Aesthetics

Would we be having this conversation had the greeks not dug civilization out of the mud?
It is only in populations where resources abound that aesthetics interests flourish.
Rumbling stomachs do not spend too much time in contemplation of beauty.
It is moral that should deal with matters of avoidance of suffering.
Once moral is satisfied, then the feeeeeeels

Oh, before you say again, causing my palm to hit my face again, that relief from suffering is only momentary, can you focus on that moment, when all needs are satisfied?

phoneutria wrote:

It is only in populations where resources abound that aesthetics interests flourish.
Rumbling stomachs do not spend too much time in contemplation of beauty.

A rumbling stomach is no guarantee that you will find food to eat. The same populations in Africa fall victim to famine again and again, relying on others to feed them. You think after hundreds of thousands of years they might have figured out a solution?

Need is the mother of all invention....and when the stomach is silenced the groin commences....and when the groin slumbers, the brain seeks for something.

And when Arthur said..."The two enemies of human happiness are pain and boredom" he was feeeelnig it in himself.

When, in that rugged peninsula, man turned to the seas, he gathered memetic nectar from across the middle-of-the-earth basin, bringing them home as a bee to its hive.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Full of sweetness those symmetrical cells were filled.
A golden age...[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]...driping down through the time/space continuum.

And how beautifully they did not settle on their full coffers, and asked more, such as "what is beauty?", then carving it out of marble in near-perfect symmetry.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.].

Because when men sit around they think...and when children sit around they play....and when women sit around they gossip and feeeeeeeeel.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

We have made progress.

So once the body is satiated but the "brain" is hungry, it finds itself wandering about ... "trivial" things, such as "what is beauty".

You were able to make a distinction between a moral value and an aesthetic value. The first, dealing with the prevention of suffering, and the second dealing with the obtaining of pleasure.

Tough business to pry this out of a hardened, repressed mind. Here, I give you a star:

*

When we engage on aesthetic pursuits, it is not because we are concerned with our necessities, it is done freely and spontaneously for its own sake, because it interests us.
Call it trivial if you will. I call it the place where we find ourselves Human.

Oh my.

Ha!!!
  

Watch the stupidity display itself when it speaks more than a paragraph:

Phoneee wrote:

You were able to make a distinction between a moral value and an aesthetic value. The first, dealing with the prevention of suffering, and the second dealing with the obtaining of pleasure.

Different words saying the same thing.
Circular.

Mind/Body.
The mind obtains, the body avoids.
The body is sickly, sinful, the mind is holy, divine....it finds god.

Pleasure has nothing to do with suffering, it is a pure sacred sensation.

Bravo!!!

Now sit.....siiiit!
That's a good girl.

Morality?
I don't believe in morality in the sense you imply, my female canine pet.
It is not valuable in and of itself.
Morality when it protects the dumb, for example, is sickly.
Morality is a product of need, weakness.
It surrenders, gives in, so as to obtain power via otherness (synergy).  

Beauty is the product of need producing excess: strength.
No division.
Both rooted in need/suffering.

Now, lie down....lie down!
That's a good girl.


And now fetch!!!!

Words:
Power.....Beauty.....Order.....God....Symmetry.....Pattern....Omnipotence/Omniscience....all words describing what is absent in the absolute.

Beauty is symmetry as determined by the past - inherited.
Nature is the sum of all past.
Nature is beautiful, because it still displays the remnants of ordering.
The body is beautiful when it has inherited a period of excess energies, ordering.  
It is a temporal fingerprint, displaying a period, in the past, where the genes, the code, the ordering algorithms, sufficed and excelled.

We are attracted to its promise....not for its own sake.
Getting horny is a unconscious mechanism not requiring consciousness, understanding....it's automated. It makes the organism act without having to evolve a sophisticated comprehension.
Later, a mind might evolve which can question the mechanisms, the "why", and ask the questions that will clarify its own instinctive behaviors, its own automated reactions to the recognition of what it lacks in self.

This is why Know Thyself signifies a process of self-exploration, self-understanding...so that one does not remain, like you, a dumb female canine, sniffing at a-holes and calling it sublime, because it surrenders tot eh sensation and never asks why.

