Power of Nil

My definition expands to include secular forms of absolutism.
I acknowledge the origins in psychology, which develops into spiritual nihilism - religions like Abrahamism’s triad - and then evolves into secular forms, like post-modernism, Marxism, etc.

I trace the origins back to emerging self-consciousness, exposing the ego - lucid part of self - to a reality that distresses it, producing existential anxiety.
It gradually becomes aware of how it compares to other, producing insecurity and vulnerability, which nihilism acts as a defence against.

What does existence deny existence to?
Absolutes, i.e., certainty, perfection, completion, wholeness, omniscience, omnipotence, or any term understood as an absolute, including ‘god’, ‘truth’, ‘morality’, ‘self’…
Absolute = indivisible, immutable, singularity.
The mind fabricates these concepts - abstractions - and then demands them to be in existence - projecting them as already existing.
When it fails to discover them, or when faces with the possibility that they be entirely of tis own making, it calls the cosmos a ‘negative’.
So, nihilism, the concept itself, is an expression of nihilism.
A cosmos void of a one-god, universal morality, universal purpose, is not a negative but a positive, because it makes life possible, and because it exists, as it is, without requiring these noetic absolutes.
The projections themselves, if taken literally, and as what they are, becomes expressions of nihilism as they would negate the cosmos as it is.

But my positions proposes a cleansing of language from these corruptive elements and the appropriate definition of words, by understanding what language is and why it evolves.
For example, the concept of ‘morality’ need not a one-god to have meaning, nor is it entirely subjective, but refers to a kind of behaviour we witness in many species, and not only in the homo sapient.
What is common between these species?
They all use cooperative survival and reproductive strategies, necessitating tolerance and sympathy to facilitate the process and to overcome an already present fight/flight mechanism.
Morality does not require a god, nor is it subjective, or a social construct.
We must differentiate ethics from moral behaviour, as we have between genetics and memetics.
I use ethics to make the distinction clear.
Ethics evolves as an addition to the already evolved moral behaviour, as a way to facilitate coexistence on a human scale - and not a tribal one.
But this requires unpacking.

My position claims that much of modern language use is infected by nihilistic understanding, due to the effect of Abrahamism over the past 2,000 years.

To make it more clear…I claim that because language is infected by nihilistic defensiveness, much of what passes for “philosophy” is nonsensical debates over ideologies, and psychological fabrications.
More politics and marketing, if not psychological expressions of anxiety.
We are so used to this misuse of language that we adopt obscurantism as a profound insight, because it allows us to project into the vague poetics our own psychological issues and find relief in how they are reflected back in an endless dialogue over nonsense.
Occultism was a primitive way of converting the unknown, which produced anxiety, into something intimate - by naming it. Now it has become an argument in itself.
We accept nonsense using occult insinuations because we fear that what we perceive to be true is, in fact, so.
We secretly wish to erase the obvious…and this ‘secret’ is what makes the occult so effective.
It seduces and exploits human frailty and need/desire.

Just to tie a few threads, so to speak, together…

Nil is essential to life, because it delineates self from other. This occurs organically with the emergence of the membrane/skin/exoskeleton.
Self-Awareness begins with a simple premise: I am what I am not because consciousness is outwardly focused - it evolved to deal with world.
The negation of other is essential to preserving self.

But where it becomes psychotic is when this negation dominates reason.
Nil becomes a weapon to deny whatever threatens and chalenges the organism’s well-being and it becomes a emptiness it believes it can fill with tis own abstractions - to ‘correct’ the absence of what it needs and desires.
Words/Symbols become representations of these esoteric constructs - see the neurotic iambiguous - which can now be sued as defences or to construct alternate realities - Paradise/Utopia.
This is why language is fundamental to nihilism. It has no external grounding so it compensates with the projections of language.
See how ‘logos’ was corrupted by Christians into ‘god’ - words are now divine, magical expressions of a godly mind - a creator.
Instead of representing reality they construct it.

Because words are abstractions they can describe reality as some want it to be rather than how it actually is
The interpretation of reality then becomes more important than reality itself even though we all see the world through a subjective lens
Everything we experience and everything we know is filtered through that lens so any expression of the absolute cannot really be known

The metaphysical unfalsifiable Abrahamic God is the supreme example of this for it is so perfect that it can only be a conception and not a reality
The secular version of this is the concept of Universe which does actually exist in reality but can only be experienced at a very infinitesimal level
And one other version of this is mathematical infinity which is only a concept but one that can also only be perceived at a very infinitesimal level

Words are representations of abstractions.

Any expression of an absolute is in our own head but we mistake it as being in the world, or we intentionally convince ourselves that it is - self-deceit.
It would be like an artist mistaking his painting for the real thing…or painting something non-existent and imagining that is was in the world.

