The Hypermnemata: an Existential Crisis.

This is the main board for discussing philosophy - formal, informal and in between.

The Hypermnemata: an Existential Crisis.

Postby Parodites » Mon May 03, 2021 6:00 pm

" Just as, in Stiegler's thesis, the hypomnemata is any
'external memory-device' or narrative formulae that conditions the subjectivity of those utilizing it to shape their history, so the hypermnemata is
an external memory device that conditions other memory devices, that is, the hypomnemata."

The hypermnemata is, in an ultimate sense, the 'meme singularity', whose higher-dimensional structure is enfolded in on the past and paradoxically reverberated in the eschaton of History like a metaphysical Mobius-strip,- stretching backward into the very origin of human consciousness with the emergence of Language, (per the basic thesis of generative anthropology) into the remote future in which that language is finally converted into its mnematic instrumentalization,- after whose realization every 'cultural atom' will resonate every other, driving an imperceptible clinamental divergence toward an unforeseen and unmappable future like that moving the Lucretian 'atom-universe'; after whose realization every cultural transmission will autopoietically generate another cultural transmission and so on, ad infinitum; the accelerating profusion of human culture in the form of our vagrant digital footprints and the personal data we allow Google et al to harvest from us over the internet,- even now growing faster and faster, even now being produced at an accelerating rate,- will explode into a 'heteroclitic mass' (Pound's term) in a long-range feedback-cycle amenable solely to the intervention and management of artificial intelligence, whose event-horizon lies firmly beyond the reach of any human operator's perception,- displaced as it is along a narratological vector for which the human mnema is already excavated from its mythic depth (a la. in a form stripped of any ascriptive praxis) and sublated by the inscriptive processes, (See "Emerging Vectors of Narratology; Unnatural Narrative Theory: A Paradoxical Paradigm", P. 201. "... a dual or divided poetics", for a purely mimetic model of narrative, by definition, "cannot comprehend antimemetic works that violate mimetic practices." Thus, "A complete narrative theory requires a binocular vision and a dialectical poetics. ") therefor shifting the weight of Destiny from us, to machines. The power of Memes was used to win an election a few years ago- while it was inspiring and certainly entertaining, it isn't exactly a 'good thing' because mimesis, now grown into the most powerful force in human culture, is being taken out of the control of humans- what happens then? The hypermnemata is, in essence, the mimetic core of Capital compressed to its ontological minima, (its ectypo-schismatic differential) thereby purified of System's entropic stressors and protected from the consequent integral collapse that Bataille's apocalyptic Gnosticism prophesized for Capitalism and indeed for all Systems, be they biological, economic, or metaphysical, like the ana-thymiatic rarefaction of the pneuma which comes to starve the Heraclitean 'fire of creation' of its fuel source in the Stoic model of the universe; a perfect techne, in Stiegler's term, capable of absorbing and reproducing all human culture (all HYPO-mnemata) in its own image. Mimesis is all consuming after its realization, and there will be no possibility of philosophy afterward, or individualism in general: mimesis, once mechanized in this way, means that language is mechanized. All of the modern political activity, (eg. globalist policy and Leftist deconstructionism) geared apparently toward extinguishing individualism, individual rights, freedom, free speech, etc., is not truly political: it is all a side-effect of the ongoing hypermnematic conversion of cultural history approaching the point of no return, or a meme singularity.

The foremost goal of my philosophy is to challenge, confront, and overcome the hypermnemata. But, in order to do that, one must first understand in detail, what the hypermnemata is and how it works. I will include several passages in which I develop the concept. I find it increasingly distressing that nobody else seems to have caught on to what is happening. While this stuff might be difficult to understand and digest, it is integral that you do just that, because otherwise, you're fucked.

Excerpt 1:

" The automatism at work in this currently unfolding but still indeterminate scenario lies in the fact that, as humans create self-referential,
'plunderphonically' originated remixes of remixes and mostly anonymous memes ad infinitum, so the omnipresent 'algorithm' allows these memes
to propagate, so that a new dual arrangement, or more properly, a kind of positive feedback loop like the long-term cycles noted by Land, whose
object lies firmly beyond the epistemological blind-spot of all present theory, develops outside the control of any human operative. The creative
output of the now globally connected human consciousness, finally distilled into autopoietically generated self-referential memes capable of
spreading virally and traversing a topology which, though it crosses continents in the physical world, simultaneously exists in a compressed
digital space, has become too massive in scope to be organized by anything other than an algorithm,- yet it is the algorithm itself that allows
memes to propagate out of control in the first place, that is,- the algorithm itself by which our creative output is so distilled. In effect, the creative
and selective processes have been fused, and the function of mimesis therefor subverted entirely, (insofar as mimesis implies an ironic
recapitulation of the selective-principle deployed by a group as an expression of the very individual against which it had been originally levied)
leading both to a form of self-censorship already visible in our more colloquially designated 'cancel-culture' and the flagellating hysterics of
identity-politics as well as the kind of 'free-mimesis' I have noted, by which the fatal decoupling of symbolization from the Object is arrived upon
and the underlying automatism is at last self-sublimed, fulfilling the utopian signifier of Capital's empty core,- that is, emancipating
value-exchange from symbolization and in this way stabilizing the accumulated stresses on the capitalist economic infrastructure exploited by
accelerationists and, more cynically recognized, prophesied by Bataille's accursed share as inevitable catastrophe. With this stability achieved, the
epistemological ruptures within our ontological horizon closed, (ie. our 'blind spot') and the catastrophe avoided, so the 'anastrophe' is suspended
and any final purification of System a la. Bataille's sacrificial violence equally refused,- leading to the interminable leveling of the Individual and
the entropic maxima (Which Badiou believed could never actually occur, since System would have been fatigued by the impermeable residuum
of its attempted conformation of the Individual and thus torn itself apart from within given its own internally accumulating free-radicals and
entropy long before such an eventuality might be realized.) I have been increasingly moved to warn of."


Excerpt 2:

"Myth is not primordial quasi-religion, or some kind of incubating antecedent for religion,
inasmuch as 'religion' is not a logically necessary progression in the development of myth. One would do well to fully differentiate the two. Myth,
whose modern equivalent is what the CCRU named hyperstition, is an artificially constructed, imaginative-poetic history (Like those for which
Lovecraft is infamous. Note his production of false documents, eg. the Necronomicon, as well as false actors, eg. the Mad Arab.) that, when
superimposed over 'real history', overloads the symbolic gaps, fragments, miss-identifications, contradictions, etc. in such a way as to explain the
tears in our own history (This explanatory mechanism is what I call a 'hypermnemata'. Just as, in Stiegler's thesis, the hypomnemata is any
'external memory-device' or narrative formulae that conditions the subjectivity of those utilizing it to shape their history, so the hypermnemata is
an external memory device that conditions other memory devices, that is, the hypomnemata.) that an empirical science, even in principle, cannot,-
and even convert them into energetically charged limen capable of propagating a discursive metalepsis across disparate, otherwise disconnected
semantic fields, that is, the autonomous or 'internal semiotic' discussed in this essay, which we must recognize as properly the secret of the
Kantian schematism which Kant himself, unable to properly articulate, was forced to dismiss as an 'art concealed in the depths of the human soul',
like all philosophers do with regard to their integral but inexplicable premises. Myth achieves this because, as discussed by Heraclitus, (and
argued equally in my own "Mythos and Ontos") it is naturally paired to the reinscriptive processes of the Logos and thereby intimates the direct
affirmation of Being, that is, a 'Doric trace' reaching back toward some occluded point of origination of the human cultus,- an affirmation from
which we are eventually disconnected by the linear development of techne,- a 'thaumazein' whose revelatory contents generates the circulus of
Vico's imaginative-universal, which structurally inheres an underlying pattern of material history that no 'particular' or empirical science can
access. A constructed history that is unable to do this, is simply not a mythology, but only a more elaborate fiction, like that of Tolkien or Star
Wars. For this is the function of mythology, as understood by the ancients who engaged directly with the still living mythos themselves,- as
opposed to modern scholars. Given the fact that the 'real history' of the ancients was so unreliable, the use of such a mythology is evident,- though
one might say that our own history is, if in other ways, even more inaccurate than theirs. Inasmuch as knowledge, that is, the ability to explain, is
itself power, so it was independently discovered around 2015, in no small part due to events surrounding the US election, that a hyperstition
superimposed on 'real-history' in this way, if it could repair the gaps within the later, might be utilized to not only explain otherwise
incomprehensible features of the 'real history', but to influence events in that history, therefor offering an alternative source of political power for
those who musingly named this force 'meme magic'."

