When Nietzsche Took Cocaine

[Jakob]

Well, surely you know this quite well:

'[W]hen I opened it and started to read, it was as if I'd entered a primeval forest. [...] I was inspired beyond belief.'
https://ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopic.php?p=2766472#p2766472

Yes, of course -- I just failed to make the connection. It was good to reread this story though. Indeed it is no wonder that this revolution led to a depression, as absolute as its philosophy was and as puny the object of its rage (the girl in question, just some quite vain teenage dame of no special spiritual virtues); what else but a crater could be left?

In this exercise, you did crash through the value of truth, that is to say through truth insofar as it was a value to life, insofar as it was 'true' ---
truth for its own sake vanquished truth for life's sake - thus this truth had to take on a cloak, a form, a being - a manner - it became essentially a god, under which you then, spent for the moment of poesis, continued to live, piously.

By the way, I just rediscovered an important influence from my childhood (compare Burton's black Batman and my transforming into Cornholio, I mean Jesus...):

Heh. (Yod Vau)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2Rckr0Q1PM

The black drakōn...

This reminds me of my favorite Disney movie, the Black Cauldron.

No matter who or what forged Thors hammer, you can damn well rely on its power.
The Logical Affirmation of the ER thus represents the reversal of science, the completion of the Machiavellian task, by the completion of western metaphysics and its subsuming into a new project, a new discipline. The power of truth finally harnessed as a tool; this shall be true, in order that life justifies itself.

And it can only be known when it is justified to itself - this is why the project is scientific, why it serves the knowledge of truth; because in order to be known, truth first has to be created.

That reminds me of this old thread of mine:

'Becoming can be conscious of itself, understand itself, as a Being in the process of being destroyed or created (depending on its perspective). So even if it is shattering illusion, it can only understand itself as an illusion being shattered: for there is only consciousness of Being, not of Becoming. Thus Becoming stamps the character of Being on itself even in the very destruction of (the illusion of) this Being. This is its transfiguration.'
https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopic.php?p=1913979#p1913979

Consciousness requires an object, a being (entity)—but those don't really exist!

Ah but when Being has stamped its character Becoming the road hasn't come to an end. I think VO serves here to go beyond what was hitherto knowable; as within a being, there can still be a river of flux, which flows like an Ouroboros.

As indeed Being is no more than a limitation placed upon becoming, it does not annihilate becoming!
Rather, if being were to perceive itself, it would still see a flowing. But the river goes around, perhaps in spirals, perhaps it flows upwards, perhaps it is lava, and hail pours into it from above (or from it, upwards), it may take on many different forms but it will always flow. Being, too, is flux, but it is flux contained within -
within what?
A formula, an exercise, a magic, a truth, a philosophy.

A truth hard enough to be known (as illusion) without being tarnished thereby.

[...]

The best (strongest) substances are the ultimate standards, limits of time ; the rule of Kronos as the golden age. Now the Affirmation of the ER is to consciousness what gold is to matter.

Gold is not a hard metal, though—I suppose it's so "soft" because it can afford to be, being so "hard" on the atomic level.

In any case, I totally agree with you on the mindstate.

I had figured that we are now in agreement. I have of course 'conceded' finally to this point which you have been pressing forever.

On gold; it is indeed soft to handle yet as you well say, atomically hard - I refer to it foremost as the best, and the strongest substance.

[Jakob]

Hardness requires a focal point; gold has no such point, it is just lustre, at whatever it looks.
(as the highest being looks only away from itself, shapes thew world by its vision)

The focus of hardness is in the diamond, which is a much simpler atom, though a splendid one as well.

The diamond does not however represent the bestowing virtue, precisely because it is too hard! God is the soft lustre which comes from being both incorruptible (thus fearless) and much - rich.

Diamonds always still make for a rather harsh lustre. Like when it rains diamonds inside of Neptune and Uranus, as is apparently the case. We may gather to what rune the diamond belongs.

Interesting to consider the different forms of pressure under which the diamonds and gold are formed;
Gold has to be produced in the furnace of a star, a diamond is formed by the 'mere' pressures of a planet.

[Jakob]

In ode to my affirmation of the ER as a means to defeat you in your depression at Street Fighter.
https://soundcloud.com/taurusvision/the-tuurbo-beat

[Jakob]

To affirm the ER of a moment is a means to phenomenally value the whole cosmos in terms of oneself. It is to produce a true instance of Chaos.

[Jakob]

For the sake of like, honor and such things -
My concession was possible after you conceded to the fact that the ER is not literally the case -
when we were thereby "licensed" to treat the ER as a holy lie, I could affirm it as such.

In as far as truth tends to be a convenience to praxis, a holy lie may be even more noble than a truth, at least this particular holy lie. Also since the experience of affirming it enforces a greater truthfulness.

All this serves the study of truth, as in the truth about truth; which is the underlying meaning to the Will to Power.
Truth, too, is in the end a mere 'instrument' - not the highest value. What then is the highest value? There is no name for this, because it is not a commodity.

Why then discuss it in philosophy? Why not keep it secret?
But we do, inadvertently, keep it secret from those who simply do not have the power to grasp it.
In so many words; it cant be given, it must be taken. But in truth, it cant be taken, it must be already possessed.

[Zeroeth Nature]

does Nietzsche's concept of the eternal recurrence of the same mean that he LITERALLY claimed this was a physical reality-- that everything LITERALLY 'recurrs' or returns again and again, in a real, materialistic fashion, for all of "eternity"? or, is the concept used by Nietzsche more as a thought-experiment, a hypothetical or metaphoric argument? is it a way of thinking which can lead to higher truths, or is it a literal ASPECT OF REALITY that Nietzsche was describing?

