circumstances doesn’t un-scumbag people.

Im satisfied that I managed to make raps that sound cool to you, Zoot - that is a definite step. This is not an easy business. To win over a sharp critic is a victory.
Its not actually the case that I tried to sound cool before and now I didn’t. Its more that I decided I have an ego and I need to stand somewhere, wherever. My previous raps were more beyond the ego, as I certainly didn’t find it easy to understand myself as a rapper.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194947&p=2728176#p2728175.

Gotta have my last posts here.

Shit, Ive spent three years helping people understand why they shouldnt oppose the one who has ended all the US immorality abroad. But Americans here are SCUMBAGS, by and large, murderous thugs, filthy fucking maggots feasting on the deaths of children.

Leftists will all go mad in the end, I can’t see this shit any other way, they have it coming, the savages made out of weakness.

The American empire is coming to end end, isn’t it.

It has been overtaken by women, and it is becoming a living hell. People now want to escape it.

It turns out that Trump simply prevented our destruction and killed the mass murderers abroad, but can’t save the USA. It has shown that it really doesn’t have the female substance to merit saviour.

Who, abroad, would want to be with an American woman? Unheard of. By and large the ugliest, stupidest, most banally selfish women in the world.

Women who unflinchingly stab to death the breathing, feeling child in their womb and scoff at heroic saving of millions of children in he Middle East - there havent walked any eviler demons on the planet. Nazi wives were reasonably cool in comparison to the American left.

I give up on trying.

The closest friend I have here constantly turns his back on himself, and among the people I am cool to there are mostly supporters of the most murderous, sickest politicians that ever were.

Humanity… what a joke.

What kind of absolute MONSTER would it take to carry a child for 7 or 8 months and THEN decide to kill it?

Such people should never have existed. It is clear where it will all end for them.

I guess nature now needs there to be something terrible, for such creatures to learn to know themselves, to learn something about what they ve been doing to others.

Its always been the case that the American woman was the ugly, bloated miscreant of the world. That used to only go for the white ones, but it has become universal. Overprivileged and completely ignorant of human realities, somehow this does not make for aristocracy. It only makes for utterly unweddable trash.

It has been a war that splits families for some years now, Ive lived things Id been raised to think of as of the distant past, of the days of Christian civil wars, but my grandmother did see it coming.

People insisting that late stage abortions are a human right are an undeniable symptom of the end of their line. It is worse than suicide, it is the style of suicide that is there for people too scared to hurt themselves. The suicide of a decadent line,

The women who perform such late stage abortions are the abominations of the earth. The very vilest beings ever to appear.

Poor women.
They’ve been left unguided.

Given that my posts have gotten quite a few views I have hope that even through the idiots who respond have insisted on remaining murdering scumbags, there are those who have been struck in their hearts and changed their minds.

It is also clear why there is this huge obsession in leftist girls for using big dicks to fuck themselves in the throat, or why they love “having their sinuses cleaned” as one once put it to me afterwards. It is because they know very well that they talk too much. They know they’re immoral whores who need to be shut up. But since they are illiterates and certainly not versed in logic, the dick is the only thing that will shut them up, and they love it for it. It is more than love, it is obsession.

Going down, down down…

fucking America.

Im gonna enjoy the rest of the goddamn show.

Lucis Trust

Lucis Trust

Posts : 1
Join date : 2011-11-11
Age : 34
Location : Within

Slavery Empty
PostSubject: Slavery Slavery Icon_minitimeMon Nov 28, 2011 7:51 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Should individuals, races, sexes, classes and cultures choose to dominate, to submit, or to be free?

Civilization requires more than just intelligence, it requires domestication, slavery of people, places and things. Ants and bees domesticate their environment, in addition to specializing and collaborating, but they do so instinctively, we do so intelligently.

The Master/slave dialectic, in addition to interdependence (large tribes) is more efficient and has replaced the predator/prey, the hunter/hunted dialectic, in addition to independence (small tribes). A surplus of goods can now be extracted. How much surplus does one require? How much is healthy? Some choose to maximize consumption, some choose to minimize.

Slavery can manifest in subtler ways than mere brute force, when dealing with members of our own species e.g. capitalism, religion, etc.

How much should we domesticate people, places and things, and how much should we allow ourselves to be domesticated?

Civilization has advantages and disadvantages, there’s been times when I’ve contemplated living more simply.

This is what I meant by the dilemma of civilization-

Intelligence + dexterity trumps all, or nearly all other qualities- speed, strength, endurance, agility, stamina (actually, humans have superior stamina as well).

This current, relative monopoly on intelligence has offset the balance, the equilibrium of nature. Like playing a game of rock paper scissors where rock can crush paper and scissors.

The ancients comprehended the supreme dilemma even better than we do today. The fall of Aryan Atlantis (assuming it happened) was more fresh in their minds. Where as Nietzsche tells the more left brain tale of master/slave morality, the ancients tell more right brain tales.

It is Prometheus’ fire, Pandora’s box and Eve’s apple. With knowledge comes the power to destroy nature and create artifice, to convert more and more nature into artifice.

It has to do with our natural needs- physical, emotional and mental. Primitive man is closer to deprivation, Civilized man is closer to decadence. At the dawn of the French revolution, it was said 90% of the people died of starvation, and 10% of the people died of gluttony. Who was better off? I suppose I’d rather die of gluttony, but…

The advantage of civilization is- it gives 1 access to more resources. 1 is more able to satisfy their basic needs. The disadvantage is- it gives 1 access to more resources. 1 is more able to satisfy their basic needs… and more, much, much more, way beyond what is required. In addition to the depletion and the destruction of that which we’re dependent on, our environment, abundance and affluence can be detrimental to our own health.

Should the victors (rich, white men) share their spoils with the unfortunate, the vanquished, give back the surplus they’ve took from nature (after all, they don’t need it, right?), or should they hoard it, and take even more, take as much as the earth can bare, increase their wealth and power at the expense of all who live under the sun… and beyond?

Now, socialism is not necessarily slave morality (you could call it challenger morality), if the slaves take by force and unhypocritically, rather, it becomes slave morality when they attempt to convince the rich/powerful to share with them, or when they deceive (unless of course it is genuine) themselves into thinking they’d share if they were in their place.

The rich/powerful can also be hypocritical, and seek to justify their reign beyond will to power, beyond survival of the fittest, monarchs and capitalists have been known to do this… or is it genuine?

Is slave morality a hoax, a scam? Or do rich men have nothing to lose by being charitable, and their souls to gain? Western civilization, 500 years of raping, pillaging, plundering and swindling, was it all for not? Should we have never set sail for America?