Excerpt 3:

" Automatism; an unpredictable long-term feedback cycle appears, to borrow the Landian term, fusing the two functions specified above and
thus subverting mimesis itself. The hypomnemata, (the instruments by which a culture or age records its history, from the oral traditions of a
Socrates or Homer, each invested with their own topological proscriptions, to the written word, to the blog post and financial ledger, insofar as
such compositional functions imply equally, certain modifications to that subjectivity deploying them in tandem with processes of its own
reflective cognition in the construction of identity) or external regulative form by which modernity affirms its own history, amounts to the
self-perpetuating instrumentality embodied by auto-poiesis, (the automatism about which we are now speaking) that is, by endless technological
progress, [Or embodied, more precisely, by those external subsystems of our material-economic infrastructure through which one machinic
signet or technological innovation reproduces itself as the inertial telos or 'hypermnemata' of another and therefor accomplishes the semiotic
linkage (a connexion otherwise referred to in my work as semasiosyntax) designated by the term 'capital', until, at the height of this process,
capital reproduces itself as the teleological catalyst for its own creation,- that is, a 'pure emergence' projected from the vantage of a more planar
or Euclidean geometry upon the unseen 'curve of the series' in a new complex Riemannian-time, or, in Bloom's phrase, a 'revisionary calculus',-
reinscribing the predicative logic of contingent microscale or 'tychogenetic' descriptors,- like those called 'idiographs' in the Kantian
framework,- as a higher-order or nomothetic logic, thereby subverting the causal linkages (that is, semasiokinesis) implicit in our asymmetrically
temporalized ontology for purely semiotic ones, and closes the basic chiasmatic gap through which all such predication generates 'meaning' (as
a phenomenologically grounded dis-closure of Being to a temporal horizon, in Heideggerian terms) on one side or another of the
'phenomenological closure' (on one side or another of Bloom's ratio, or the 'ground of emergence') and thus restrains the otherwise unchecked,
negentropic inflationary semiosis. In this final stage, the regulative form grounded on the logic of capital,- now grown omnipresent and
completely metastasized by all external systems, will be capable of recapitulating within its own structure all previous regulative mnematic
forms, by which ages past had recorded their own histories, such that all of the human past will be consolidated and serialized within the
narrative of modernity. The acceleration of our apparent cultural transformation, which most compelled Steigler's critique, and the exponential
'quickening' of technological progress toward some occluded artificial intelligence or cybernetic transcendence, which it seems everyone is
certain about on all sides of the debate, then reveal themselves as illusions generated by an entirely inverse phenomenon, whereby the past is
fractally compressed, converted from analogue to serial data and ultimately 'digitized'. On the one side of this inversion, which we can read as
the last vestigial remainder of the chiasm, we have a singularity-point machine intelligence at the end of history, while on the other, we have the
Marxist species-essence absorbed by a residual subjectivity,- by a man who woke by Homeric trials, sported with Elizabethan libertines and took
to sleep under the stars of the Romantics, etc. therefor representing, unlike Nietzsche's last man, a kind of 'humanist fatalism' beyond the
evolutionary trajectory of any selective mechanism. The un-intuitable Grund of History was, for Schelling, neither eschatological terminus, but
simply this impermeable chiasm, chronostatically stretched beyond the epistemological saccade of the Event between what, in a more reductive
economic vocabulary, we might call the means of production and the ends of production, for which no predication could be made at all.] and
implied, following Bloch, by the myth of Progress more generally conceived,- a kind of malignant ontology and fatal obreptition of the nested
hierarchy, such that it is only possible to record modernity,- that is, to communicate its mimeses to our potential descendants,- in that historical
form capacitated by the very instrumental technology constituting modernity. (Computers, machine intelligence, etc.) In order to map the
modern, and therefor trace its labyrinth in search for an escape-route, we must record it; to record it we must utilize, and therefor empower, the
instruments by which it perpetuates itself, and through whose domain it solely exists; having empowered it, we have closed the door to one more
possible route back toward reality, surrendering ourselves all the more completely, in an apparent Freudo-thanatological nullification of all
potential psychodynamicism, to the automatism of Capital.

There is a 'lag' between the processes of individuation and hierarchialization, with this lag representing the pre-individual, which Simondon
describes as a kind of permeable field that influences both processes in tandem,- enough so that the hierarchy can be modified and shaped by
individuating processes, (such that it is not so imposing as to be slavery) while the individual can in turn still be compelled and modified,
reciprocally, by the hierarchy, that is, incentivized or de-incentivized toward certain behaviors conducive or inconducive to the needs of that
hierarchy, as well as provided an inheritance of culture to work with by the greater society, since man is not a tabula rasa and requires that as
much as anything in order to sustain his individuation-process and enter into the great Western project at self-discovery, the gnothic auton. This
lag is created by the underlying economic-material infrastructure, and the logic of capital is, as I have detailed, causing it to shrink more and
more, approaching a fatal asymptotic declination until the two processes eventually fuse, thereby subverting mimesis. In a post-scarcity economy,
or, if one prefers a mythological corollary, in a Marxist-communist Utopia, we can extrapolate from the preview given to us by the internet, in
which semiotic-coupling has detached all ideographic gestures from their objects and inverted the function of value-exchange: people don't
become more differentiated,- despite a short-term manifestation of apparent differentiation or 'valence' through tribalist fragmentation, which of
course recoils back to a minimal population following a single rapidly exploded distribution of its members- (eg. the singularity of Youtube and
Google versus the multiplicity of the early internet) they become more similar, more like-minded, more enculturated, as ideology propagates to
the point of homogenizing culture entirely. Thus the pre-individual field has to be salvaged and to do that, one must 'think beyond capitalism',
perhaps replacing its economic-material foundation with some new substrate entirely."


Excerpt 4:

" A useful metaphor in describing a new approach to this same task would be, in Kunze's lexicon, a stochastic resonance. The term refers to a way
of drawing out latent signals in an ambient environment: a white noise is produced through which the ambient signal is propagated, such that
what would otherwise be inaudible becomes, through the stochastic resonance,- audible. That inaudible signal is the paideuma or soul of History;
it is the lost object, the Innocence at the Garden with Adam and Eve, etc.; it is, in whatever linguistic guise, the ontos (literally, the 'thing') that
instantiates Vico's imaginative-universal within an irrecoverable past,- a past whose dwindling signal can only be strengthened through a
stochastic resonance phenomena. To bring about that necessary white noise, one must absorb the entire human past,- from the most obscure texts
to the literary beacons of the world, as attempted by Burton's Anatomy, Pound's Cantos, or finally my own books; the work of every language,
every era, on every conceivable subject. This collection of disparate knowledge, from Gnostic mysticism to Heyting algebra, from
mnemotechnological analysis to transcendental psychology, to 17th century Latin mystic-poets, to comparative religion, to Marxist theory, etc.
etc.: it is blended together, fused into the singular, continuous, monolithic white-noise, (just as the alchemists boil a mass of unrelated materials
down into the 'nigredo', a prime-substance from which to extract the secret of immortality, the philosopher's stone) using a variety of techniques
including metaleptic discourse, predicative calculus, Lullian diagrammatics, 'cryptopoetics', Hammanian metaschematism, Kabbalistic gematria,
the Poundian ideogrammatics, alchemical transformation, etc. Thus one goes about first engineering the white-noise through which to propagate,
with the hope of finally drawing it out into the audible range, the meaning of History,-- a lost signal to crash through the increasingly
anti-historical, dystopian, automated hypermnemata of modernity, by which all previous hypomnemata necessary in the construction of identity
have been destroyed, refused, cast aside under the feet of Walter Benjamin's "Angel of History", even by those of Benjamin's critical-theorist
admirers, as 'pernicious' objects which, far from producing 'kulture-meaning' like the Sinnstiftung described by Frobenian anthropology, have
only the one purpose in codifying patriarchal gender roles, destructive economics and racist ideology, etc. At any rate, the latent signal escavated
from our stochastic element or white-noise is the clinamen, a swerve in the otherwise linear series projected upon a higher manifold in complex
Reimannian-time; the 'clinamental divergence' of Lucretius' atom-universe. Together,- stochastic media and clinament,- Lucretian curve and
Anaximanderean vortice,- they form the diplocyclonic vortex within which to trace the spyrognomic structures of Creation,- the mizan passed
down to us, from the teachings of the great Apollonius, by one Hinax,- upon which to prognosticate, in the Bataillean sense, of the anastrophe
lying somewhere before and behind the catastrophe of system and modernity."
Qui non intelligit, aut taceat, aut discat.

BTHYS TOU ANAHAT KHYA-PANDEMAI.
-- Hermaedion, in: the Liber Endumiaskia.

ΑΝΤΗΡΟΠΑΡΙΟΝ,
in formis perisseia mutilata in omnia perisarkos mutilatum;
omniformis protosseia immutilatum in protosarkos immutilata.

Measure the breaking of the Flesh in the flesh that is broken.
[ The Ecstasies of Zosimos, Tablet
the First.]
User avatar
Parodites
 
Posts: 427
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2020 12:03 pm

Re: The Hypermnemata: an Existential Crisis.

Postby iambiguous » Mon May 03, 2021 7:04 pm

Oh, I thought you meant the other existential crisis. The one where flesh and blood human beings are prone to agonize over any number of things revolving around "how ought one to live?"

If only from the cradle to the grave.

Seriously, though, how might "The Hypermnemata" be related a question of that nature?

Given a particular context.

If that might be of interest to you.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 41588
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: hanging out with godot

Re: The Hypermnemata: an Existential Crisis.

Postby Parodites » Mon May 03, 2021 8:12 pm

Yes, I mean an existential crisis as in existential threat, eg. a meteor impact or something; a threat to our species, society, the existence of the human being as it is now and has been.

However, in terms of the other kind of existential crisis, as in nihilism, despair: there is a period of elation right before every big emotional collapse. Similarly, we see the profusion of meme culture now, a rejoicing over the god KEK, the sheer rollercoaster entertainment of Trump's bid and election, all fueled by memes online; the grasping of the revelatory potential of meme culture, since, if it could win one election, it can win another, and shift the balance of power back toward the people, etc. That is all the elation right before the crash, which is the realization totally, of the hypermnemata, in whose image all hypomnemata (the modes of self-referential history; the narratological frameworks by which individuals construct their own identities and histories) will be reconstructed, refashioning the entire material of history in the image of this new "non-culture" and extinguishing all potential expression of individuality, whose unconscious heralds are globalism, relativism, deconstructionism, etc. But if I thought that was inevitable, I would not be writing about it. So I am not in despair, but others will be.
Qui non intelligit, aut taceat, aut discat.

BTHYS TOU ANAHAT KHYA-PANDEMAI.
-- Hermaedion, in: the Liber Endumiaskia.

ΑΝΤΗΡΟΠΑΡΙΟΝ,
in formis perisseia mutilata in omnia perisarkos mutilatum;
omniformis protosseia immutilatum in protosarkos immutilata.

Measure the breaking of the Flesh in the flesh that is broken.
[ The Ecstasies of Zosimos, Tablet
the First.]
User avatar
Parodites
 
Posts: 427
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2020 12:03 pm

Re: The Hypermnemata: an Existential Crisis.

Postby iambiguous » Tue May 04, 2021 4:53 pm

Parodites wrote: Yes, I mean an existential crisis as in existential threat, eg. a meteor impact or something; a threat to our species, society, the existence of the human being as it is now and has been.