Understanding increases control.
When, for example, I know why a female's round buttocks, causes an erection, I am not overtaken by it.
When I know why a lush forest causes me to gasp, I do not deify the experience.

Understanding decreases the pleasure of surrendering to the mysterious, this feminine surrendering, but it also increases the masculine pleasure of delving deeper, and deeper, and pounding the shit out of that cavernous void....
ahem, where was I?
Ah yes....and going into the substrate where newer, more subtle forms of order exist.

One may lose the pleasure in the shallow, the primal, but one gains a more sublime level of awareness, opening the mind up to new forms of order/symmetry.

I would agree that progress is being made, but I am not so naive as to think I can progress a canine so far as to then call it an ape.
I know that limits are determined in the past...and the past is, indeed, immutable.

The Greeks having become aware of the connection of pleasure and symmetry, sought to represent its most sublime form.
In the above statues, the human body is depicted in natural dimensions.
No human body has the proportionality between shoulder, waist, legs and so on.
Thee are representations of Hellenic beauty, exemplified in all their art which depicted the human form.
The goal was not to depict reality, which was always lacking, always imperfect, no matter how close it came to perfection, but to try to represent the divine form of the human, the godly, the perfectly symmetrical.
They understood the connection between pleasure and beauty...or the attraction of the patterned, the ordered, to an organism that sought to organize itself within the chaos.
Morality for them had nothing to do with an other-worldly, deity.
It had to do with nature.

To have ethos was to possess self-control, self-order.
It had no other meaning. There was no divine justice, no sin.
The mind was born with a potential to self-control, to self-order...and this appeared as form.
There was no sinful act, for the Greeks...there were only acts of excess, acts of abandonment to the animal instincts.
To be human for them was not to deny this animal inheritance, but to seize it and direct it.

The Spartans killed the babies born deformed, not because they did not love themselves through their children, but because they loved them so much that they would not permit the ill, the deformed, the malformed from reentering their bloodlines.
The act of sacrifice was an act of love - a profound love for self, and for the generations that would come.  
Like nature, they reflected this beauty in brutality.

See why she never offers long posts?
Because when she does she exposes her simplicity, her lack of understanding for the very subject she claims an expertise in.

As you will notice the feminine mind needs to detach the self from the action.

Read this little bit:

Phonee wrote:

When we engage on aesthetic pursuits, it is not because we are concerned with our necessities, it is done freely and spontaneously for its own sake, because it interests us.

Read how she closes the circle.
Why does it interest us?
Just because....stated using words that make her appear more intelligent.

It's spontaneous. The causal chain is broken.
The Divine enters the picture.
It is we who choose what to find beautiful.
Why?
Just because.

The Christian:
"God exists for His own sake".
He is His own cause, his own justification, His own proof.

Why are we attracted to beauty?
Just because...for its own sake.
Circular reasoning.
Beauty is beautiful, because it is beautiful.  
Not because it promises something, to offers us potential, possibility, but ...'just 'cause'.
We can use pretty words to hide that trite little "just because".

It's spontaneous, magical....it has no explanation.
Like spontaneous combustion.
It just happens.
Out of nothingness.

She does not wish to go further.
She wants to stop here, on the mysterious, the mystical.
From then on its all sensations with no reference point.  
Senses with no source, and no object/objective.

All it took is for her to post one longer than usual post.
And....voila mes amis.  

Being terse is more than just indifference.
Sometimes it is extreme difference.

Phono will have to bring her A...game.

Anfang wrote:

Phono will have to bring her A...game.

Her "A-Game" was saying little and pretending she knows much.
When she opened her mind, and exposed it, she lost that edge.

Arrogance....giant killer.

If she doesn't have a well-formed A...game then it's Game Over man, Game Over!

Never game over.
There's always next time...or the "You misunderstood me" fall-back position.
The problem with being clear, or trying to be, is that you lay it all on the line.

When you use these feminine techniques, you can never be defeated, especially not in your own mind.
The goal is not reason, lucidity, reality, but word-play, trickery, ambiguity, feigning, evading.
S()Words used as fantasy objects.
Like aesthetics, with no objectivity.