Europeans freed themselves from bondage, but then we proceeded to enslave the whole earth. Now the greens and liberals want to give it back. Who’s right, who’s wrong and… why?

Perhaps the European, being the superior man, is more capable of love and hate, ferocity and tenderness. Nothing can stop the European, perhaps, except himself, or extraterrestrial intervention. High civilization may weaken, atrophy man, his body and his spirit. Perhaps atrophy, in addition to slave morality, is natures way of correcting herself, and reestablishing equilibrium. However, equilibrium may not be desirable. Is there a way to keep European man strong, healthy, in spite of circumstances that make him girlish and contented?

Should the white race specifically, or the human race in general, go on exploiting nature and other humans… or should we power down our economy?
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 6711
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Midgard

Slavery Empty
PostSubject: Re: Slavery Slavery Icon_minitimeMon Nov 28, 2011 10:46 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Quote :
Should individuals, races, sexes, classes and cultures choose to dominate, to submit, or to be free?

Civilization requires more than just intelligence, it requires domestication, slavery of people, places and things. Ants and bees domesticate their environment, in addition to specializing and collaborating, but they do so instinctively, we do so intelligently.

The Master/slave dialectic, in addition to interdependence (large tribes) is more efficient and has replaced the predator/prey, the hunter/hunted dialectic, in addition to independence (small tribes). A surplus of goods can now be extracted. How much surplus does one require? How much is healthy? Some choose to maximize consumption, some choose to minimize.
Do you mean that the master/slave dialectic produces an offspring of surplus? Interesting. Is that Hegel?

Quote :
Slavery can manifest in subtler ways than mere brute force, when dealing with members of our own species e.g. capitalism, religion, etc.

How much should we domesticate people, places and things, and how much should we allow ourselves to be domesticated?

We are operating from a paradigm of thirst, we are consuming everything that is at hand. There is no metaphysical meaning – no relation direct of the physiology to the psyche – so there is no sense for what is real, and what is not. We need to establish it, “scientifically”. which means artificially, through coercion of consciousness by means of the senses.

This urge is entirely compulsive and has nothing of calculation in it. The calculations following from it are therefore not at all strictly to our benefit, but simply of a great effect. It is this urge that we should cultivate, because we are already cultivating all the rest because of this urge.

Quote :
Civilization has advantages and disadvantages, there’s been times when I’ve contemplated living more simply.
What would that entail?
It is also a challenge to live by more simple principles, but to allow oneself all the complexities of living.

Quote :
This is what I meant by the dilemma of civilization-

Intelligence + dexterity trumps all, or nearly all other qualities- speed, strength, endurance, agility, stamina (actually, humans have superior stamina as well).

This current, relative monopoly on intelligence has offset the balance, the equilibrium of nature. Like playing a game of rock paper scissors where rock can crush paper and scissors.

The ancients comprehended the supreme dilemma even better than we do today. The fall of Aryan Atlantis (assuming it happened) was more fresh in their minds. Where as Nietzsche tells the more left brain tale of master/slave morality, the ancients tell more right brain tales.

It is Prometheus’ fire, Pandora’s box and Eve’s apple. With knowledge comes the power to destroy nature and create artifice, to convert more and more nature into artifice.
But the concept “nature” is an artifice.
There is no one nature, there are natures.
There is never a totality of it, there is always only an amount of interactions of them, forming “webs of meaning” what one may call value-systems, in which interaction is useful to the end of existing-as-such.

Quote :
It has to do with our natural needs- physical, emotional and mental. Primitive man is closer to deprivation, Civilized man is closer to decadence. At the dawn of the French revolution, it was said 90% of the people died of starvation, and 10% of the people died of gluttony. Who was better off? I suppose I’d rather die of gluttony, but…

The advantage of civilization is- it gives 1 access to more resources. 1 is more able to satisfy their basic needs. The disadvantage is- it gives 1 access to more resources. 1 is more able to satisfy their basic needs… and more, much, much more, way beyond what is required. In addition to the depletion and the destruction of that which we’re dependent on, our environment, abundance and affluence can be detrimental to our own health.

Should the victors (rich, white men) share their spoils with the unfortunate, the vanquished, give back the surplus they’ve took from nature (after all, they don’t need it, right?), or should they hoard it, and take even more, take as much as the earth can bare, increase their wealth and power at the expense of all who live under the sun… and beyond?
To a great extent western man has exhausted its (moral, energetic) resources and needs the east now, to find there a ground of meaning, to include the other in a more meaningful, fertile and productive discourse.

Given that Europe has been the cradle of much of what we now value as culture, what is the state of affairs at this point? By which valuing system is the European man still to be valued superior? Is this valuing system still operative? If so, can we define the standard value to it? Other question; Is European man still capable of valung himself as superior?

Quote :
Now, socialism is not necessarily slave morality (you could call it challenger morality), if the slaves take by force and unhypocritically, rather, it becomes slave morality when they attempt to convince the rich/powerful to share with them, or when they deceive (unless of course it is genuine) themselves into thinking they’d share if they were in their place.

The rich/powerful can also be hypocritical, and seek to justify their reign beyond will to power, beyond survival of the fittest, monarchs and capitalists have been known to do this… or is it genuine?

Is slave morality a hoax, a scam? Or do rich men have nothing to lose by being charitable, and their souls to gain? Western civilization, 500 years of raping, pillaging, plundering and swindling, was it all for not? Should we have never set sail for America?
All active morality is a hoax, a trick played on the self, like belief in God. Socialism gave the poor the idea that they were not the downtrodden, but the mighty, the conquerers of history. This alone explains the power of the movement, the will to power, emerging from a stronger self-valuation. The key word was “historical necessity”. This is what replaced God, and gave the simple man a road to necessity.

Quote :
Europeans freed themselves from bondage, but then we proceeded to enslave the whole earth. Now the greens and liberals want to give it back. Who’s right, who’s wrong and… why?

Perhaps the European, being the superior man, is more capable of love and hate, ferocity and tenderness. Nothing can stop the European, perhaps, except himself, or extraterrestrial intervention. High civilization may weaken, atrophy man, his body and his spirit. Perhaps atrophy, in addition to slave morality, is natures way of correcting herself, and reestablishing equilibrium. However, equilibrium may not be desirable. Is there a way to keep European man strong, healthy, in spite of circumstances that make him girlish and contented?

Should the white race specifically, or the human race in general, go on exploiting nature and other humans… or should we power down our economy?
If it is up to me, the Europeans turn their attention back to their regional geography and the values that spring forth from the real world there. Europe has never been a unity, except in competition and armed conflict. Its riches lie entirely in difference, diversity. The EU is a choke-hold. I think that there can never be unity of culture or economical trust when there is no unity of language.