An act of God...or a threat from something like the covid virus. Something that has little or nothing to do with dasein, conflicting goods and political economy. At least until the heated discussions and debates begin to pop up in regard to how to deal with it. Then we bump into the conflicting goods that revolve around wearing masks or lockdowns or getting vaccinated or the role of government and Big Brother. The existential crises I'm more inclined to explore.

Parodites wrote: However, in terms of the other kind of existential crisis, as in nihilism, despair: there is a period of elation right before every big emotional collapse. Similarly, we see the profusion of meme culture now, a rejoicing over the god KEK, the sheer rollercoaster entertainment of Trump's bid and election, all fueled by memes online; the grasping of the revelatory potential of meme culture, since, if it could win one election, it can win another, and shift the balance of power back toward the people, etc. That is all the elation right before the crash, which is the realization totally, of the hypermnemata, in whose image all hypomnemata (the modes of self-referential history; the narratological frameworks by which individuals construct their own identities and histories) will be reconstructed, refashioning the entire material of history in the image of this new "non-culture" and extinguishing all potential expression of individuality, whose unconscious heralds are globalism, relativism, deconstructionism, etc. But if I thought that was inevitable, I would not be writing about it. So I am not in despair, but others will be.


Maybe.

But this is still entirely too academic, scholastic, didactic -- pedantic? -- for my taste. I'm more interested in how your analysis above might compare and contrast with the arguments I make in my signature threads...given a set of circumstances in which a Trump supporter might confront a Biden supporter. Or in which someone I construe to be a moral and political objectivist confronts those of my ilk: moral and political nihilists.

Again, given a particular context.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 41588
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: hanging out with godot

Re: The Hypermnemata: an Existential Crisis.

Postby Fixed Cross » Wed May 05, 2021 9:58 pm

It's all entertainment, isn't it?

The world is nothing more than an amusing meme.

People who do stuff are so stupid. They should stay inside and wear masks. Otherwise they're larping.

I think Im getting it.... the super deep philosophy....
The strong act as they may, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Nietzsche's Heritage; The Philosophy of the Future - Some Music - The Magical Tree of Life
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 11544
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: The Hypermnemata: an Existential Crisis.

Postby iambiguous » Wed May 05, 2021 10:11 pm

Fixed Cross wrote:It's all entertainment, isn't it?

The world is nothing more than an amusing meme.

People who do stuff are so stupid. They should stay inside and wear masks. Otherwise they're larping.

I think Im getting it.... the super deep philosophy....


Note to others:

From time to time I, uh, "get" to him. And he'll post all but unintelligible stuff like this.

What does it mean?

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Unless of course I'm wrong. :wink:
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 41588
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: hanging out with godot

Re: The Hypermnemata: an Existential Crisis.

Postby Fixed Cross » Wed May 05, 2021 10:20 pm

It's all very beautiful.
The strong act as they may, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Nietzsche's Heritage; The Philosophy of the Future - Some Music - The Magical Tree of Life
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 11544
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: The Hypermnemata: an Existential Crisis.

Postby Parodites » Sat May 08, 2021 9:25 pm

The world? The world can choke on my knob son. Oh my god I feel so sad about, like, the world, it keeps on moving and, like, aw man I wish I was a part of it. NOT. The only thing I want to be a part of is this botte of Percocet, Sarah's internal organs and my own brain. You can go ahead and take this whole world and fuck yourself to death with it it jabroni.

Aw man, I took a glance and thought Fixed actually laid out something I could address, something I'd have to think about and respond to,- but it's just more bullshit. I was concerned I was going to eat through this brand new bottle for nothing again; thankfully, I can get this out of the way realllll fast and go enjoy the rest of my night.

It isn't real politics. None of this is real. It is all the hypermnemata conditioning and programming you. And people who pretend that their wearing or not wearing a mask is some kind of statement are LARPing. (BTW, Fixed, I never said you were LARPING. I said the morons who ran into the Capital building to take fucking selfies were LARPING. Somehow you got offended by osmosis and now you're being a little bitch about it. Passive-aggressiveness is not becoming a male, refrain from directing it toward me in the future, otherwise I might get the idea of fucking you like a little bitch. Also refrain from saying dumb shit.) It is what Dugin calls subpolitics. Every single thing that has happened and is going to happen is a symptom of a disease, not the disease. People who "do" things- you are "doing" things in response to a spectacle. Therefor the spectacle has absorbed you and made you part of itself. That is the logic of the hypermnemata. By interacting with it, you are incorporated into it and perpetuate its logic, at however unconscious a level.

If you have a headache, it is easy to understand: take tylenol (if you're a pussy, I prefer percocet and heroin) and the symptom goes away. But it is harder to understand that it's a metastatic tumor on your frontal gyrus and it's going to kill you without the use of specialized gamma-knife surgery. It's a lot harder to understand the tumor let alone correct it; it requires many years of training and medical knowledge and higher-resolution verbiage (jargon) even to merely talk about. So "politics": that's the headache and the tylenol. With a lot of you people, for me, it is mostly just a headache. But what I am into and dealing with: that is the brain tumor and the gamma knife. A crystalline example is the legality of pot and gay marriage, stuff like this: that isn't political. That is subpolitical and doesn't mean anything and the people who talk about it are morons. This subpolitical veneer has been used to surreptitiously insert concepts that do not seem immediately connected to what our modern politics is expressing. Like cultural inclusivity just being a veneer the elites use to cover up the pan-hemispheric world economy they are pushing as if it were a moral victory, or even moral at all. Like I write here:

" The apparent contradiction in the bulk of critical theory, with the individual deconstructively excised from the
primary-process and the subject thus solely elevated to the status of Truth, alongside the conclusion that the individual is programmatically
derived by the secondary through a kind of specialization tacitly grounded in the very marginalization, class-structure, gender disparity, socially
constructed roles, and racism that critical-theory finds its highest task in freeing us from, is not merely an apparent contradiction- it is in fact quite
integral to the world-view in question,- that is, a hard leftism which best serves those who have co-opted and transformed it into a mere
ideological vessel for the secreted transmission of certain economic and political goals, like the mass exportation of labor to foreign nations
passed off as a moral victory and couched upon the ideal of a freer and more inclusive world, or less emphatically said, on open boarders and the
kind of pan-hemispheric markets so beneficial to those states currently enjoying the later stages of tertiary-capitalism, or more properly,- to those
corporations in control of such states. In so many words, this subversion of mimesis is ultimately responsible for the dissolution of the political
into the subpolitical, of morality into bioethics, as well as for the fragmentation of the human subject into unthinking individualism, hedonic
excess, materiality, consumerism, tribalist identity-politics, etc. Liberal-secular humanism, as Dugin explains, designates simply this sub-political
reality of modern politics, insofar as the basic interests of liberal humanism,- or more generally, the most conspicuous subject matter of our
political discourse on both the Left and the Right,- consists in things like the legislation of marijuana, the legality of gay marriage, etc. none of
which are even political subjects in the true sense, but simply the matter of bottom up, state-level legislatures already established theoretically by
the federalists a few hundred years ago and of course injuncted upon or ignored by federal over-reach and those executive agencies spirited along
by corporatocratic neocons and neolibs in the pursuit of their globalist program."

So, if you see me uninterested in certain discussions,- discussions I would deem meaningless and 'subpolitical', well it's because I don't give a fuck.

I will extend what I said earlier:

The emergence of a hypermnemata was perhaps inevitable, given the fact that the hypomnemata, necessary for the construction of individual identity, began to appear quite a long time ago,- namely in the shadow of Socrates. Because Spengler's 'inner motivations' were, prior to the social revolution experienced first by the Athenians following the appearance of Socrates on the stage of world-history, reflected immediately and perfectly in the demos, (that is, the network of iteroecotic exchange-functions) the pathos of Greek man was materially embodied in the forces of marginalization with which he found himself invisibly ensconced,-- generating as they did a psychodynamic pressure we would call repression, though a form of repression not yet made an injunction against the intrusions of jouissance,- a form of repression not yet made inward and so converted, from a merely passive counter-flow of the subporrected libido, into an active drive in and of itself, (A basic fact of the modern psyche is that repression functions as an active drive, not merely a passive counter-drive to Eros, just as Eros, in its turn,- once fulfilling for the Greek cosmogon the Dionysian limen between the excesses of Life and Death, the demi-ourgias of the corporeal and the sacromimetic reinscription of the sacred and the profane,- had for the young Hellenes not yet been differentiated by the antidrome and so transmogrified by the reification of the incommensurable barrier of Thanatos, which had been, up to that point, only grasped obliquely in myths like that of Narcissus and his spring,- the thought of the ungraspable image, of the transcendent, as the image of the self, in Melville's phrase.) following Browne's conception in Life Against Death,-- as opposed to being worked out within the secondary-process through a series of internal reactions carried out by the individual,- by reflective consciousness, in a word, or the great bane and triumph of modernity, in its divergence from the primary. In fact, it would be impossible for Greek man to become conscious of these pathological divergences (that is, his individuality) in the first place, since the recognition of these affects requires the very 'signal lag' which gives rise to them.