The female mind likes words when they remain artistic in the unrealistic, fantasy, sense.
The battle of making an impression...of seducing, of playing mind-games.
Luckily I am good at that, as well.
It can be entertaining, but it is not the same as using words to make a point, to establish a superior position in reality.
With female minds, or effete male minds, it's all a game of shadows: innuendo, sexual tension, implications, indirectness.

Phonee was relevant only as long as she remained in that feminine field of idealism, or of verbal acrobatics. There she was adept at speaking without saying a thing, always leaving a reasonable doubt to make her escape...implying insult without actually insulting - flirting, causing psychological wounds, as it were.

She used the typical human weak spots: sex, age, social status, shame, pride, ego...etc.
I enjoy this. I returned to the Sciforum days when this was an everyday thing.
Before the forum was taken over by a douche-bag, it was an interesting, open arena, where ideas were explored along with psychological gaming.
Then, the new owner, wanted to make it safe for the women and children...and the forum went to hell, like ILP has.

Of course, in such circumstances, the philosophical content was more obscure.
It was interesting that over time the retards disappeared, fell into the background, because even foes did not show them respect. They could not keep-up, and so they became spectators or they dropped out.
Phonee is not on the level of some of the women that used to frequent that place: gendanken, Xev, Lucysnow ....a few others.
Good times.

When Phonee tried to make a lucid rational point she exposed her quality: smoke and mirrors.

Beauty is an end. You pursue it for its own sake, as a goal---and not for the sake of something else. In other words, the value of beauty is not grounded in something other than just what it is, in the actual world.

You think that beauty is not an end. You now have to tell me what you pursue beauty for. If beauty is not one of your ends, then when you pursue it, you pursue it as a means to something else---and what end is that?

Recognize the challenge:

I am not asking you to explain how you know that something is beautiful. That would be a 'how' question. (To which you could talk about the Golden Ratio, symmetry, order, and so on). I am asking you to 'why' you pursue beauty---it's a question about your underlying goals and purposes for pursuing beauty.

Here's a possible answer:

Satyr wrote:

Beauty is the product of need producing excess: strength.
No division.
Both rooted in need/suffering.

She said that aesthetics is about "obtaining pleasure". You think that "obtaining pleasure" is the same thing as "avoiding suffering". And, you think that aesthetics is about avoiding suffering—(satisfying a need that is rooted in suffering). So, what you said amounts to just what she already said. It's the equivalent.

There's some truth to what you've both said. An artist can describe himself as being "compelled" to create. That implies a need. Nietzsche was pregnant, with ideas.

But ultimately, this truth doesn't change the fact that the value of beauty is a part of the world, and that your need arises when you mix the world as it is with a creature such as you. Beauty---i.e., the world---creates that need. So, even if you are driven by need to beauty, beauty is still the end that you are directed at.

Back to the challenge:

I am asking you to 'why' you pursue beauty---it's a question about goals and purposes. What is beauty your means to? And then I'm going to ask 'why' you pursue that. And then again, the 'why' question. You'll arrive at your end, and we'll see if you say "just because". If you don’t say "just because", and there's another because, then there's another 'why?' question for you.

When you say "just because", you are basically pointing to something about the world and your senses. That's what happens when you recognize that value is grounded in the world itself.

By analogy, the tree is in my yard because I see it. I sense it. And I can go and verify my senses, by using my senses. It's there. Same for beauty. Can I be wrong? Of course. But that's REALISM about beauty. Not idealism. Not fantasy. Not religion. It is realism. And it does not mean that I cannot be wrong about what beauty is. My senses could be more refined, I could lack appropriate experiences, education, and so on.

Watch out for your challenge's main danger:
If you have for yourself no end(s), no worldly purpose or goal, that's nihilism.  If you justify your final 'why?' answer by appeal to otherwordly thinking, that'll be nihilism as well.

So, what do you say about your ends?

Beauty is order/symmetry manifesting in the apparent.
With the brain, which is behind the skull, symmetry manifests as intelligence.

Both words refer to order, the absolute which is absent.
Both words refer to what cannot be attained completely.