1. In his notebooks, Nietzsche does present it as fact.
2. I used to be-lieve in it (but then I used to be a fanatic).
3. I now think its value lies in being the supreme life-affirmation formula.

https://ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopic.php?p=2074019#p2074019

[Jakob]

It was only recently that you refuted its literal possibility - or that I showed how your cosmology refutes it.

The fact that you can know that it isn't true and still affirm it was inspiring. I ran with that inspiration a bit, though of course this cesspool isn't the place for that.

I always knew it wasn't possible and I always knew the affirmation is still an effective meditation. So yeah I am aware man, nothing new happened here.
I just sought to honor an old friend.

[Zeroeth Nature]

It was only recently that you refuted its literal possibility

A couple of years ago, yes:

https://pathos-of-distance.forumotion.com/t107-spacelight-continuing#2721

- or that I showed how your cosmology refutes it.

I suppose you pointed it out to other readers, but you didn't show it to me. I was not at all surprised. In fact, I was surprised at your inspiration! But then again:

The fact that you can know that it isn't true and still affirm it was inspiring.

For me the emphasis is on "and still affirm it". That's actually an even more recent development (from the night of May 2nd, 2020):

'I just had the ultimate insight during my Holosync. I am now mad like Nietzsche.
[...]
Well, I'm also not mad, because my madness is the measure of everything. I am the mad God, Dionysus.
Everyone and everything who is not Dionysus is my Ariadne.'

Cosmosis, Psychedelica Melodica, "Dance Of The Cosmic Serpent"

[Jakob]

It was only recently that you refuted its literal possibility

A couple of years ago, yes:

https://pathos-of-distance.forumotion.com/t107-spacelight-continuing#2721

Excellent thread. Enjoying the read!

- or that I showed how your cosmology refutes it.

I suppose you pointed it out to other readers, but you didn't show it to me. I was not at all surprised. In fact, I was surprised at your inspiration!

It was in part a show. A declaration of allegiance to my oldest philosophic colleague, to whom I do owe more than to any of the newer ones. In fact, the only one to whom I owe anything (philosophical) at all.

I felt I owed it to myself to honor your thinking.

But then again:

The fact that you can know that it isn't true and still affirm it was inspiring.

For me the emphasis is on "and still affirm it". That's actually an even more recent development (from the night of May 2nd, 2020):

'I just had the ultimate insight during my Holosync. I am now mad like Nietzsche.
[...]
Well, I'm also not mad, because my madness is the measure of everything. I am the mad God, Dionysus.
Everyone and everything who is not Dionysus is my Ariadne.'

Cosmosis, Psychedelica Melodica, "Dance Of The Cosmic Serpent"

Perfect.

[Jakob]

To condition that somewhat in terms of tastes and valuing on a level of art and aesthetics, I do value immensely the existence of Parodites and Capable and admire their powers in many senses more than anyone else, but they aren't Nietzscheans, they have not committed to this singular task of brining about the Superman.
Its true though. That is the only meaning of philosophy in the olden sense; to bring about the resolutions of both science and psychology, which as it turns out is (obviously in hindsight) a progression of them both to one and the same method of inquisition. One and the same a prior proposition to all argument; not a hypothesis but a fact, therefore a value-standard; all that does not conform to this fact is nonexistent.

This fact is the logic, in the sense that it prescribes reality.

So that is to the purpose of resolving the condition of mankind, which is a social condition. Im sure N would have emphasized some words here but he would have phrased it more dramatically. The Superman is of course not just some individual who occurs, but the ground to a whole future inherited by beings who are more wise to their powers than the herd-ape man, who just cucks up completely. That was a typo but apparently my Bill and Ted are listening along intently, if you catch my drift, which assuredly you do not, if you havent seen Bill and Ted and even then its doubtful.

The logic how is it to be employed?
First of all by being known. It makes people into more healthy creatures, more strongly connected. This is a chaotic process but the same way as the creation of a flower is chaotic.

In the second instance it is to be brought about, by doing such things as N proposes in the WtP, inflicting upon the human species a condition which rewards superior being.

How is this not merely a "chore", as Parodites would have it? How is this not a distraction of the philosopher from his true task, which is being evermore what he is?
Simple; but only simple if you understand that the world is self-valuings and nothing besides; when you can no longer separate your consciousness from the destiny of the universe in the primary-causal sense. When ones mind has become a daemon in the life of eternity; when a "feast of friends" means what it means.

When you are "functionally psychotic" in the sense of achieving the delusional results in actuality - when you have forged a katana from a rusty chainlink on the anvil I placed at the precipice.

[Jakob]

The golden nature values all into gold. I believe this to be the true timeline of the universe; Even though it may never happen, if there is a true end to the world of matter it is when all has been raged into gold, and there is nothing that can be changed anymore.

Valuing or valuation is the most "objective" value there is. In an abstract sense, "valuation" itself is invaluable (note: this means the opposite extreme of "not valuable"!). But in a concrete sense, it only begins with "some other self-valuings". Here, the opposite extreme of (presque) rien would be "all other self-valuings". This, however, can only happen indirectly; one can directly value only the self-valuings one actually encounters, of course... It is only by extension, if one values all of those, that one values all beings, directly or indirectly.

* Invaluable is probably read best as inestimable; of a worth that cant be contained by reason, circumscribed. 'If the doors of perception were cleansed every value would appear to man as it is: Infinite. For man has closed himself up, till he sees all values thro' narrow chinks of his cavern.'

It is fitting that the brother of the abyss and the screaming fire eagle above the abyss are the precursors to the golden nature, as gold is birthed in the fury of a star.

(Ultimately, the universe can only end if flux is ended entirely, which means only when all matter has been pressed into gold. The golden nature is the end of time)