Can Europe devise a different meta-structure to convey its meaning to itself as an entity? Can Europe effectively value itself, as America has done? I doubt it. There is too little understanding and sympathy back and forth, from Sweden tot Italy, from Spain to Germany - unless a great project of art is envisioned, a new classicism so to speak, an Great Style.

Message
Aleatory
bowstring
bowstring
Aleatory

Posts : 50
Join date : 2011-11-15

Amerika Empty
PostSubject: Amerika Amerika Icon_minitimeThu Dec 01, 2011 6:09 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Semi rough draft of the first three sections. It needs some work, but I would like to see how others react to it. It should be noted that I employ the term “Amerika” to distinguish the culture of the United States (who brazenly don the title “American”) from the continent, America. The allusion to the Kafka novel is intentional, as I felt Karl’s tumultuous story quite applicable to the mise en scène.

Amerika: An Abstract on Pandemonium

I) Casino

When I reflect upon the origin of these “United States of America” (united only in the sense of their contiguity—and even then, Hawaii and Alaska are outsourced) I find that our forefathers, desperate to escape oppression, set sail for an expansive nature preserve, subsequently passing on disease to the indigenous people whilst dislodging them, razing the preserve, and erecting a meta-casino/amusement park on the ravaged land, providing these unfortunates with trinkets, uncomfortable vestments, shiny objects, and the word of God as recompense—thereby emulating the very beast from which they fled.

This meta-casino runs deep: one notes the designated establishments, but in actuality it is the entire way of life, the entire infrastructure which composes this massive conjunction between meta-casino and meta-amusement park. Indeed I am not the first to identify this analogy; Baudrillard writes: “Disneyland is presented as imaginary in order to make us believe that the rest is real, whereas all of Los Angeles and the America that surrounds it are no longer real, but belong to the hyperreal order and to the order of simulation. It is no longer a question of a false representation of reality (ideology) but of concealing the fact that the real is no longer real, and thus of saving the reality principle.”

Baudrillard, however, missed the mark by about 265 miles of arid desert road—Amerika skulks in that same vision of convoluted debauchery that played hostess to the Good Doctor’s fear and loathing in the third and fourth months of 1971; the quintessence of the United States, its pure, unadulterated essence is Las Vegas, Nevada—the true panegyric of Amerikan Life.

The more money one has, the more of a friend one is to the establishment—not only the casino, but the greater portion of this economy—and once your reserve runs dry, you are swiftly booted to the street. Notice how the stripper, upon learning she’s bled you dry, immediately abandons you, the illusion of sexual interaction being a simulation fueled by capital (and where has capitalism, where has the corporation not infiltrated?). They give you the illusion of possibility, that these women are actually attracted to you, that they are going to sleep with you—but they are not. There are those who see through the charade, but they are either too few and dissimulated as wacko conspiracy theorists (the true wackos—contrail theorists and the like—exist as a permanent ad hominem so that any theory not consented by the government appears entirely ludicrous) or they are those unfortunate golems in whose heads have been placed Thompson’s words, “No, no. Calm down. Learn to enjoy losing.”

It’s all a gamble, a rouse to play statistics, to perpetuate that Amerikan dream—chants of “Yes We Can!” resounding ad nauseam to rally the troops. Again one observes the United States reflected in the casino: the lovely waitresses not only serve drinks but actively affect the psychologies of the male ego; that perpetuated meme of winning big (“Make me rich. Make me very rich. Oh, you bastard!”) when the truth is advertised proudly on every banner: “What happens here, stays here.”—that penultimate social contract of collusion. The winners exist only to perpetuate the myth that anyone can win. This is the mise en scène of the United States: The Illusion of Potential.

II) Cinctures and Methods of Control

Foucalt, and subsequently Deleuze, saw this looming titanic ghoul on the horizon—the societies of control—only it is no longer looming; it is here. There is, ever present, a process of production, a facsimile of the quality-control conveyor belts in mass-production facilities. Everywhere, we erect Henry Ford’s assembly line, mass producing food, buildings and everything in between. The unique is taboo, “diversity is now our greatest fear.”

Look at the school: the students file into this closed structure—a mimesis of prison architecture down to the gates and door locks (but the locker rooms and showers provide no privacy)—where they are taught how to pass a standardized test. The exceptionally well conforming producers (of grades, of performing the task they are commanded to) are given advanced options to prepare for an alternate or augmented program, separated from the standard whereas the underachievers are selected for an entirely different special program or simply drop out—the rejects thrown away at the end of the work day. This remaining majority portion is then packaged and labeled, placed on the shelf and taught to advertise themselves (like the toys in a store with a revealed button circled and annotated: “push me!”) to colleges where they then receive their brand names after passing the sorting apparatus and the final quality control check point.

Let us not forget that pivotal method, the universal dissemination of desiring-production—advertising/marketing—that virulent, uninhibited exploitation of the “grass is always greener” paradox. Buy this coin commemorating the attacks on 9/11, a $100 value, yours for just $19.99. Is indolence becoming an obstacle for optimal production in your work place? Don’t get more sleep; drink a 5-hour Energy—with only 5 calories.

We see police psychologies in infinite variation between the honest Joe who patrols not to punish but to seek justice and the pugnacious individual-qua-bouncer—the hired muscle—with the ethos of a mercenary. But to counteract this, we have detective novels, CSI, Law & Order, etc.; the apotheosis necessary to enlist a wider demographic, a technique also employed by the military (give the kids toy guns, toy soldiers, have them play cops and robbers, G.I Joe, hook them young and sync that meme before their frontal lobes develop).

We apply universally the methods which predicate the irrigation system, the internal combustion engine—controlled failure. The faucet, the lawn sprinkler, the shower; these are all controlled leaks. So we see, once again, this system employed on individual economies. The Hallmark Holidays simulate cultural imperatives of quid pro quo, where two or more parties exchange gifts of purportedly equivalent value so that one fails to notice the shell game just played: both individuals’ capital returned to the grid whereas each individual is now holding an object of substantially insufficient value to compensate for their loss. Our flight attendants will refer you to your calendar to see the conveniently located exits for your capital. Enjoy your trip and thank you for choosing Thievery International.

Everywhere we see these multitudinous channels: the broadcast and its content determined by statistical demographics which in turn determine the demographics themselves; roads and their breaks/flows of circuitry programmed by traffic engineers; the schools you can attend and the degress you can get from them—these things are all hierarchical channel structures, not the tree but the river delta.