Like all value judgments the words express a relationship, a comparison, a juxtaposition.
As a relationship they represent an interactivity, a potential....a hierarchy.

Beauty, being a higher form of order, inherited as a past manifesting as an appearance, a presence, represents the potential for more order.
It attracts because we lack it....and the degree that we lack it determines the degree we are attracted to it, are seduced by its promise.

Saying "just because" you are recognizing your own nature, your own incapacity to justify your own ideas without referring to an outside authority, or referring back to your own incomplete understanding. Like a child says: "Just because".

The mind that does not understand pleasure, because it is trapped in its revulsion of reality which is experienced as need/suffering, pleasure becomes the end itself.
It is an animal that only senses the object/objective which it has been programmed to be attracted by, and it does not understand why.
It simply surrenders to the sensation and is content there on that level.

The question "why" is the most human question of all.
It is the beginning of the Nihilistic process. It is where Schopenhauer got stuck, what Nietzsche subsequently rejected, and what Buddhism in the east, and the Abrahamic religions in the west, use to deny existence.

To understand the why you must know yourself.
I like salts...why?
I like female buttocks...why?

The why is the determining, immutable, past.

Then one can reject this past, and try to overcome it, or one can try to build upon it, or one can try to denounce it and reject it altogether (nihilism).

Order is in the past....to a higher degree than it is in the future.
We are manifestations of this past....ergo order is an echo of what we desire to remain.

When we witness beauty it is always as a potential, an increase of possibilities towards this end.

Because the absolute is absent it can be projected as anything....and this anything is usually directed by genetics or memetics....as an ideal.
A projected object/objective.

Beauty is power.
We covet power so as to dominate.
We may wish to dominate others or nature or self.
The latter is the basis for the former two.

Consciousness is a looking back.
Ergo order is an indication of a pattern that promises to remain consistent and symmetrical in time, for a longer period of time.
We like circles, harmonious proportions, color combinations indicating a proportionality in the electromagnetic spectrum...we like scents that indicate symmetry, associated with health...sounds that are melodic, sonar symmetry.
Sexually we are attracted to particular physical proportions promising virility, fertility.
We like eloquence of movement because to exposes physical efficiency,which is a result of organic symmetry.

Also beauty is always from a distance.
We enjoy a scene from a certain distance...but if we approach the beauty is lost.
Something may look pretty from afar, but as you get closer it becomes jumbled and ugly.
This is because the brain is an ordering tool, and it incorporates patterns into cohesive models, by simplifying/generalizing them.
Beauty can also be an illusion...a carefully structured imitation of order/symmetry, which is fake.

We covet order, symmetry so as to ad it to our own, so as to give ourselves an increase in potentiality...or as an inspirational "possibility," we wish to emulate, to copy...to strive towards.

vonMo wrote:

If you have for yourself no end(s), no worldly purpose or goal, that's nihilism. If you justify your final 'why?' answer by appeal to otherwordly thinking, that'll be nihilism as well.

The purpose is tied to oneself and knowing oneself is a continuous moving towards which is never reached. And so, that purpose is too, a towards and not a solidified point to reach.

Nihilism is saying - If there is no reachable absolute goal, then why bother at all? Life is meaningless. That malleable attitude is ready to be informed, educated by the institutions of modernity, producing and selecting for minds which have no capabilities to live, to find purpose in the non-absolute sense, on their own. It's not a bug, it's a feature which is selected for.
Surrender to the instincts, the pleasures, which are provided for by society for playing your part.

If what I say has merit then Nihilism is, once more, a reversal.
It has sold itself as positive, and the real as the negative.

The common philosophical usage of the term is as the absence of meaning, purpose, morality, a teleos.
And that is exactly what I mean by "absent absolute".

Nihilism begins with the presupposition of a "must"...and 'thou shall'...
Reality must have meaning, must have purpose, the world must be governed by a moral imperative.
The position that it does not, could not, is a nullification of their humanistic positivity, which is actually an existential negativity, because it closes the door on human will, and creativity.

The negation o reality, as a fluidity, with no absolutes, is labeled, by nihilists, a negative...within the contexts of human need, human hope, human submission to what is absolute.