The hypermnemata is, in an ultimate sense, the 'meme singularity', whose higher-dimensional structure is enfolded in on the past and paradoxically reverberated in the eschaton of History like a metaphysical Mobius-strip,- stretching backward into the very origin of human consciousness with the emergence of Language, (per the basic thesis of generative anthropology) into the remote future in which that language is finally converted into its mnematic instrumentalization,- after whose realization every 'cultural atom' will resonate every other, driving an imperceptible clinamental divergence toward an unforeseen and unmappable future like that moving the Lucretian 'atom-universe'; after whose realization every cultural transmission will autopoietically generate another cultural transmission and so on, ad infinitum; the accelerating profusion of human culture in the form of our vagrant digital footprints and the personal data we allow Google et al to harvest from us over the internet,- even now growing faster and faster, even now being produced at an accelerating rate,- will explode into a 'heteroclitic mass' (Pound's term) in a long-range feedback-cycle amenable solely to the intervention and management of artificial intelligence, whose event-horizon lies firmly beyond the reach of any human operator's perception,- displaced as it is along a narratological vector for which the human mnema is already excavated from its mythic depth (a la. in a form stripped of any ascriptive praxis) and sublated by the inscriptive processes, (See "Emerging Vectors of Narratology; Unnatural Narrative Theory: A Paradoxical Paradigm", P. 201. "... a dual or divided poetics", for a purely mimetic model of narrative, by definition, "cannot comprehend antimemetic works that violate mimetic practices." Thus, "A complete narrative theory requires a binocular vision and a dialectical poetics. ") therefor shifting the weight of Destiny from us, to machines. The power of Memes was used to win an election a few years ago- while it was inspiring and certainly entertaining, it isn't exactly a 'good thing' because mimesis, now grown into the most powerful force in human culture, is being taken out of the control of humans- what happens then? The hypermnemata is, in essence, the mimetic core of Capital compressed to its ontological minima or 'epimoric ratio', using a term from the Archytan metaphysics, [See Adler, in "Plato's Timaeus and the Missing Fourth Guest; Appendix 2; the Archytan Alternative in the Pythagorean School".] (its ectypo-schismatic differential) thereby purified of System's entropic stressors and protected consequently from the integral collapse that Bataille's apocalyptic Gnosticism prophesized for Capitalism and indeed for all Systems, be they biological, economic, or metaphysical, like the ana-thymiatic rarefaction of the pneuma which comes to starve the Heraclitean 'fire of creation' of its fuel source in the Stoic model of the universe; a perfect techne, in Stiegler's term, capable of absorbing and reproducing all human culture (all hypo-mnemata) in its own image. Mimesis is all consuming after its realization, and there will be no possibility of philosophy afterward, or individualism in general: mimesis, once mechanized in this way, means that language is mechanized. All of the modern political activity, (eg. globalist policy and Leftist deconstructionism) geared apparently toward extinguishing individualism, individual rights, freedom, free speech, etc., is not truly political: it is all a side-effect of the ongoing hypermnematic conversion of cultural history approaching the point of no return, or a meme singularity.


^ And that's as toned down as I can get. If you think that's too high-falootin', get a load of this:


" ... Automatism; an unpredictable long-term feedback cycle appears, to borrow the Landian term, fusing the two functions specified above and
thus subverting mimesis itself. The hypomnemata, (the instruments by which a culture or age records its history, from the oral traditions of a
Socrates or Homer, each invested with their own topological proscriptions, to the written word, to the blog post and financial ledger, insofar as
such compositional functions imply equally, certain modifications to that subjectivity deploying them in tandem with processes of its own
reflective cognition in the construction of identity) or external regulative form by which modernity affirms its own history, amounts to the
self-perpetuating instrumentality embodied by auto-poiesis, (the automatism about which we are now speaking) that is, by endless technological
progress, [Or embodied, more precisely, by those external subsystems of our material-economic infrastructure through which one machinic
signet or technological innovation reproduces itself as the inertial telos or 'hypermnemata' of another and therefor accomplishes the semiotic
linkage (a connexion otherwise referred to in my work as semasiosyntax) designated by the term 'capital', until, at the height of this process,
capital reproduces itself as the teleological catalyst for its own creation,- that is, a 'pure emergence' projected from the vantage of a more planar
or Euclidean geometry upon the unseen 'curve of the series' in a new complex Riemannian-time, or, in Bloom's phrase, a 'revisionary calculus',-
reinscribing the predicative logic of contingent microscale or 'tychogenetic' descriptors,- like those called 'idiographs' in the Kantian
framework,- as a higher-order or nomothetic logic, thereby subverting the causal linkages (that is, semasiokinesis) implicit in our asymmetrically
temporalized ontology for purely semiotic ones, and closes the basic chiasmatic gap through which all such predication generates 'meaning' (as
a phenomenologically grounded dis-closure of Being to a temporal horizon, in Heideggerian terms) on one side or another of the
'phenomenological closure' (on one side or another of Bloom's ratio, or the 'ground of emergence') and thus restrains the otherwise unchecked,
negentropic inflationary semiosis. In this final stage, the regulative form grounded on the logic of capital,- now grown omnipresent and
completely metastasized by all external systems, will be capable of recapitulating within its own structure all previous regulative mnematic
forms, by which ages past had recorded their own histories, such that all of the human past will be consolidated and serialized within the
narrative of modernity. The acceleration of our apparent cultural transformation, which most compelled Steigler's critique, and the exponential
'quickening' of technological progress toward some occluded artificial intelligence or cybernetic transcendence, which it seems everyone is
certain about on all sides of the debate, then reveal themselves as illusions generated by an entirely inverse phenomenon, whereby the past is
fractally compressed, converted from analogue to serial data and ultimately 'digitized'. On the one side of this inversion, which we can read as
the last vestigial remainder of the chiasm, we have a singularity-point machine intelligence at the end of history, while on the other, we have the
Marxist species-essence absorbed by a residual subjectivity,- by a man who woke by Homeric trials, sported with Elizabethan libertines and took
to sleep under the stars of the Romantics, etc. therefor representing, unlike Nietzsche's last man, a kind of 'humanist fatalism' beyond the
evolutionary trajectory of any selective mechanism. The un-intuitable Grund of History was, for Schelling, neither eschatological terminus, but
simply this impermeable chiasm, chronostatically stretched beyond the epistemological saccade of the Event between what, in a more reductive
economic vocabulary, we might call the means of production and the ends of production, for which no predication could be made at all.] and
implied, following Bloch, by the myth of Progress more generally conceived,- a kind of malignant ontology and fatal obreptition of the nested
hierarchy, such that it is only possible to record modernity,- that is, to communicate its mimeses to our potential descendants,- in that historical
form capacitated by the very instrumental technology constituting modernity. (Computers, machine intelligence, etc.) In order to map the
modern, and therefor trace its labyrinth in search for an escape-route, we must record it; to record it we must utilize, and therefor empower, the
instruments by which it perpetuates itself, and through whose domain it solely exists; having empowered it, we have closed the door to one more
possible route back toward reality, surrendering ourselves all the more completely, in an apparent Freudo-thanatological nullification of all
potential psychodynamicism, to the automatism of Capital.

There is a 'lag' between the processes of individuation and hierarchialization, with this lag representing the pre-individual, which Simondon
describes as a kind of permeable field that influences both processes in tandem,- enough so that the hierarchy can be modified and shaped by
individuating processes, (such that it is not so imposing as to be slavery) while the individual can in turn still be compelled and modified,
reciprocally, by the hierarchy, that is, incentivized or de-incentivized toward certain behaviors conducive or inconducive to the needs of that
hierarchy, as well as provided an inheritance of culture to work with by the greater society, since man is not a tabula rasa and requires that as
much as anything in order to sustain his individuation-process and enter into the great Western project at self-discovery, the gnothic auton. This
lag is created by the underlying economic-material infrastructure, and the logic of capital is, as I have detailed, causing it to shrink more and
more, approaching a fatal asymptotic declination until the two processes eventually fuse, thereby subverting mimesis. In a post-scarcity economy,
or, if one prefers a mythological corollary, in a Marxist-communist Utopia, we can extrapolate from the preview given to us by the internet, in
which semiotic-coupling has detached all ideographic gestures from their objects and inverted the function of value-exchange: people don't
become more differentiated,- despite a short-term manifestation of apparent differentiation or 'valence' through tribalist fragmentation, which of
course recoils back to a minimal population following a single rapidly exploded distribution of its members- (eg. the singularity of Youtube and
Google versus the multiplicity of the early internet) they become more similar, more like-minded, more enculturated, as ideology propagates to
the point of homogenizing culture entirely. Thus the pre-individual field has to be salvaged and to do that, one must 'think beyond capitalism',
perhaps replacing its economic-material foundation with some new substrate entirely."

Tylenol isn't going to save you. The only saving is in: diagnosing and cutting out the tumor. And apparently, I am the only one with the gamma-knife necessary for accomplishing that task without killing the patient in the process.

However, I invite the new hostility Fixed. It is all apropos. I am the only way. Become my disciple or become nothing. Other "philosophers" cannot exist, as long as I do.

I was really just postponing the Reality by honoring my friends and being respectful. I have nothing to respect. That is my reality. So how about this- bow down and follow my directives and do exactly what I say, or fuck off into non-entity because nobody even knows what is happening- let alone does anyone have any idea of what to do about it. I am done having conversations. Here's the line-up: do what I say, or fuck off. The Parodites cult is now open for business, I will be receiving sign up requests in my threads as well as by PM.
Qui non intelligit, aut taceat, aut discat.

BTHYS TOU ANAHAT KHYA-PANDEMAI.
-- Hermaedion, in: the Liber Endumiaskia.

ΑΝΤΗΡΟΠΑΡΙΟΝ,
in formis perisseia mutilata in omnia perisarkos mutilatum;
omniformis protosseia immutilatum in protosarkos immutilata.

Measure the breaking of the Flesh in the flesh that is broken.
[ The Ecstasies of Zosimos, Tablet
the First.]
User avatar
Parodites
 
Posts: 427
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2020 12:03 pm

Re: The Hypermnemata: an Existential Crisis.

Postby Fixed Cross » Mon May 10, 2021 5:11 pm

Parodites wrote:The world? The world can choke on my knob son. Oh my god I feel so sad about, like, the world, it keeps on moving and, like, aw man I wish I was a part of it. NOT. The only thing I want to be a part of is this botte of Percocet, Sarah's internal organs and my own brain. You can go ahead and take this whole world and fuck yourself to death with it it jabroni.

Not a good beginning, pure nihilism, escapism, which is exactly what I accuse you of, why I called you a traitor in the first place.

Aw man, I took a glance and thought Fixed actually laid out something I could address, something I'd have to think about and respond to,- but it's just more bullshit. I was concerned I was going to eat through this brand new bottle for nothing again; thankfully, I can get this out of the way realllll fast and go enjoy the rest of my night.