And what of the addiction the U.S. thrives on? Tobacco, alcohol, violence, adrenaline, caffeine, sex, gambling, video games, hypochondria, television, illicit drugs, the deal; these are all perpetuated, marketed by various social memes, advertising in all its forms (peer pressure is a form of advertising: “If you’re cool, you’ll buy Soulja Boy, you’ll eat Vicodin and Roxies, drink Colt 45” etc.) so that above all else, Amerika is addicted to validation by one’s peers.

Addiction leads to deficient serotonin production; your brain in essence acknowledges external stimuli as the trigger for serotonin release, whatever that stimulus may be. What a precarious tightrope we walk here knowing the empathetic potential of man; ergo the appeal of various gradations of virtual realities like television or video games—this sort of escape into a more user-friendly vicarious experience where you can live out your fantasies without the consequences (of those fantasies; you are not free from consequence in general). You can watch soap operas, leeching off the empathetic response to these disastrous social situations, feel the righteous indignation when so and so cheats on such and such with so and such, that awful bitch/bastard. You can play MMORPGs where you design your physical appearance in any number of ways, be a man, a woman, an elf, or any number of imaginary creatures; have super powers, do all those things you can’t do in reality and all without having to leave your house.

Like the heroin addict escapes to phantasy, we invest in—subject ourselves to—all manners of phantasmagoria; the voluntary divestment of our personal realities. We all yearn for a sort of stasis and this is crystallized in the success of vapid commercial art; the ersatz and kitsch everywhere outsells the mordant, the genius; forget Mike Patton, we want Korn and System of a Down. We have inverted the maxim: quantity over quality; we want a hundred bands that sound the same, not one that is wholly unique.

III) Recursion and Transposition

There is a golden section of the Amerikan vernacular, a scalable schematic contributing on an unconscious level to the malaise of so many (citi/deni)zens…and Amerikan life is the repletion of this sinister master formula. The economy-schematic is the lottery (scaled up: more scratch-offs, more rules, more participants but the win/loss/prize ratio remains unchanged)—and is it really any wonder that the highest income comprise the smallest proportion…by such a wide margin? Is the stock market not transposed dog races?

Let’s once again isolate the educational cincture. The teachers (or the quality control personnel in the factory) are not free to decide what they teach: their curriculum is dictated to them in the same way they dictate it to the students; their jobs depend on their students’ performance (which is where we depart from the factory analogy, for if the machines are malfunctioning resulting in fewer passable specimens, they are subjected to maintenance or repair rather than sacking the inspectors). But equally, the principal’s employment depends on the school’s collective performance (the inspector-inspector) and so on and so forth until we find that we are simply fighting numbers: the U.S. education system is in a state of exponential decadence, so we fall back on, once again, playing the game of statistics.

Here, however, statistics are tampered with: we identify in what precise skills one needs to excel and conclude that these skills are the parroting of specific data so we teach students not to think but to memorize and repeat (exactly like the production-machines) and repeat and repeat and repeat and repeat and repeat and repeat and repeat and repeat and repeat and repeat and repeat and repeat and repeat and repeat and repeat and repeat and repeat and repeat and repeat and repeat and repeat and repeat.

The template is cut and used for that singular purpose; the arteries of creativity are clogged, blocked off, sealed. We are teaching you perspective, today. Draw a line lengthwise across your paper, parallel to the shorter two edges and about two thirds from the bottom. Draw two lines which mirror each other and intersect at the mid point of the first line you drew. Continue by drawing lines parallel to the first line to finish representing the train tracks. Don’t you fucking dare draw anything else, or you’re getting a bad mark! Don’t deviate or you will be subject to maintenance/eviction/termination.

The apartment building—what a deceptive invasion the corporation has here!—is housing conformed to the paradigm of the office, and it is in every way the same schematic as the office (you must interact satisfactorily or you are fired/evicted; you must produce your capital to the company or you are fired/evicted; you must conform to our rules or you are fired/evicted) only the act is cut and you simply shell out your profit to avoid eviction, to avoid the boot to the street. One observes in the business facsimiles of the tenant relationship. The business is a meta-stable entity where the absence of capital causes the company to be evicted in the same way that the tenant is evicted for failing to make rent.

I have a fourth section, but it is disheveled even more so than these three, so I apologize in advance for the anti-climax. Then again, it does fit the Kafka motif…

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

Posts : 6711
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Midgard

Amerika Empty
PostSubject: Re: Amerika Amerika Icon_minitimeSat Dec 03, 2011 4:57 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
It is fascinating that, within this frame of confinement you describe, it is still possible to feel as if one is free. There is a psychological understanding at the root of this system that is more masterful than anything that has come before. What is always immediately called to my mind here is Nietzsches phrase “superior means of dominion” formulated casting a glance at the 20th century and the increasing possibilities for manipulation of the masses. Disney Land seems to me to be the work of no one less than an Artist Tyrant. The Soviet filmmaker Eisenstein was terrified of Walt Disney, for good reason. What the Soviet propagandists attempted with brutally dishonest idealisms, their American counterparts managed to pull off using seemingly naive and endearing representations of harsh reality. All the fluffy figures in the early cartoons do nothing to hide to the careful observer that there is noting morally admirable going on in their behavior – the hardness of reality is made ‘funny’. I think that this must be one of the keys to understand the Amerika you have described above.

Whenever a European sets foot in the USA, he or she feels elated and free. It is so without many exceptions, without any that I know of at least. Perhaps a few poets were critical enough to hate it from the outset, but most people immediately fall for the sheer ambition and the lack of confining standards, to which they are used. There is a paradox here which I am not able to solve yet. America provides to the immigrant a very real sense of liberty, of opportunity, of respect for what it means to be human – for both the principles of self-valuing and the will to power. The American respects the individual will to power as an ethical principle. In this, he is ahead of the European. But of course, not many have come to this respect on their own, nor is this respect entirely honest. It is too often coupled with nationalism and strange religious dogmas. Still, it works to spark the feeling of power. And we know that this feeling is not essentially different from power itself, and that power is nothing different than will to power, and that this in turn is only possible by a strong self-valuing.

Looking at the statements made by its founding fathers, America seems to have been set up with in mind the principles of self-valuing. Jefferson hailed respect for selfishness as a more credible form of morality, and the pursuit of happiness is nothing other than the work of valuing the world in terms of ones own self-value. There is to me an indisputable goodness at this nations metaphysical, ideational roots. The fact that its legislative structures have been corroded, that the logic has been lost, has not prevented strong ethical will to arise there more frequently and powerfully than it does in Europe, which ethical roots are far more organic, context-bound, pragmatic, on the whole far less philosophical.