The world of man is mistaken as the world itself, when it is, in this case, a contradiction of the world.

Once the reversal is accomplished then all follows from it, as the opposite of what it is in reality.
The world is inverted.
Reality becomes unreality, an illusion....and the beyond, is the more real reality.
Positive becomes negative, and negative positive.
Weakness a strength, strength a weakness.
Stupidity becomes genius, and genius stupidity.
Life becomes death, and death becomes life.
The fluid becomes static.
Becoming becomes Being.
Man becomes woman, and woman becomes man.
Multiplicity becomes a singularity.
Divergence becomes sameness.
Distinction becomes uniformity.
The past becomes irrelevant, the future becomes determining.
Nurture becomes nature.

All consciousnesses of differences, all discrimination, all awareness of superior/inferior, becomes a matter of perspective, a matter of taste...an accident, or a choice.

Appearance becomes illusion, the illusive becomes apparent.

Love of self becomes hatred of self, and hatred becomes love.
Sickness becomes the new health, and health becomes another illness.

Arrogance becomes humble, and humility arrogant.

The noumenon becomes phenomenon, and the phenomenon noumenon.

The word becomes reality, and reality is reduced to words, to a code.

The brain can no longer think outside of these premises.
It is trapped in nihilistic paradigms.

Sometimes it presents two seemingly opposite positions which represent two variants of the same annulment of reality.
Right/Left in political discourse, both represent two poles of the same nihilism.
The conceptual landscapes are now taken over by variants of the same end.
They pretend to be opposites, in their dualistic discourse, but are really in agreement on their fundamental opposition to the fluid real, to nature, to the world as it is.
Both propose a different variant of the absent absolute, as a literal end. Both despise the past, nature, to different degrees. Both propose a correction to reality, in accordance with their particular hopes.
Both propose a human intervention upon natural processes, in contradiction to nature's ways.

sigh
give me that star back

Satyr wrote:

Phoneee wrote:

You were able to make a distinction between a moral value and an aesthetic value. The first, dealing with the prevention of suffering, and the second dealing with the obtaining of pleasure.

Different words saying the same thing.
Circular.

Wrong.
Does absence of suffering equal presence of pleasure?
Physical pleasure, yes sorta. Aesthetic pleasure? Abso-fucking-lutelly not.

Why did I ask you the difference between a finger and an eye?

Quote :

Morality is a product of need, weakness.
It surrenders, gives in, so as to obtain power via otherness (synergy).  

I did not imply any other meaning. My only definition for a moral value so far is one that seeks to prevent suffering.

Quote :

Beauty is the product of need producing excess: strength.
No division.
Both rooted in need/suffering.

.

Disagree. There is no logical cause and effect here. The product of need producing excess is... excess.
Beauty is the product of the desire to occupate the idleness which excess provides.
Beauty is not rooted in need/suffering. In order for it to originate, it requires for need/suffering to cease.
Two realms. One comes into existence when the other ceases to exist, and vice-versa.

Quote :

Beauty is symmetry as determined by the past - inherited.
Nature is the sum of all past.
Nature is beautiful, because it still displays the remnants of ordering.
The body is beautiful when it has inherited a period of excess energies, ordering.  
It is a temporal fingerprint, displaying a period, in the past, where the genes, the code, the ordering algorithms, sufficed and excelled.

We are attracted to its promise....not for its own sake.
Getting horny is a unconscious mechanism not requiring consciousness, understanding....it's automated. It makes the organism act without having to evolve a sophisticated comprehension.
Later, a mind might evolve which can question the mechanisms, the "why", and ask the questions that will clarify its own instinctive behaviors, its own automated reactions to the recognition of what it lacks in self.

This is why Know Thyself signifies a process of self-exploration, self-understanding...so that one does not remain, like you, a dumb female canine, sniffing at a-holes and calling it sublime, because it surrenders tot eh sensation and never asks why.

Understanding increases control.
When, for example, I know why a female's round buttocks, causes an erection, I am not overtaken by it.
When I know why a lush forest causes me to gasp, I do not deify the experience.