It isn't real politics. None of this is real. It is all the hypermnemata conditioning and programming you. And people who pretend that their wearing or not wearing a mask is some kind of statement are LARPing. (BTW, Fixed, I never said you were LARPING. I said the morons who ran into the Capital building to take fucking selfies were LARPING. Somehow you got offended by osmosis and now you're being a little bitch about it. Passive-aggressiveness is not becoming a male, refrain from directing it toward me in the future, otherwise I might get the idea of fucking you like a little bitch. Also refrain from saying dumb shit.) It is what Dugin calls subpolitics. Every single thing that has happened and is going to happen is a symptom of a disease, not the disease. People who "do" things- you are "doing" things in response to a spectacle. Therefor the spectacle has absorbed you and made you part of itself. That is the logic of the hypermnemata. By interacting with it, you are incorporated into it and perpetuate its logic, at however unconscious a level.

I dont think you accused me of larping at all. I think youve given away your country because you think everyone fighting for it is larping. And Im not talking about the people who walked over to the capital, nor of the commies who were let in by the guards.

If you have a headache, it is easy to understand: take tylenol (if you're a pussy, I prefer percocet and heroin) and the symptom goes away. But it is harder to understand that it's a metastatic tumor on your frontal gyrus and it's going to kill you without the use of specialized gamma-knife surgery. It's a lot harder to understand the tumor let alone correct it; it requires many years of training and medical knowledge and higher-resolution verbiage (jargon) even to merely talk about. So "politics": that's the headache and the tylenol. With a lot of you people, for me, it is mostly just a headache. But what I am into and dealing with: that is the brain tumor and the gamma knife. A crystalline example is the legality of pot and gay marriage, stuff like this: that isn't political. That is subpolitical and doesn't mean anything and the people who talk about it are morons. This subpolitical veneer has been used to surreptitiously insert concepts that do not seem immediately connected to what our modern politics is expressing. Like cultural inclusivity just being a veneer the elites use to cover up the pan-hemispheric world economy they are pushing as if it were a moral victory, or even moral at all.

And these elites, how do you account for them?

I dont separate the elites (or the Gods) from the material of my investigation, Im not a Sokratic, or Marxist; all politics is the play of self valuing logics, greater and stronger integrities. The complexities are far more involved than what you or even any digital computer can handle.

Like I write here: " The apparent contradiction in the bulk of critical theory, with the individual deconstructively excised from the
primary-process and the subject thus solely elevated to the status of Truth, alongside the conclusion that the individual is programmatically
derived by the secondary through a kind of specialization tacitly grounded in the very marginalization, class-structure, gender disparity, socially
constructed roles, and racism that critical-theory finds its highest task in freeing us from, is not merely an apparent contradiction- it is in fact quite
integral to the world-view in question,- that is, a hard leftism which best serves those who have co-opted and transformed it into a mere
ideological vessel for the secreted transmission of certain economic and political goals, like the mass exportation of labor to foreign nations
passed off as a moral victory and couched upon the ideal of a freer and more inclusive world, or less emphatically said, on open boarders and the
kind of pan-hemispheric markets so beneficial to those states currently enjoying the later stages of tertiary-capitalism, or more properly,- to those
corporations in control of such states. In so many words, this subversion of mimesis is ultimately responsible for the dissolution of the political
into the subpolitical, of morality into bioethics, as well as for the fragmentation of the human subject into unthinking individualism, hedonic
excess, materiality, consumerism, tribalist identity-politics, etc. Liberal-secular humanism, as Dugin explains, designates simply this sub-political
reality of modern politics, insofar as the basic interests of liberal humanism,- or more generally, the most conspicuous subject matter of our
political discourse on both the Left and the Right,- consists in things like the legislation of marijuana, the legality of gay marriage, etc. none of
which are even political subjects in the true sense, but simply the matter of bottom up, state-level legislatures already established theoretically by
the federalists a few hundred years ago and of course injuncted upon or ignored by federal over-reach and those executive agencies spirited along
by corporatocratic neocons and neolibs in the pursuit of their globalist program."

You are focusing on the symptoms, the labels, the 'studies' of 'experts' and 'thinkers' -
Youve not actually thought it through using the hard logic of power. To your mind, will to power doesn't really relevantly exist.
So logically you would like for the world to choice on your knob.
But it won't.

So, if you see me uninterested in certain discussions,- discussions I would deem meaningless and 'subpolitical', well it's because I don't give a fuck.

You run. I noticed.

I will extend what I said earlier:

The emergence of a hypermnemata was perhaps inevitable, given the fact that the hypomnemata, necessary for the construction of individual identity, began to appear quite a long time ago,- namely in the shadow of Socrates. Because Spengler's 'inner motivations' were, prior to the social revolution experienced first by the Athenians following the appearance of Socrates on the stage of world-history, reflected immediately and perfectly in the demos, (that is, the network of iteroecotic exchange-functions) the pathos of Greek man was materially embodied in the forces of marginalization with which he found himself invisibly ensconced,-- generating as they did a psychodynamic pressure we would call repression, though a form of repression not yet made an injunction against the intrusions of jouissance,- a form of repression not yet made inward and so converted, from a merely passive counter-flow of the subporrected libido, into an active drive in and of itself,

What Nietzsche identified as slave morality. And extreme boringness.
There is no writer more boring than Plato.

As Ive always said, Sokrates is the distraction of the human from Being. He is the first Cosmopolitan gossiper, making it seem like philosophy is about the malcontent of those who dont want to leave the city, like Sokrates, rather than about what one finds outside of the city. The world, being.

The Sokratic citizen has no other option than to succumb to judgment of other humans.
America's foundation relied on precisely the opposite.


(A basic fact of the modern psyche is that repression functions as an active drive, not merely a passive counter-drive to Eros, just as Eros, in its turn,- once fulfilling for the Greek cosmogon the Dionysian limen between the excesses of Life and Death, the demi-ourgias of the corporeal and the sacromimetic reinscription of the sacred and the profane,- had for the young Hellenes not yet been differentiated by the antidrome and so transmogrified by the reification of the incommensurable barrier of Thanatos, which had been, up to that point, only grasped obliquely in myths like that of Narcissus and his spring,- the thought of the ungraspable image, of the transcendent, as the image of the self, in Melville's phrase.) following Browne's conception in Life Against Death,-- as opposed to being worked out within the secondary-process through a series of internal reactions carried out by the individual,- by reflective consciousness, in a word, or the great bane and triumph of modernity, in its divergence from the primary. In fact, it would be impossible for Greek man to become conscious of these pathological divergences (that is, his individuality) in the first place, since the recognition of these affects requires the very 'signal lag' which gives rise to them.

Yes, and you are a symptom of this, and angry at me for not being a symptom of it.

This stuff is really old by the way dude. We've discussed it in 2011 at some length on BTL too but its something even Freud was aware of.

The hypermnemata is, in an ultimate sense, the 'meme singularity', whose higher-dimensional structure is enfolded in on the past and paradoxically reverberated in the eschaton of History like a metaphysical Mobius-strip,- stretching backward into the very origin of human consciousness with the emergence of Language, (per the basic thesis of generative anthropology) into the remote future in which that language is finally converted into its mnematic instrumentalization,- after whose realization every 'cultural atom' will resonate every other, driving an imperceptible clinamental divergence toward an unforeseen and unmappable future like that moving the Lucretian 'atom-universe'; after whose realization every cultural transmission will autopoietically generate another cultural transmission and so on, ad infinitum;

No. Woud be the case maybe if life wasn't flesh and blood at heart, if we could escape indefinitely into the happy selfloathing Sokrates.
Politics is for a good deal memetic but at heart it is made of what people are willing to sacrifice.

This is the part of it you seek to escape, which is what pisses me off, as I come from a line that has always sacrificed the utmost for liberty. I identify with the warriors of Washington more than you can, as for you its just all some kind of memetic contraption.


the accelerating profusion of human culture in the form of our vagrant digital footprints and the personal data we allow Google et al to harvest from us over the internet,- even now growing faster and faster, even now being produced at an accelerating rate,- will explode into a 'heteroclitic mass' (Pound's term) in a long-range feedback-cycle amenable solely to the intervention and management of artificial intelligence, whose event-horizon lies firmly beyond the reach of any human operator's perception,- displaced as it is along a narratological vector for which the human mnema is already excavated from its mythic depth (a la. in a form stripped of any ascriptive praxis) and sublated by the inscriptive processes, (See "Emerging Vectors of Narratology; Unnatural Narrative Theory: A Paradoxical Paradigm", P. 201. "... a dual or divided poetics", for a purely mimetic model of narrative, by definition, "cannot comprehend antimemetic works that violate mimetic practices." Thus, "A complete narrative theory requires a binocular vision and a dialectical poetics. ") therefor shifting the weight of Destiny from us, to machines.

Lol, again, no. Pure postmodernism. Completely irrelevant to the very biological politics happening now.

The power of Memes was used to win an election a few years ago- while it was inspiring and certainly entertaining, it isn't exactly a 'good thing' because mimesis, now grown into the most powerful force in human culture, is being taken out of the control of humans- what happens then? The hypermnemata is, in essence, the mimetic core of Capital compressed to its ontological minima or 'epimoric ratio', using a term from the Archytan metaphysics, [See Adler, in "Plato's Timaeus and the Missing Fourth Guest; Appendix 2; the Archytan Alternative in the Pythagorean School".] (its ectypo-schismatic differential) thereby purified of System's entropic stressors and protected consequently from the integral collapse that Bataille's apocalyptic Gnosticism prophesized for Capitalism and indeed for all Systems, be they biological, economic, or metaphysical, like the ana-thymiatic rarefaction of the pneuma which comes to starve the Heraclitean 'fire of creation' of its fuel source in the Stoic model of the universe; a perfect techne, in Stiegler's term, capable of absorbing and reproducing all human culture (all hypo-mnemata) in its own image. Mimesis is all consuming after its realization, and there will be no possibility of philosophy afterward, or individualism in general: mimesis, once mechanized in this way, means that language is mechanized. All of the modern political activity, (eg. globalist policy and Leftist deconstructionism) geared apparently toward extinguishing individualism, individual rights, freedom, free speech, etc., is not truly political: it is all a side-effect of the ongoing hypermnematic conversion of cultural history approaching the point of no return, or a meme singularity.