I offer this text as a counterbalance, as a measuring-context, to the Kafka-esque description of 20th century America. Ideally we might be able to distill from the madness the metaphysical essence of the nations spirit, which, set loose from its natural legislative boundaries, has taken on such bizarre and self-mutilating forms.

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

• Thucydides
  Back to top Go down
  View user profile Send private message Send e-mail Online
  Aleatory
  bowstring
  bowstring
  Aleatory

Posts : 50
Join date : 2011-11-15

Amerika Empty
PostSubject: Re: Amerika Amerika Icon_minitimeMon Dec 05, 2011 7:15 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Fixed Cross wrote:
Whenever a European sets foot in the USA, he or she feels elated and free. It is so without many exceptions, without any that I know of at least. Perhaps a few poets were critical enough to hate it from the outset, but most people immediately fall for the sheer ambition and the lack of confining standards, to which they are used.
I was not aware the United States fooled any modern European. Still, “sheer ambition” and “lack of confining standards” do not seem to me innately good or beneficial foundations for a progressive culture. Additionally, the “lack of confining standards” I cannot agree with, unless you are comparing the situation to that of the Arabic nations, Asia and Africa. I get into this argument quite a bit with my fellow citizens: the danger of a social oppression whose presence is dissimulated by comparison to overtly oppressive social milieus is that it is dissimulated now, systematically disseminating a perpetuating apparatus. That said, what say you of France, Germany, Norway, etc? Marijuana is illegal because stoners don’t mass in armies and declare war on the authorities (as opposed to alcohol, which is a foundation of the United States culture). What of Spain on this point or Amsterdam on prostitution?

Fixed Cross wrote:
Looking at the statements made by its founding fathers, America seems to have been set up with in mind the principles of self-valuing. Jefferson hailed respect for selfishness as a more credible form of morality, and the pursuit of happiness is nothing other than the work of valuing the world in terms of ones own self-value. There is to me an indisputable goodness at this nations metaphysical, ideational roots.
Certainly the practice of self-valuing is in no short supply here, but this is no virtue–especially when the self-valuing includes only the ego–the individual. The pursuit is just that–a pursuit, a wild goose chase. As for the roots, the “goodness” is extant only in the Kantian sense of intention, sense of duty–an entirely naive contention. The best intentions are no stranger to tragedy (for instance, the Army Corps of Engineers and the Mississippi). Disaster is not averted by good will alone.

You say: “The fact that its legislative structures have been corroded, that the logic has been lost, has not prevented strong ethical will to arise there more frequently and powerfully than it does in Europe, which ethical roots are far more organic, context-bound, pragmatic, on the whole far less philosophical.” Which “ethical will” do you speak of? What is this frequency? Have you forgotten Norway? More importantly, is “philosophy” inherently beneficial? The manner in which the United States employs philosophy today is an absolute joke. Our Supreme Court has ruled that pizza is a vegetable.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 6711
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Midgard

Amerika Empty
PostSubject: Re: Amerika Amerika Icon_minitimeTue Dec 06, 2011 2:23 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Aleatory wrote:
Fixed Cross wrote:
Whenever a European sets foot in the USA, he or she feels elated and free. It is so without many exceptions, without any that I know of at least. Perhaps a few poets were critical enough to hate it from the outset, but most people immediately fall for the sheer ambition and the lack of confining standards, to which they are used.
I was not aware the United States fooled any modern European.
From my perspective at least, it is the modern American who is fooled into believing that, because of the severe degeneration and increasing stupidity, the entire value system is lost.
All my travels through the USA have been very interesting and fruitful, and the people I come to know there are very much worth knowing, I have learned much there. It seems to me that there is still a boldness to American thinking that can not be found in Europe.

Of course I am very selective in who I speak to long enough to draw such conclusions. The bulk of humanity, wherever you go, is stupid.

Quote :
Still, “sheer ambition” and “lack of confining standards” do not seem to me innately good or beneficial foundations for a progressive culture. Additionally, the “lack of confining standards” I cannot agree with, unless you are comparing the situation to that of the Arabic nations, Asia and Africa.
It is the question what is being confined, of course. But I admit that I may be too positive here, I am aware that there is a great deal of suppression and control in the US, that this is an understatement even. What I speak of is the minds of the people I’ve come to know. There seems to be more ‘‘ethical space’’ at lthe very least than in the Netherlands, anno 2011.

Quote :
I get into this argument quite a bit with my fellow citizens: the danger of a social oppression whose presence is dissimulated by comparison to overtly oppressive social milieus is that it is dissimulated now, systematically disseminating a perpetuating apparatus.
Could you elaborate on this? What is the danger, what is the perpetuating apparatus? What is systematically being dissemminated?

Quote :
That said, what say you of France, Germany, Norway, etc? Marijuana is illegal because stoners don’t mass in armies and declare war on the authorities (as opposed to alcohol, which is a foundation of the United States culture). What of Spain on this point or Amsterdam on prostitution?
Although I know that marijuana possession is used as an excuse for the government to ruin people, I have not noticed any effective restrictions on marijuana in the US. it seems to be readily available in good quality, and much more people smoke it there than in Amsterdam, relatively speaking as well. In California the quality is arguably better and, in case of a medicinal permit which is, so I found out, very hard not to get, more legal than in Amsterdam where it is still illegally produced and sold to the coffeeshops. But that aside, I would not say of such things that they are a real standard for freedom or lack of boundaries.

I like France very much as a country. Germany… I’m not so sure what to think yet. In Norway I’ve never been, its hardly populated and nothing really interesting has come from there since the Vikings, as far as I know. They have very little challenges, politically speaking, compared to the US. That should be a consideration – how does the worlds leading political power maintain order interiorily? Clearly, they are not doing a very good job now, but I doubt that the Norwegian government would manage better if they had a simiar weigth to carry and wealth to manage. It is said that power corrupts -but the US is still a far better place to live than any African or most any Asian country, and I would prefer it to most European nations as well. Italy and France are probably the only exceptions.

But this is all distracting from what you aim to expose – the only thing I can do is give counterweight, knowing that the degeneracy of control and standards in the US is alarmingly real.
I am putting it in context of the rest of what we call the civilized world.

Quote :
Fixed Cross wrote:
Looking at the statements made by its founding fathers, America seems to have been set up with in mind the principles of self-valuing. Jefferson hailed respect for selfishness as a more credible form of morality, and the pursuit of happiness is nothing other than the work of valuing the world in terms of ones own self-value. There is to me an indisputable goodness at this nations metaphysical, ideational roots.
Certainly the practice of self-valuing is in no short supply here, but this is no virtue–especially when the self-valuing includes only the ego–the individual. The pursuit is just that–a pursuit, a wild goose chase. As for the roots, the “goodness” is extant only in the Kantian sense of intention, sense of duty–an entirely naive contention. The best intentions are no stranger to tragedy (for instance, the Army Corps of Engineers and the Mississippi). Disaster is not averted by good will alone.
I disagree that this egoistical selfvaluing is not a virtue. It starts with egoism. No creature is based on anything else. I would say that only when advances are made within the egoic sphere, can the self be interpreted more widely. But this is debatable, I realize. I am no authority on the virtues and merits of ego-forsaking.