Understanding decreases the pleasure of surrendering to the mysterious, this feminine surrendering, but it also increases the masculine pleasure of delving deeper, and deeper, and pounding the shit out of that cavernous void....
ahem, where was I?
Ah yes....and going into the substrate where newer, more subtle forms of order exist.

One may lose the pleasure in the shallow, the primal, but one gains a more sublime level of awareness, opening the mind up to new forms of order/symmetry.

I would agree that progress is being made, but I am not so naive as to think I can progress a canine so far as to then call it an ape.
I know that limits are determined in the past...and the past is, indeed, immutable.  

I wish that you would stop professing this as though it was some sort of profound insight, and then acting as though my lack of interest is due to lack of understanding. It's sophomoric at best, and I already exhausted that approach when I was... dunno, 12.
We can understand why we like things that we like, and why appreciation of beauty is universal even though it is a subjective phenomena.
I want to go beyond that.
We are intellectually discussing a phenomena which is not intellectual. It is a split second judgment of values.
Can you bare to indulge, or should I find someone with a lower degree of dementia to talk with?

One does not orgasm with visions, dear.
You confuse awe with pleasure.

The eye arouses, only the finger, the tongue gives pleasure.

Here what happens in the brain with the stimulation the nervous system receives is at play.
Some reactions are automatic, like the orgasm.

Then there are reactions based on memes, ideals.
One is inspired, feels hope, is overjoyed by a projection of possibility, or is stimulated emotionally when the sensation stimulated by contact with symmetry, order. The divine is another word describing the godly, the perfect, the ordered, the singularity, the absolute which is absent.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Order moves us, because we are seduced by its promise, its ideal...like beauty of physical form.
Symmetry, proportionality...
We are becoming, orderings, so order is attractive to us.

You are thick, dear.
Idleness produces atrophy, ugliness.
Stress produces beauty by forcing the organism to compensate or perish.

Idleness, as in leisure, is an excess of energies once sheltering has ensured the basic needs fulfillment. The mind, if it is sophisticated, may dedicate those excess energies towards creativity, or might, like the rabble, dedicate it to decadence, to exclusiveness, to squandering, or to self-numbing.

Who the fuck said anything about morality, you dunce?
Take that star and...stick it where you know it will have an effect.

Beauty is order, dear...health displays itself in order. nature is about ordering.
Everything you consider "positive' demands effort to come about and to continue.
Everything you call ugly comes about due to entropy, with no effort....randomness is increasing.
As beings of order we enjoy its manifestations.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] of positive/negative.
Not perspectivism, not just because, not I choose it for the hell of it, not for its own sake.
We are ordering, and so order is, for us, a positive. That which is ordering, in a universe of increasing entropy, is rare, and preciuos...a resistance, a reaction.

Ol' woman...need/suffering is the sensation of entropy, of temporality, of increasing randomness. Beauty is the product of it as a reaction to it, as that which persists, despite it.
No entropy no ordering...not life.
It is because order is decreasing that we find it sublime.
A muscle grows and a body becomes beautiful when it is stressed, exercised...when it suffers.
Leisure, for the sake of leisure, is decay...woman.
One wants leisure to free his mind to pursue higher needs...and not to remain a chimpanzee who thinks beauty is owed to him/her, or that it comes about magically, just because.

Phonee wrote:

Can you bare to indulge, or should I find someone with a lower degree of dementia to talk with?

What you should do is only discuss these things with your men-children...boys, or guys who want to bang you.
Besides that, I see no value in you, or in anything you have to say.

It's the same liberal crap, trying to find a way out of reality.

Sorry, need/suffering is the experience of conscious existence.
Do nothing, see how fast need/suffering emerges, without you having to do a thing.
Pleasure, on the other hand, demands effort, action...a towards.

Pleasure is a momentary respite, a pocket in time/space, of order, in a sea of disordering.
I've explained why it is ephemeral, and why it never goes away. The consciousness of it recedes but not for long.
The artist who has not suffered, who is not intimate with need/suffering is worthless...shallow, decadent....with no value.
All art which we find inspiration is a product of need/suffering.

Schopenhauer's definition of pleasure stand unchallenged.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Although I disagree with his response to this reality, I fully agree with his judgments.