Yes.

The confusion of the representation for the represented is exploited by charlatans, hypocrites, and those who exploit human fears, needs and desires.

It’s the second oldest racket.

Notice that within the nihilistic paradigm - where everything is inverted and names are replaced - ‘god’ has not gone but has been replaced by ‘universe’ or ‘order’, and the concepts of ‘good/evil’ are not overcome - by those who sometimes claim to be Nietzsche followers and apostles - but have been renamed as ‘Nazi/Zionist’…or ‘worthy/unworthy’…

Nihilism is entirely linguistic, because it is a psychological defence against existence - a reaction to an emerging self-consciousness.
It exists only as ideology, dogma…and is expressed politically, as marketing, as psychology.
Not philosophy proper.

The real usurped by the ideal. Body usurped by mind.

Outside language and the minds that understand them, nihilism is meaningless - non-existent, and so are its products - it’s so called philosophies. Useless outside the minds that comprehend semiotics and can be influenced by them.
Modern philosophy, like modern spirituality is dominated by nihilism.
Begin your analysis with the concept represented by the English word ‘god’ - any linguistic equivalent will do.
Consider what it meant, and what it means.

The first being?

Prostitution

God represents the absolute from a positive perspective for those who believe in him
Nihilism is the inverted negative version because there is no reward for its believers

The first cannot be proven and so could be false and the second denies all reason for existence and so are as opposite as it is possible to be
The rejection of both lies in finding meaning to ones own individual life while accepting reality cannot be changed in any fundamental way

The inevitability and eternity of death is unavoidable so one should simply focus on what one can change instead
The eternal reward for believers denies the biology that we are animals like all others and will die just like them

Reality has to be accepted as it is not denied or reinterpreted for our convenience

We cannot be the desert because we are just a single grain of sand and no more
We cannot be the ocean because we are just a single drop of water and no more

Indeed.

And does not the priest also claim to be god’s favourite concubine, through which great pleasure can be had?

Indeed,

Through the Power of Nil, and Cult of Innocence, it becomes obvious how the self-delusion of the slave-caste can morph into a pervasive neurosis that spreads over time. It becomes a luxury, taken by an ‘elite’ class of chosen, as a revenge against the real elite class of Warrior and Kings (Aristocracy). It’s a mimicry that requires and needs forms of delusion, spread by lies, perpetuated by indoctrination into children. These “God’s Children”, “World Citizens”, “Global Proletariat”, “Chosen Ones”, are hypocritical and push a religion of double-standards. Chosen by “God”, yet, Chosen by Us, as long as you recite the themes (lies), play by (((our))) rules, and follow the Pre-Determined ethics, mythos, and morality.

Oh!

The second being witch-doctor, that became shaman that became priest…
Sometimes superstition peddler, although the practice evolved and branched out.
It used to be a carrier of the tribe’s lore, its accumulated knowledge and wisdom.
One part became science, philosophy and spirituality, and another became pseud-science, occultist philosophy and superstitions.

A split into astrology/astronomy, astrology/psychology, alchemy/chemistry, alchemy/ homeopathy etc.

From primitive towards advanced.

When Empires enter their final phase - their Dark Age - the ancient practices that worked in soothing the masses of desperate, ignorant, mostly illiterates, return.
This would include prophets, messiahs, superstition peddlers, and doom-sayers.
A cross section of ILP.

It’s so predictable that it can be sued as a sign, a symptom that the system is declining.

It seems like Mystics are simply failed Scientists or Doctors. The ‘real’ doctors, from pre-history, were measured by their successes, intelligence, and actual abilities. Those with lower intelligence, imitated or attempted to imitate, but failed, and thus the addiction began for justifications after-the-fact, along with dependency on ‘faith’ rather than the methods which were kept by the actual scientist/thinker/doctor/professional. So, simply put, the ones who succeeded are backed by reality (actual curing of disease) versus the plethora and more popular, faith-based believers who do not have a record of victories, despite them trumping up any ‘miracle’ or their compensating marketing-campaigns.

Those who can’t actually cure, or perform, instead rely on marketing and emotional theatrics. Convince the ill that they are ‘fine’ and ‘cured’, instead of actually curing.

It’s about having an effect to justify your status to the group.

Faith healers, like ancient shamans, relied on the power of persuasion - the Placebo effect.
Ancient shamans also had knowledge passed on from teacher to student, accumulating a pool of practical wisdom.

If you are unable to tell which is witch, you may fall victim to word-smiths and charlatans.
Gypsies using old-wives tales to manipulate gullible, desperate, degenerates.

Ok…