Quote :
You say: “The fact that its legislative structures have been corroded, that the logic has been lost, has not prevented strong ethical will to arise there more frequently and powerfully than it does in Europe, which ethical roots are far more organic, context-bound, pragmatic, on the whole far less philosophical.” Which “ethical will” do you speak of? What is this frequency? Have you forgotten Norway? More importantly, is “philosophy” inherently beneficial? The manner in which the United States employs philosophy today is an absolute joke. Our Supreme Court has ruled that pizza is a vegetable.
What should I remember about Norway? It is clean and has few people. It used to be extremely poor, recently it has found some oil and is now rather prosperous, but enormously boring and culturally insignificant.
The US is still, despite, or perhaps also because of, evertyhing, the most politically dynamic and culturally productive country in the world, even if the standards are seemingly very low, you dont even want to know what standards we have in Holland. The social counter-engineering, the art of creating aggression, stupidity and self-pity are mastered here, and there is nothing to compensate for it. Dutch society is effectively destroyed. Whenever I fly back from the US to Holland I feel like I am setting foot in a filthy cage.

Yet when I came back from Damascus to Amsterdam, I felt like I was entering a sanctuary of purity. I think that well thinking Americans, dismayed by what goes on around them, tend to overestimate the virtues of the rest of the world.

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

• Thucydides
  Back to top Go down
  View user profile Send private message Send e-mail Online
  Aleatory
  bowstring
  bowstring
  Aleatory

Posts : 50
Join date : 2011-11-15

Amerika Empty
PostSubject: Re: Amerika Amerika Icon_minitimeTue Dec 06, 2011 8:50 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Fixed Cross wrote:
From my perspective at least, it is the modern American who is fooled into believing that, because of the severe degeneration and increasing stupidity, the entire value system is lost.

All my travels through the USA have been very interesting and fruitful, and the people I come to know there are very much worth knowing, I have learned much there. It seems to me that there is still a boldness to American thinking that can not be found in Europe.

Of course I am very selective in who I speak to long enough to draw such conclusions. The bulk of humanity, wherever you go, is stupid.

I have no doubt the value system is not yet lost. Rather, it has been compromised, contaminated and/or corrupted; it is abused. Replacing the filibuster with intransigence in political office; dividing the populous with party warfare and bewitching them with egregious propaganda[1]; the vitiation of the Free Press by capital[4]; the apotheosis of convenience[5]; the implementation of peer pressure to market by simulated demographics[8]; etc.

Boldness, indeed—but such a ‘virtue’ has accompanied every military dictator in recorded history. Hitler was bold[9].

Fixed Cross wrote:
Could you elaborate on this? What is the danger, what is the perpetuating apparatus? What is systematically being dissemminated?

I elaborated extensively in “II: Cinctures and Methods of Control” and “III: Recursion and Transposition”. If you want vague, umbrella-term answers, the danger is trapping the progress of man in a möbius strip that (due to youth becoming little more than glorified parrots) is inexpugnable from within, the perpetuating apparatus is the transposition of mass production onto all strata and the perpetuating apparatus is what is being disseminated by advertising/marketing—however, I would rather you just read the two sections mentioned for a more substantial explanation.

Fixed Cross wrote:
Although I know that marijuana possession is used as an excuse for the government to ruin people, I have not noticed any effective restrictions on marijuana in the US. it seems to be readily available in good quality, and much more people smoke it there than in Amsterdam, relatively speaking as well. In California the quality is arguably better and, in case of a medicinal permit which is, so I found out, very hard not to get, more legal than in Amsterdam where it is still illegally produced and sold to the coffeeshops. But that aside, I would not say of such things that they are a real standard for freedom or lack of boundaries.

May I ask where in the U.S. you have been? New York, for instance, averages 50,000 arrests for misdemeanor possession of marijuana annually[10]. The FBI’s Uniform Crime Report for 2010 (obviously, the 2011 edition has not yet been released) lists over 750,000 arrests for possession of marijuana, but I would rather not get hung up on this point.

Fixed Cross wrote:
In Norway I’ve never been, its hardly populated and nothing really interesting has come from there since the Vikings, as far as I know. They have very little challenges, politically speaking, compared to the US. That should be a consideration – how does the worlds leading political power maintain order interiorily? Clearly, they are not doing a very good job now, but I doubt that the Norwegian government would manage better if they had a simiar weigth to carry and wealth to manage. It is said that power corrupts -but the US is still a far better place to live than any African or most any Asian country, and I would prefer it to most European nations as well.

I’ll leave off discussion of Norway until the second to last paragraph (where it is brought up again).

Are we actually to assume that the United States is not responsible for its issues; that its “weight” and “wealth” are inherently good and that the issues of managing the control over such a vast populous—its failures in this sense—are therefore forgivable? Well, from the standpoint of rape, in 2009 the U.S. was ranked 5th in per capita rapes—Zimbabwe was 7th—and 1st by 75,907 rapes[11]. Is this a necessary evil? What of being ranked 46th globally in terms of infant mortality rate[12]? 98th in unemployment rate? How about that obesity rate[6]? Indeed, the U.S. carries a great weight.

Fixed Cross wrote:
What should I remember about Norway? It is clean and has few people. It used to be extremely poor, recently it has found some oil and is now rather prosperous, but enormously boring and culturally insignificant.

As a point of comparison, Norway has an unemployment rate of 3.4 to the U.S.’s 8.6, an infant mortality rate of 3.58 to the U.S.’s 6.26, a rape rate of 19.8 to the U.S.’s 28.6 and no death penalty. How about education? Norway was 9th in reading to the U.S.’s 14th, 15th in math to the U.S.’s 25th and the U.S. pulls an uncharacteristic upset ranking 17th in science to Norway’s 19th. What about these Netherlands? 7th in reading, 6th in math and 8th in science[13]. But perhaps these countries are boring and culturally insignificant. Zimbabwe is far from boring and extremely culturally significant. Let’s all move there.