And since this is going nowhere because you cannot provide an argument but only state "no it isn't" and "yet it is"...I see no reason why this should go on.
Go back to your delusions, old woman...find a boy on your level and converse.
Enjoy yourself.

Seriously...I really have no interest in anything you have to say on subjects relating to philosophy.
You bore me.
If I wasted my time on every simple mind who came around with declarative statements, void of any metaphysical grounding, or any reference to reality, held with conviction simply because (s)he likes to think so, just because, I would never leave the house.

Talk to me about sex, your buttocks, what sexual positions you enjoy, what food you are eating, what drinks you drink, or do not talk to me at all.

Satyr wrote:

See why she never offers long posts?
Because when she does she exposes her simplicity, her lack of understanding for the very subject she claims an expertise in.

As you will notice the feminine mind needs to detach the self from the action.

Read this little bit:

Phonee wrote:

When we engage on aesthetic pursuits, it is not because we are concerned with our necessities, it is done freely and spontaneously for its own sake, because it interests us.

Read how she closes the circle.
Why does it interest us?
Just because....stated using words that make her appear more intelligent.

It's spontaneous. The causal chain is broken.
The Divine enters the picture.
It is we who choose what to find beautiful.
Why?
Just because.

The Christian:
"God exists for His own sake".
He is His own cause, his own justification, His own proof.

Why are we attracted to beauty?
Just because...for its own sake.
Circular reasoning.
Beauty is beautiful, because it is beautiful.  
Not because it promises something, to offers us potential, possibility, but ...'just 'cause'.
We can use pretty words to hide that trite little "just because".  

It's spontaneous, magical....it has no explanation.
Like spontaneous combustion.
It just happens.
Out of nothingness.

She does not wish to go further.
She wants to stop here, on the mysterious, the mystical.
From then on its all sensations with no reference point.  
Senses with no source, and no object/objective.

All it took is for her to post one longer than usual post.
And....voila mes amis.  

Being terse is more than just indifference.
Sometimes it is extreme difference.

This entire post is a product of your defective comprehension skills.

We engage in aesthetic pursuits freely and spontaneously.

Engage is the word here.

old man wrote:

Why does it interest us?

Not what I asked. Why do we engage in it is the question I answered.

Quote :

Just because....stated using words that make her appear more intelligent.

Strawman, since I never asked that question.

Quote :

It's spontaneous. The causal chain is broken.
The Divine enters the picture.
It is we who choose what to find beautiful.
Why?
Just because.

Not what I asked.

Old woman, why do you assume every post I make is directed at you?

I have little interest in your intellectual views.
I use you as an example of modern, nihilistic decay, and of the female mind, as I've defined it before you came here.
You offer zero arguments, zero metaphysical or physical arguments...you only declare, and then insinuate.
This is typical.

Give me a recipe, or show my your ass...nothing about what you think./feel, emote, interests me.

If you prefer living your life as if pleasure makes you exit existence, or that intellectual pleasure is other than physical pleasure, and it is free to do as it wills, then live your life as you like.
If you prefer to believe that genes and memes are detached, that what you find intellectually beautiful is not rooted in genetics, or the human condition, and you simply choose it, so be it.

Who, the fuck, cares?
Every time you speak more than two sentences I lose interest.
Your lips are meant to be wrapped around my penis, dear, and your tongue would stimulate me only by running itself down my shaft.

I feel nothing else but frustration when you use both to talk.
Exposing your mind to me creeps me out. I would rather you expose your body.

No wait...it's your fingers.
Use them to play with my testicles.
Your typing irritates me...it insults my aesthetics.
 
Ooooooooorrrrrrr.....
Discuss things with boys who think "just because" is a philosophical position...or maybe "because I say so" is better.
I will not bother you, if you remain within forum rules.

Other than that, good luck.

lol
quote me
directly address my quote with faulty comprehension
make a huge deal out of your own strawman
get called on it
pretend you weren't talking to me to begin with

Watch him fumble kids, it's today's show.

I already have, old woman, but you are too emotional to notice.

Here is but one:

Phonee wrote:

When we engage on aesthetic pursuits, it is not because we are concerned with our necessities, it is done freely and spontaneously for its own sake, because it interests us.