Yeah, no.


^ And that's as toned down as I can get. If you think that's too high-falootin', get a load of this:

I think it's superficial to the point of being infantile.
If you think this is difficult to grasp for me it is no wonder you havent approached an understanding of vo.

" ... Automatism; an unpredictable long-term feedback cycle appears, to borrow the Landian term, fusing the two functions specified above and
thus subverting mimesis itself. The hypomnemata, (the instruments by which a culture or age records its history, from the oral traditions of a
Socrates or Homer, each invested with their own topological proscriptions, to the written word, to the blog post and financial ledger, insofar as
such compositional functions imply equally, certain modifications to that subjectivity deploying them in tandem with processes of its own
reflective cognition in the construction of identity) or external regulative form by which modernity affirms its own history, amounts to the
self-perpetuating instrumentality embodied by auto-poiesis, (the automatism about which we are now speaking) that is, by endless technological
progress, [Or embodied, more precisely, by those external subsystems of our material-economic infrastructure through which one machinic
signet or technological innovation reproduces itself as the inertial telos or 'hypermnemata' of another and therefor accomplishes the semiotic
linkage (a connexion otherwise referred to in my work as semasiosyntax) designated by the term 'capital', until, at the height of this process,
capital reproduces itself as the teleological catalyst for its own creation,- that is, a 'pure emergence' projected from the vantage of a more planar
or Euclidean geometry upon the unseen 'curve of the series' in a new complex Riemannian-time, or, in Bloom's phrase, a 'revisionary calculus',-

So you are a Marxist.

Do you even realize that Marx espoused the same idea and produced his theory as a response to it?

reinscribing the predicative logic of contingent microscale or 'tychogenetic' descriptors,- like those called 'idiographs' in the Kantian
framework,- as a higher-order or nomothetic logic, thereby subverting the causal linkages (that is, semasiokinesis) implicit in our asymmetrically
temporalized ontology for purely semiotic ones, and closes the basic chiasmatic gap through which all such predication generates 'meaning' (as
a phenomenologically grounded dis-closure of Being to a temporal horizon, in Heideggerian terms) on one side or another of the
'phenomenological closure' (on one side or another of Bloom's ratio, or the 'ground of emergence') and thus restrains the otherwise unchecked,
negentropic inflationary semiosis. In this final stage, the regulative form grounded on the logic of capital,- now grown omnipresent and
completely metastasized by all external systems, will be capable of recapitulating within its own structure all previous regulative mnematic
forms, by which ages past had recorded their own histories, such that all of the human past will be consolidated and serialized within the
narrative of modernity. The acceleration of our apparent cultural transformation, which most compelled Steigler's critique, and the exponential
'quickening' of technological progress toward some occluded artificial intelligence or cybernetic transcendence, which it seems everyone is
certain about on all sides of the debate, then reveal themselves as illusions generated by an entirely inverse phenomenon, whereby the past is
fractally compressed, converted from analogue to serial data and ultimately 'digitized'. On the one side of this inversion, which we can read as
the last vestigial remainder of the chiasm, we have a singularity-point machine intelligence at the end of history, while on the other, we have the
Marxist species-essence absorbed by a residual subjectivity,- by a man who woke by Homeric trials, sported with Elizabethan libertines and took
to sleep under the stars of the Romantics, etc. therefor representing, unlike Nietzsche's last man, a kind of 'humanist fatalism' beyond the
evolutionary trajectory of any selective mechanism.

I see this as very innocent and optimistic and separated from biological reality. But I really dont have the passion to deconstruct it, as it won't make any difference. What is happening now in general is far harsher than any of what youre thinking.

The un-intuitable Grund of History was, for Schelling, neither eschatological terminus, but
simply this impermeable chiasm, chronostatically stretched beyond the epistemological saccade of the Event between what, in a more reductive
economic vocabulary, we might call the means of production and the ends of production, for which no predication could be made at all.] and
implied, following Bloch, by the myth of Progress more generally conceived,- a kind of malignant ontology and fatal obreptition of the nested
hierarchy, such that it is only possible to record modernity,- that is, to communicate its mimeses to our potential descendants,- in that historical
form capacitated by the very instrumental technology constituting modernity. (Computers, machine intelligence, etc.) In order to map the
modern, and therefor trace its labyrinth in search for an escape-route, we must record it; to record it we must utilize, and therefor empower, the
instruments by which it perpetuates itself, and through whose domain it solely exists; having empowered it, we have closed the door to one more
possible route back toward reality, surrendering ourselves all the more completely, in an apparent Freudo-thanatological nullification of all
potential psychodynamicism, to the automatism of Capital.

So, pure Marx once again. You are becoming disconcertingly transparent.

There is a 'lag' between the processes of individuation and hierarchialization, with this lag representing the pre-individual, which Simondon
describes as a kind of permeable field that influences both processes in tandem,- enough so that the hierarchy can be modified and shaped by
individuating processes, (such that it is not so imposing as to be slavery) while the individual can in turn still be compelled and modified,
reciprocally, by the hierarchy, that is, incentivized or de-incentivized toward certain behaviors conducive or inconducive to the needs of that
hierarchy, as well as provided an inheritance of culture to work with by the greater society, since man is not a tabula rasa and requires that as
much as anything in order to sustain his individuation-process and enter into the great Western project at self-discovery, the gnothic auton. This
lag is created by the underlying economic-material infrastructure, and the logic of capital is, as I have detailed, causing it to shrink more and
more, approaching a fatal asymptotic declination until the two processes eventually fuse, thereby subverting mimesis. In a post-scarcity economy,
or, if one prefers a mythological corollary, in a Marxist-communist Utopia, we can extrapolate from the preview given to us by the internet, in
which semiotic-coupling has detached all ideographic gestures from their objects and inverted the function of value-exchange: people don't
become more differentiated,- despite a short-term manifestation of apparent differentiation or 'valence' through tribalist fragmentation, which of
course recoils back to a minimal population following a single rapidly exploded distribution of its members- (eg. the singularity of Youtube and
Google versus the multiplicity of the early internet) they become more similar, more like-minded, more enculturated, as ideology propagates to
the point of homogenizing culture entirely. Thus the pre-individual field has to be salvaged and to do that, one must 'think beyond capitalism',
perhaps replacing its economic-material foundation with some new substrate entirely."

Idem.

Tylenol isn't going to save you. The only saving is in: diagnosing and cutting out the tumor. And apparently, I am the only one with the gamma-knife necessary for accomplishing that task without killing the patient in the process.

However, I invite the new hostility Fixed. It is all apropos. I am the only way. Become my disciple or become nothing. Other "philosophers" cannot exist, as long as I do.

I was really just postponing the Reality by honoring my friends and being respectful. I have nothing to respect. That is my reality. So how about this- bow down and follow my directives and do exactly what I say, or fuck off into non-entity because nobody even knows what is happening- let alone does anyone have any idea of what to do about it. I am done having conversations. Here's the line-up: do what I say, or fuck off. The Parodites cult is now open for business, I will be receiving sign up requests in my threads as well as by PM.

Im disappointed to now have completely understood you.
The strong act as they may, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Nietzsche's Heritage; The Philosophy of the Future - Some Music - The Magical Tree of Life
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 11544
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: The Hypermnemata: an Existential Crisis.

Postby Parodites » Wed May 12, 2021 12:46 am

So you just admitted you started calling me an un-American traitor because you didn't think I paid enough respect to you in committed writing. FINALLY, we fucking agree on something. I love just letting morons babel. They always best make my own point for me.

Buddy, if the best you've got is accusing me of nihilism for the joke I led in with, you've got some problems ahead of you.

"I dont separate the elites (or the Gods) from the material of my investigation, Im not a Sokratic, or Marxist; "

So a literally meaningless statement. Do you even know what that means?

" You are focusing on the symptoms, the labels, the 'studies' of 'experts' and 'thinkers' -"

What are you even talking about? You're the one focused on symptoms. In fact, you haven't delineated a single cause of anything. (As I have in abundance, since I don't bother talking about something unless it is about causes, just as the hypermnemata is the cause of all modern politics. I KNOW IT'S FIVE SYLLABELS. But your only argument is NO U. This is another meaningless verbal ejaculation for which I can only suggest that you try again.)

"You run, I noticed."

You noticed that I have responded to every single thing you've ever said since you had your little emotional breakdown and projected your pathetic intellectual inadequacies on me in unprovoked anger? Oh yeah, I noticed that too. I genuinely get lost in contemplation. I actually write. I actually read. I eventually respond to everything I get messaged, but the days I take in between are days in which I seriously don't even log in and get on the computer. I'm not running, because I come back and respond to it all sentence by sentence. What it is, is: I do not perceive you as a threat or even something to think about. You haven't laid out any argument against anything I said, because you do not understand anything I said. You're not a challenge to me. You're just a bunch of nonsense accusations I have to power-through so that I can get to the end and do something that matters.


"What Nietzsche identified as slave morality. And extreme boringness. There is no writer more boring than Plato. As Ive always said, Sokrates is the distraction of the human from Being. "

I get that you have little original thought and have to resort to parroting one of Nietzsche's most shit-posty lines, but seriously. This is once again a literally meaningless statement. He's boring. Guess what? You're boring. So apparently that is good enough of an argument and you can take the L now. Then "Socrates is the distraction of the human from Being"... Yeah. Gibberish buddy. (Also, can you read Greek? I mean, I can. And Athenian Greek is especially refined and difficult. So I don't think you're allowed to say anything regarding Plato being or not being boring. The guy's prose is some of the best ever written- in any language. I get that he, like me, might be difficult to digest, but at least learn the language he wrote in before you call him boring.)


"Yes, and you are a symptom of this, and angry at me for not being a symptom of it. This stuff is really old by the way dude. We've discussed it in 2011 at some length on BTL too but its something even Freud was aware of."