Fixed Cross wrote:
The US is still, despite, or perhaps also because of, evertyhing, the most politically dynamic and culturally productive country in the world, even if the standards are seemingly very low, you dont even want to know what standards we have in Holland. The social counter-engineering, the art of creating aggression, stupidity and self-pity are mastered here, and there is nothing to compensate for it. Dutch society is effectively destroyed. Whenever I fly back from the US to Holland I feel like I am setting foot in a filthy cage.

If you feel the U.S. is anything but proficient in what you call social counter-engineering, and that we compensate for it (especially in aggression, stupidity and self-pity), you are disastrously mistaken. Visiting is not enough. Live here for a few years. This reply is already far too long, so I’ll end it here.

End Notes:

[1] The current state of political affairs is abysmal at best. The President serves as little more than a figurehead, a scapegoat upon whose shoulders we can lay all the blame. We failed to alleviate the financial crisis that’s been snowballing since Clinton left office? Blame Bush[2] and Obama[3]. The democrats, vacuous mouths and furled brows, menacingly thrust their index fingers at the republicans who in turn mirror this gesture, the Tea Party is in constant existential quandary, and all the while the independents are reduced to cynical irony. This is all perpetuated by drowning the Amerikan people in horribly biased propaganda, which would be fine if the audiences of Fox News and its democratic equivalent exhibited a propensity for checking sources.

[2] Bush may be blamed for the war in Iraq but it is the Amerikan people who made the ultimate decision to go to war.

[3] While Obama is, in my opinion, not at fault for the national debt, he was not ready for presidency.

[4] The press is, first and foremost, a business requiring a good deal of capital to operate. To satisfy this need, the story must not only be provocative enough to sell, but consistently produced in such a way as to ensure a steady profit. Thus the paparazzi is ex-cinctured as the mainstream jackals and vultures swarm, quenching the bloodlust of the Amerikan people for scandal; nothing satisfies the public quite like the felling of a titan through scandal.

[5] Fast food is by no means peculiar to Amerika, but no where else is it such a fundamental staple of the national diet. McDonald’s, Burger King, Wendy’s, Hardees, Checkers, White Castle, Dairy Queen/Stuckey’s, Taco Bell, Arby’s, KFC, Popeye’s, Chick-fil-a…the list goes on. More than half of the U.S. population consumes fast food on a weekly basis—around 27% eat it daily. The health concerns are obviously appalling[6], but the semiotics… terrifying. To make some attempt at brevity, I will refer you further to an interview with David Foster Wallace[7] which outlines transpositions of this schematic elsewhere…the psycho-social implications.

[6] Once again topping the charts, the U.S. weighs in with 74.6% of the population being overweight or obese, an importunate statistic when observing that just 19.7% were overweight or obese in 1997.

[7] The interview can be accessed here: samizdat.cc/shelf/documents/2005 … erview.pdf

[8] The most despicable development in marketing to date is this trendy psychological warfare capitalizing on the hegemony of peer pressure: ‘We have stereotyped your demographic which we will now synthesize into an injection mould mimesis, so convincingly enjoying our product that you will, more often than not, purchase it not because you actually want it (indeed, prior to this ad, you were ignorant of such desire) but because we dictate how you should be you.’

[9] Hitler was, as it so happens, greatly influenced by America…and Britain’s colonization policies.

[10] huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/0 … 78023.html

[11] 1st being the most rapes (as opposed to the next note’s numbering): en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics

[12] 1st being the least deaths per 1,000 live births: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co … ality_rate

[13] guardian.co.uk/news/datablog … ce-reading
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 6711
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Midgard

Amerika Empty
PostSubject: Re: Amerika Amerika Icon_minitimeTue Dec 06, 2011 2:45 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I respect your study, but I ask to what you would have it point. The aim of 20th century America has been to keep the Eurasian continent from taking control of the world. All was allowed to that end. After Vietnam, people have become more critical. If people become more critical without having a global political overview, perspectives are skewed.

In olden times, people would simply die for their country. After Vietnam something very significant has happened - the notion of the state in general as superego became untenable to a certain refined taste. The nation-state-world was in grave danger, and the people kept getting better informed, journalism and resulting, pop music threatened to kill the states authority as-such entirely. A grand sweep was needed the Grand Chessboard could not be left unattended, despite the peoples growing selfishness, their growing ability to think of themselves as laws unto themselves.

Either America-Israel relinquishes its international military domination, or - not. If so, it is hard to estimate how China, Russia, Germany, etc would rise to the occasion - that would be the question to ask. If not, the people will have to find a way to stand behind the military industrial complex, understand it as a fundamentally productive and protective institution, a condition of civilization, which is actually how it functions. All means by which the people have gotten better informed are resultant of the technology war between corporate nations. That is not to say that there is not a great deal kept away from the people - the individual can never again believe the state, and the states moral and medical predications, but he must work within it, because the state increasingly represents the world at large, its utterly inhuman resistance of power, “the Real” in its total anonymous force contained. The world is not ready to become a peaceful haven without coercion and manipulation. It may never become that.

The evil of this is implicit not in the mechanism of power itself, but arises in the interpretation by a different-valuing group, is created by the separating of morality from reality. Economical and political reality, corporate industry, has been renounced since its effects became popularly visible. But there is no other option. There are only many ways to make it worse, and quite likely a few ways to improve it, make it better suited to our “human” standards. But we forget too easily that these are western standards - that rights before the state is a western concept. The west is still the only post industrial master-morality, but it has been largely lost after 9-11, when America, the great warrior nation, became a self-pitying freak. Thereby are the excesses allowed, not by “the state”. Such an institution is always a direct reflection of the peoples will. The will of Americans has been weakened. Thereby the parasitic nature of corporatism has gained ground. But what was the cause of the weakening of the will? It was the peoples ability to see behind the facade of politics coupled to their inability to affirm what they saw, and the paralysis that followed disabled them from even trying to affirm it — so far.

If philosophy is not aimed at clarifying the will to power as an ethics, it is going nowhere. Corporate; entity-like. Industrial: productive. Complex: system.
The good people of the world are very far removed from a logic powerful enough to ‘contain’ the future, which is to disclose it. To this end we have devised value-ontology, and to the end of disseminating value ontology this forum is created. A small step, but we aim to match corporations in their power, to function as a metaphysical “virus”, to “infect” people with this new, philosophically pure master-morality. Our quest is a discovery of the diversity of human minds, the endless ways in which the logic following from making all logic subject to what it serves to organize, creates stability in human thought as it reveals it as self-valuing and valuing the world in the thereby disclosed term-system.

America could no longer be valued in terms of Americans. What was the American? A person who needed the state to tell him to value himself. When he had learned this, he ceased to believe the state, and rejected it. Consequently he was unable to value himself, as he had built himself in the terms predicated by the state.
The solution to this lack of power is to affirm the state as a corporation, but at the same time not believing one word its mouthpieces utter. The solution is to take control of politics by affirming that this is a spectacle, a game of lies and deceit - an artform. “Exposing the facts” is not politics - creating new psychological conditions is required.