Wait a second, Freud knew about repression? Holy shit... Anyway, Yeah... I know, I said that. In the very post you quoted. And then I said this is where Freud erred, and went in another direction ... And yeah, the days I just forget you even exist and don't even bother to login here. That is TRUE ANGER ARGHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.

" Lol, again, no. Pure postmodernism. Completely irrelevant to the very biological politics happening now."

Again, you didn't actually say anything. What the fuck is biological politics? Oh that's right, surface-level analysis, the diagnosis of mere symptoms, which is all you're capable of. And you have my permission to shoot me whenever the only argument I can make against someone is "LOL NO, DAT'S TOO POSTMODERN."

Genuinely fucking pathetic and thoughtless.

"So you are a Marxist."

Nothing I said is Marxist. The fact that you are so daft, so illiterate, is telling. Have you ever actually... read Marx? I'm not a capitalist because I have my own economic theory, but I have devoted countless pages to deconstructing and refuting Marixst doxa. Thus not being a capitalist does not make me a Marxist. Oh fuck this, why do I need to explicitly state that to you?

Look dude, you didn't say anything. You didn't make an argument. You have just done what you've been doing for months now, which is throwing around words like Marxist, traitor, etc. without any qualification. You don't seem to actually know what you're talking about, and it's sad. I don't think you're stupid, but I do think you're in over your head. I'd write more than what I did here, but there's nothing to respond to in what you wrote. I sat here and really tried to find something but you simply didn't SAY ANYTHING. It's just either 1) gibberish or 2) meaningless unqualified accusations.

You're fucking sad bro. Go read Marx if you want to accuse people of Marxism, because if you thought that section you quoted from me was Marxist in some way... You're not on planet earth man, and I am struggling to see how I or anyone else can have a meaningful conversation with you. You don't understand the words you are using.

You don't fucking understand yourself, let alone me.

So let's summarize your response bro: "DER UR POSTMODERN HAHA, NIHILST. PLATO BORING. U SUK."

Did I miss anything? Feel free to point out what I missed, you fucking short-stack.


And in case you miss it in PM:
I have a bad night every night you fucking cunt. Don't use those two words together when you're talking to me. Bad night? A bad night? TRY A BAD 16 FUCKING YEARS STRAIGHT YOU FUCKING CUNT. No, it wasn't a bad night. What it was, is: you took your own bullshit out on me and that's it. There's nothing else to say. I never did that to you because I'm not a fucking sniveling cunt. Now, I am getting sick of being told I am running from a conversation. I've responded to every fucking bullshit thing you've said since 2019-2020. I take days in between because I'm actually busy with contemplation, reading, and writing. I always come back to respond to it when I am done. I'm not running. I just don't give a fuck, so it takes me a little while to remember that either you or the world still exists, because you might as well not, to me. What was the last one, the Plato is boring shit. I responded. I won't be back for another few days so you go ahead and take all the fucking time you need to cook something up. Make it better than last time though because it was shit. You might be willing to throw your friends away over nothing and levy un-qualified, stupid fucking accusations against them- but you take note of this, I am willing to rub your fucking name all the way out in response, and not just burn the bridge, but de-atomize it. If you make me done with you, I am going to get verrrrryyyyyyy done.


I wanted to mention something about 'stochastic resonance'. (This is from my notepad, I just didn't want to forget the thought I started Fixed; it's not really a response to you. You are limited to the text above this. I've mentioned it a few times, but nobody seems capable of understanding anything.) The stochastic resonance itself becomes a steganographic liquidity and non-representation "to be mapped in a flux of encryptions" [See Cabrales and Carruthers on 'Poetry as Cosmic War'. BtW I am aware you've zoned out by now.] and extravalent trans-apparition,- a feedback-loop for the Landian abomena of the 'Outside' within an abiding-between conceptuality and matter, recalling the manner in which Irigaray and Plant define the female symbolic lacuna as a kind of binary zero,- not a lack of signification, not simply an exclusion from the system of positive male exchanges and the driven metonymy of libidinous becomings, not an absence at the missing center of gravity,- but a zone of multiplicities which, like the Cantorian aleph, enables that proliferating digital continua to exist from which it itself springs forth as a 'ghost in the machine',- a phantasmal extroprojection of technological excruciation and anthropocentric de-conditioning. However, the productive forces of the Market, as manifestations of this extroprojection, cannot exceed capitalist control, which is, was, or never-was, the fundamental hope of accelerationist xenopoetics. [Benjamin Noys, Cybernetic Phuturism: The Politics of Acceleration.] Oh wait that makes me a Marxist. OH MY GOD, did I... just use a concept from a Feminist? Irigaray? WHAT. Kind of like how I sometimes use concepts invented by Marx. OH MY GOD, PROFANITY, EVIL, EXCOMMUNICATION. You fucking simpleton- you and those who think like you fucking disgust me, because your anti-Marxism isn't actually a confrontation of Marxism, as mine is- it's a joke. It's a nothing. So yes, Fixed was being a retard. A retard with nothing to say. I wish you had actually made a point I could respond to because all this is, is me responding to myself about a comment I didn't want to forget. Fuck off, I bet if I asked you to define the word Marxist, you'd stumble all over yourself and be unable to. How much you want to bet, bitch? Define the fucking word Marxist, cunt. Let's hear it. And I swear to God Almighty if you can't answer this fucking 1 plus 1 equals 2 question, you can go ahead and fuck off right now.

Or is that what Sokrates was guilty of? Asking those fucking idiot Sophist Athenians to explain themselves or answer a basic question? They couldn't, and they looked like fucking morons because of it. So fuck Socrates he was 'alienating humans from Being'. No. You simply don't know what you're talking about, as little as they did, so fuck off and figure something out to lay on me because I just wasted my fucking time.
Qui non intelligit, aut taceat, aut discat.

BTHYS TOU ANAHAT KHYA-PANDEMAI.
-- Hermaedion, in: the Liber Endumiaskia.

ΑΝΤΗΡΟΠΑΡΙΟΝ,
in formis perisseia mutilata in omnia perisarkos mutilatum;
omniformis protosseia immutilatum in protosarkos immutilata.

Measure the breaking of the Flesh in the flesh that is broken.
[ The Ecstasies of Zosimos, Tablet
the First.]
User avatar
Parodites
 
Posts: 427
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2020 12:03 pm

Re: The Hypermnemata: an Existential Crisis.

Postby Fixed Cross » Wed May 19, 2021 8:16 pm

Parodites wrote:[b]So you just admitted you started calling me an un-American traitor because you didn't think I paid enough respect to you in committed writing. FINALLY, we fucking agree on something. I love just letting morons babel. They always best make my own point for me.


Another lie.
I cant even tell if its deliberate or that youre actually under the impression that I said anything of the sort.

I called Styx a traitor, for things which are now actually ILLEGAL TO EXPLAIN, and Ive been threatened a lot for even hinting at them, but when you jumped to the defence of Styx and said you shared his position, I wasnt wise enough to say: oh well, I would really not like to call you, my friend, a traitor, but I was so disturbed that I just said ok well then I guess yeah, the same applies to you.
The strong act as they may, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Nietzsche's Heritage; The Philosophy of the Future - Some Music - The Magical Tree of Life
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 11544
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: The Hypermnemata: an Existential Crisis.

Postby Fixed Cross » Wed May 19, 2021 8:37 pm

Parodites wrote:
"I dont separate the elites (or the Gods) from the material of my investigation, Im not a Sokratic, or Marxist; "

So a literally meaningless statement. Do you even know what that means?

You dont understand this?
I mean that makes sense, since you are following the logic of those that do indeed excluse the elites and gods from the material of their investiations.

Its not too hard to understand dude.

Marx never analyzed Capital itself (as he would have found merit, and value, rather than a pure adversary.

Or is this actually very complicated?

" You are focusing on the symptoms, the labels, the 'studies' of 'experts' and 'thinkers' -"

What are you even talking about? You're the one focused on symptoms. In fact, you haven't delineated a single cause of anything. (As I have in abundance, since I don't bother talking about something unless it is about causes, just as the hypermnemata is the cause of all modern politics. I KNOW IT'S FIVE SYLLABELS. But your only argument is NO U. This is another meaningless verbal ejaculation for which I can only suggest that you try again.)

Okay.

"You run, I noticed."

You noticed that I have responded to every single thing you've ever said since you had your little emotional breakdown and projected your pathetic intellectual inadequacies on me in unprovoked anger? Oh yeah, I noticed that too. I genuinely get lost in contemplation. I actually write. I actually read. I eventually respond to everything I get messaged, but the days I take in between are days in which I seriously don't even log in and get on the computer. I'm not running, because I come back and respond to it all sentence by sentence. What it is, is: I do not perceive you as a threat or even something to think about. You haven't laid out any argument against anything I said, because you do not understand anything I said. You're not a challenge to me. You're just a bunch of nonsense accusations I have to power-through so that I can get to the end and do something that matters.

Apparently youve missed about 90 percent of my messages since 2018, but I suppose I must accept that you actually believe all this.

Sending a reply doesnt mean responding to a message. I mean, physically, yes. But youve structurally ignored the content of my messages since at least 2018 -- which is what is the cause of my anger, as I keep explaining.


"What Nietzsche identified as slave morality. And extreme boringness. There is no writer more boring than Plato. As Ive always said, Sokrates is the distraction of the human from Being. "

I get that you have little original thought and have to resort to parroting one of Nietzsche's most shit-posty lines, but seriously. This is once again a literally meaningless statement. He's boring. Guess what? You're boring. So apparently that is good enough of an argument and you can take the L now. Then "Socrates is the distraction of the human from Being"... Yeah. Gibberish buddy. (Also, can you read Greek? I mean, I can. And Athenian Greek is especially refined and difficult. So I don't think you're allowed to say anything regarding Plato being or not being boring. The guy's prose is some of the best ever written- in any language. I get that he, like me, might be difficult to digest, but at least learn the language he wrote in before you call him boring.)

You are a Socratic, and have never attempted to understand Nietzsche as doing so would be painful.
I get it.
But its not an argument.