Note: American influence on Hitler was mostly the strategies devised by Edward Bernays, Freuds cousin – like his uncle and Hitler, an Austrian. The inventor of Hollywood-stage setting is of course Wagner. American soft-power is for a great part a Germanic product, which in turn is the inheritor of Hellenic Idealism. This great western ambition to create the world now has affected the entire world, but its main engines are still in America, even if Germany gradually becoming willing to live up to its self-imposed responsibilities again. The power to manipulate, as terrible as it is, is still nowhere near as horrifying as a world in the absence of this power.

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

• Thucydides
  Back to top Go down
  View user profile Send private message Send e-mail Online
  Aleatory
  bowstring
  bowstring
  Aleatory

Posts : 50
Join date : 2011-11-15

Amerika Empty
PostSubject: Re: Amerika Amerika Icon_minitimeWed Dec 14, 2011 7:12 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I feel for the most part, we have been writing past each other. This was meant as a semiotic observation on the present U.S. socio-political structure. However, you did write something that worries me:

‘A small step, but we aim to match corporations in their power, to function as a metaphysical “virus”, to “infect” people with this new, philosophically pure master-morality.’

I am afraid you have merely embarked on the propagation of yet another arbor-hierarchy. You speak of expropriation of corporate domination by force; to “match the corporations in their power”. Perhaps I should ask you to what you would have your concept point: I look for a balance–equilibrium rather than metastability–and to this end, one must dissipate the extant force rather than attempt to meet it with an equal force. Which brings me to your question of “to what would [I] have it point?” I would have my concepts point to the structural integrity of microcosmic societies cooperating as multiplicities; rhizomatic proliferation as opposed to arbor-hierarchical/mass production dissemination.

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

Posts : 6711
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Midgard

Amerika Empty
PostSubject: Re: Amerika Amerika Icon_minitimeFri Dec 16, 2011 11:09 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Aleatory wrote:
I feel for the most part, we have been writing past each other. This was meant as a semiotic observation on the present U.S. socio-political structure.
I can understand that my comments seemed somewhat irrelevant to your proposed context. But it was the context that I meant to challenge.

Quote :
However, you did write something that worries me:

‘A small step, but we aim to match corporations in their power, to function as a metaphysical “virus”, to “infect” people with this new, philosophically pure master-morality.’

I am afraid you have merely embarked on the propagation of yet another arbor-hierarchy. You speak of expropriation of corporate domination by force;
I have done no such thing, that would indeed be futile. Corporations don’t generally exert direct force, they act insidiously, infiltrate our cognitive circuitry and re-set our needs and create new desires in us. The violence acted out physically in wars and dictatorships is overshadowed by the structural violence, the domination of mans thinking. This is the power I seek to match and overcome. Philosophy, if it is to be politically effecting, must be more subtle, but still play the game of manipulation. The thinker must guide his fellow men toward the good, not ask them to abandon the bad. In life as in philosophy, one can not negate a negative by designating it as bad. We must set a positive for it to eliminate itself against. This is the context I am speaking of.

Quote :
I look for a balance–equilibrium rather than metastability–and to this end, one must dissipate the extant force rather than attempt to meet it with an equal force.
Power is not the same as force. I do not seek to meet force with force and start a war. Power is mostly intellectual. Every war is an intellectual game, both in terms of strategy as of ideology, motive.

Quote :
Which brings me to your question of “to what would [I] have it point?” I would have my concepts point to the structural integrity of microcosmic societies cooperating as multiplicities; rhizomatic proliferation as opposed to arbor-hierarchical/mass production dissemination.
We agree on a general political aim. I have long pondered how to create a movement from the root up containing in its intention already the self-organizing quality of spontaneously emerging self-cultivating socio-economical units. In other words, I have been looking for the DNA of a rhizomatically self-conditioning society. Now that I think that I have found this, at least a rudimentary code, I test all that comes along to this logic.

What I find is that corporations employ a kind of living-dead version of value ontology. They act on the reversed principle: to have people condition themselves in terms of services provided by other entities. to break the power of such entities, people must be taught, somehow - this is the hard part - to value services in terms of themselves. If the thought takes hold firmly enough as an intention, the “market” - the top-down stream of products to create demand - will be broken by a more natural, need-based system of self-sustaining by the means provided by the (physical, societal, moral) landscape.

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

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

Posts : 759
Join date : 2011-12-11

Amerika Empty
PostSubject: Re: Amerika Amerika Icon_minitimeFri Dec 16, 2011 12:02 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster

• Looks at bottle of Vicodin in left hand * My brand comes in pink pills, cute.

Hey! Take it easy on us drug addicts now. Puts out cigarette.

The best part of a cigarette is actually the moment you put it out, because that means you get to light another one.

America is the most vivid form of the disease we call modern humanity. It is the technological and economic realization of nihilism, something Nietzsche would have never even imagined was possible. The “casino” you describe is the precursor to what we have now, a giant mall, which is basically what the good old USA has become. Paris used to have (maybe still does) these things called Arcades, the equivalent of an American mall. Walter Benjamin planned to write a magnum opus about the concept, and in fact he tried to. The surviving fragments of it are called the Arcades Project, you might be interested in reading it, original poster.

Nihilism technologically realized, it is amazing. Instead of actually satisfying your desires, this mammoth Arcade simply inspires you with desire after desire, turning you into a ceaseless wellspring of new and more perverse desires, to the point that you can’t even reflect on your own dissatisfaction, emptiness, and longing. Makes me quite ill to think about it, actually. That’s why I spent more than five years without ever leaving my house.

Anyway, this disease must be corrected. All we need is a proper course of treatment: re-awaken the populace to its dissatisfaction.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Parodites
Tower
Tower
Parodites

Posts : 759
Join date : 2011-12-11

Amerika Empty
PostSubject: Re: Amerika Amerika Icon_minitimeFri Dec 16, 2011 12:22 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Also, the opiate and heroin user does not escape to fantasy. He takes opium to give him the false courage to embrace his own misery. Thus it often leads to a peculiar pathology, where the principle of the real is inverted and becomes a source of pleasure. The heroin user likes the dirt, likes being in the filth and the dirt, wants to be the filth and the dirt, wants to be the real.

His own pain and degenerating body, his own wretchedness, becomes a source of pleasure. Delectatio morosa is the sweetest bit of honey one can squeeze from the poppy bud. Opium is thanatos become pregnant, creative.