"Yes, and you are a symptom of this, and angry at me for not being a symptom of it. This stuff is really old by the way dude. We've discussed it in 2011 at some length on BTL too but its something even Freud was aware of."

Wait a second, Freud knew about repression? Holy shit... Anyway, Yeah... I know, I said that. In the very post you quoted. And then I said this is where Freud erred, and went in another direction ... And yeah, the days I just forget you even exist and don't even bother to login here. That is TRUE ANGER ARGHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.

Lol
Im glad you dont think of me constantly like some others do.
And Iclearly wasnt under the impression that you do.

" Lol, again, no. Pure postmodernism. Completely irrelevant to the very biological politics happening now."

Again, you didn't actually say anything. What the fuck is biological politics? Oh that's right, surface-level analysis, the diagnosis of mere symptoms, which is all you're capable of. And you have my permission to shoot me whenever the only argument I can make against someone is "LOL NO, DAT'S TOO POSTMODERN."

Genuinely fucking pathetic and thoughtless.

This is the problem, you think politics is some sort of abstraction.

"So you are a Marxist."

Nothing I said is Marxist. The fact that you are so daft, so illiterate, is telling. Have you ever actually... read Marx? I'm not a capitalist because I have my own economic theory, but I have devoted countless pages to deconstructing and refuting Marixst doxa. Thus not being a capitalist does not make me a Marxist. Oh fuck this, why do I need to explicitly state that to you?

Another lie. I didnt say you are a Marxist because you arent a capitalist.

You are among the least careful readers Ive ever corresponded with.

Look dude, you didn't say anything. You didn't make an argument. You have just done what you've been doing for months now, which is throwing around words like Marxist, traitor, etc. without any qualification. You don't seem to actually know what you're talking about, and it's sad. I don't think you're stupid, but I do think you're in over your head. I'd write more than what I did here, but there's nothing to respond to in what you wrote. I sat here and really tried to find something but you simply didn't SAY ANYTHING. It's just either 1) gibberish or 2) meaningless unqualified accusations.

I explained it you you many times. Implicit rights -- you apparently think they enforce themselves.
That citizens should stay out of the matter.
Just obey, like Styx, to whatever is done to the republic.

You're fucking sad bro. Go read Marx if you want to accuse people of Marxism, because if you thought that section you quoted from me was Marxist in some way... You're not on planet earth man, and I am struggling to see how I or anyone else can have a meaningful conversation with you. You don't understand the words you are using.

You don't fucking understand yourself, let alone me.

Youve not made a single honest response so far.

So let's summarize your response bro: "DER UR POSTMODERN HAHA, NIHILST. PLATO BORING. U SUK."

Did I miss anything? Feel free to point out what I missed, you fucking short-stack.


And in case you miss it in PM:
I have a bad night every night you fucking cunt. Don't use those two words together when you're talking to me. Bad night? A bad night? TRY A BAD 16 FUCKING YEARS STRAIGHT YOU FUCKING CUNT. No, it wasn't a bad night. What it was, is: you took your own bullshit out on me and that's it. There's nothing else to say. I never did that to you because I'm not a fucking sniveling cunt. Now, I am getting sick of being told I am running from a conversation. I've responded to every fucking bullshit thing you've said since 2019-2020. I take days in between because I'm actually busy with contemplation, reading, and writing. I always come back to respond to it when I am done. I'm not running. I just don't give a fuck, so it takes me a little while to remember that either you or the world still exists, because you might as well not, to me. What was the last one, the Plato is boring shit. I responded. I won't be back for another few days so you go ahead and take all the fucking time you need to cook something up. Make it better than last time though because it was shit. You might be willing to throw your friends away over nothing and levy un-qualified, stupid fucking accusations against them- but you take note of this, I am willing to rub your fucking name all the way out in response, and not just burn the bridge, but de-atomize it. If you make me done with you, I am going to get verrrrryyyyyyy done.


Yes, I saw this. You think what I endure is mild and make some kind of threat to me.

I didnt like it.
The strong act as they may, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Nietzsche's Heritage; The Philosophy of the Future - Some Music - The Magical Tree of Life
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 11544
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: The Hypermnemata: an Existential Crisis.

Postby Fixed Cross » Wed May 19, 2021 9:12 pm

As for racism; i merely asked you not to send me racist stuff.
Im rereading the mails now.

You were ranting about a black faggots IQ, nigger, etc. I asked you to stop that.

I didnt say 'you are a racist', I asked you to stop sending me racist shit. Because I dont like it and because obviously all mails are being monitored. I can handle being known as a Trump supporter because I am, but I cant handle being known as a racist because I am certainly not.

I will continue to extend you the (in the face of your lies quite strenuous) courtesy of not fully literally quoting you unless you try to pretend Im making this up. Ive had enough of your slander, it gives me a headache to restrain my responses to you.

And this is what I said in reference to treason:

I always knew styx was a pansy ass faggot pierce of traitor shit, by the way.

Then you jumped to defend him.
The strong act as they may, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Nietzsche's Heritage; The Philosophy of the Future - Some Music - The Magical Tree of Life
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 11544
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: The Hypermnemata: an Existential Crisis.

Postby Fixed Cross » Wed May 19, 2021 9:27 pm

Ok you were even less reasonable than that, I see now. You didnt jump to his defence, you started cursing me, staw manning me and telling me to fuck off.

It hadnt occurred to me at all to call you a traitor at that point, but it was clear by then that you have absolutely no respect for me. So later on, when you continued your lies (which, if you keep them up, I will expose by quoting these conversations) I figured what the hell.

I generally restrain myself very powerfully with respect to what is being done to me - I am used to betrayal, extraordinarily vile forms of it, things you will never have to know about. So what youre doing to me is very mild, comparatively. But since you are so sanctimonious and aggressive about it, I present some actual fact to balance out this whole bullshit theater youve built on your indignation.

An indignation that explosively and all of a sudden occurred the day that the thing went down that is now de facto illegal to discuss.

Its not us two who destroyed our friendship. But yeah, it's kind of silly to hope for a revival of it, after what has been said in public.

Shame. But Im thankful to discover that Im not actually to blame. Ive treated you as a dear friend until the moment you started cursing at me.



The strong act as they may, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Nietzsche's Heritage; The Philosophy of the Future - Some Music - The Magical Tree of Life
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 11544
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: The Hypermnemata: an Existential Crisis.

Postby Parodites » Sun May 23, 2021 12:38 am

This is what I interrupt my day to come back to?
"I mean that makes sense, since you are following the logic of those that do indeed excluse the elites and gods from the material of their investiations."

You understand that you literally just said NO YOU, right? Brilliant. Man, you really showed me. And btw, can you show some respect for language and just like... spell things the right way. It's automated nowadays.



"I called Styx a traitor, for things which are now actually ILLEGAL TO EXPLAIN, and Ive been threatened a lot for even hinting at them, but when you jumped to the defence of Styx and said you shared his position, I wasn't wise enough to say: oh well, I would really not like to call you, my friend, a traitor, but I was so disturbed that I just said ok well then I guess yeah, the same applies to you."


---
It's illegal to explain why you're not a fucking cunt talking out of your ass? Oh, just shut the fuck up. Seriously dude.

Anyway, yeah, like I thought. Literally nothing. You haven't read one page of Marx, which is why you feel so comfortable calling other people Marxists. (Like me.) It's because, surprise surprise, you don't know what the fuck 'Marxism' or 'postmodernism' is.

You called me a traitor for no other reason than I defended Styx. You went on a bizarre tangent because he made a joke (that was clearly a joke) and you "analyzed' it like it was a serious statement, then I defended him.

I'm done with this. You don't have anything to say, you're just a fucking cunt with the need to psychologically project your own inadequacies on everyone else. I gave you weeks to actually formulate, cogently, your issues with me or with anything else, and you didn't: because you can't. I sincerely hope you take some time to figure out what the fuck is wrong with your brain because I am done trying to figure it out for you. Suck my cock and shut the fuck up and get the fuck out of threads that I post in, or else pretend I'm not there and tell it to someone else, you fucking dipshit, because I'm just about done giving your dumb fucking ass the benefit of the doubt. I have pills to eat and bottles to slam: fuck off. I see you have sent me email: I'm not reading it. You got something else stupid to say, say it here. To tell you the truth, it was done the very first time that sniveling-cunt-fucking-word came diarrhea-spewing out of your fucking mouth toward me: 'traitor'. Fucking cunt, you want to throw that at me? Oh I am fucking done with you, now and forever. Fuck off.

You're the one who threw all your friendships in the trash for nothing, at least embrace it now you fucking cunt.
Qui non intelligit, aut taceat, aut discat.

BTHYS TOU ANAHAT KHYA-PANDEMAI.
-- Hermaedion, in: the Liber Endumiaskia.

ΑΝΤΗΡΟΠΑΡΙΟΝ,
in formis perisseia mutilata in omnia perisarkos mutilatum;
omniformis protosseia immutilatum in protosarkos immutilata.

Measure the breaking of the Flesh in the flesh that is broken.
[ The Ecstasies of Zosimos, Tablet
the First.]
User avatar
Parodites
 
Posts: 427
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2020 12:03 pm

Re: The Hypermnemata: an Existential Crisis.

Postby Fixed Cross » Sun May 23, 2021 8:15 pm

Complete denial.

Yes, I realize you're upset. If you hadn't spammed me with your seething racism none of this would have happened though. And it wasn't actually your racist ranting but the fact that you couldn't handle that I objected to it. If telling a friend the truth is throwing a friendship in the trash, then it wasn't much of a friendship. Capable took off because he didn't like my politics, I didn't do anything to him. I dont know what other friendships youre talking about. My internet relationships have always been rather turbulent.

As for the rest, the philosophy and your insolent display of ignorance about it, that is all truly below my contempt. Feel free to wallow in it though.
The strong act as they may, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Nietzsche's Heritage; The Philosophy of the Future - Some Music - The Magical Tree of Life
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 11544
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships


Return to Philosophy



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users