Now, get lost.

And you confuse aesthetic with pleasure.
Not all pleasures are aesthetic.
Your lover boy Schopenhauer himself wrote that lust counters the proper goals of art and prevents aesthetic contemplation. Did you skim through that part? The part where the will man talks about a will-less form of perception? An observation that is devoid of a will... hmm what could we call that...

Do you disagree with that? Shall Shoppie be challenged, after all?

Please note that this does not remove the relation between lust and the sense of beauty. What it does is to acknowledge that beauty from an aesthetic point of view must be separated from lust to be understood... something you seem incapable to do.

Satyr wrote:

If you prefer living your life as if pleasure makes you exit existence, or that intellectual pleasure is other than physical pleasure, and it is free to do as it wills, then live your life as you like.
If you prefer to believe that genes and memes are detached, that what you find intellectually beautiful is not rooted in genetics, or the human condition, and you simply choose it, so be it.

Do you have anything other than illusory arguments? I feel like I didn't have to be here at all, you'll make both sides of the conversation!

There is no argument in my view against the genetic roots of aesthetic appreciation.
What I have been saying this entire time is that that is a separate subject.

You're frustrated, so am I. You are not interested in a conversation, you want to fight windmills, like a crazy old man.

Reality is being abstracted and the abstraction of reality becomes reality. Words and ideas being disconnected from the phenomenon. Via modern information technology, the population is being informed about what reality is.

Elaborate abstract constructions to hide the simple motivations behind the proposed, taught reality.
That's the modern elite...

phoneutria wrote:

And you confuse aesthetic with pleasure.
Not all pleasures are aesthetic.
Your lover boy Schopenhauer himself wrote that lust counters the proper goals of art and prevents aesthetic contemplation. Did you skim through that part? The part where the will man talks about a will-less form of perception? An observation that is devoid of a will... hmm what could we call that...

Do you disagree with that? Shall Shoppie be challenged, after all?

Please note that this does not remove the relation between lust and the sense of beauty. What it does is to acknowledge that beauty from an aesthetic point of view must be separated from lust to be understood... something you seem incapable to do.

Reply, worm.

Aesthetics is the perception of symmetry, order, pattern.
We covet order, either to inspire, to give us hope, or to assimilate to add to our own.
Some nihilists also dream of being assimilated by it.

Males want to establish order, as they imagine it.
Females want to become a means towards this end.

Pleasure is in its promise, or in its utility - its application.
Orgasm, in the sexual sense, is a cessation of need, which is the reaffirmation of the order already present, or an increase of order.
It is the sudden release of repressed energies, promising renewed ordering.

Lust, you lustful whore, is the sensation of an automatic reaction to the promise of an other, as a procreative agency.
The orgasm is its culmination.
The other's beauty is appreciated as the promise for a renewal, or an increase in order - life being ordering.  

On the physical level pleasure is a sudden, or constant alleviation of need.
Need is the sensation of Flux - which never ends and never begins - which is a stress upon the established ordering.
Pleasure is its rejuvenation, its momentary respite.
On a purely objective appreciation, it is the perception of virility, a promise, a symmetry that we feel pleasing because it accentuates our own possibilities either as a 'what if', or as a possibility we may assimilate, or be assimilated by.

Pleasure of body and pleasure of mind, whore, combine into one, in the nervous system - both are founded on the same ground in Flux.

Now go fuck yourself, my sweet.

I forgot....
Forgive me for being so verbose, you stupid slut, but you asked for clarifications and I must cover all the holes, including your orifices, or else I risk being called a coward and a hypocrite, by those who hide and say nothing.

You stupid slut...
Will is a product of ordering.
Will is a part of consciousness funneling/focusing these energies towards an object/objective.
It is ordering, the aggregate energies participating in the organism, directed towards either an object/objective present before the will emerged, independent, or as a projection of the mind's desires, its hopes, its ideals.
Confusing the two is what makes Nihilism seductive, when the perceived order is too unflattering and/or threatening.
Nihilism is the confusion of the projected abstraction, with the sensually perceived ordering - it is anti-sensual but considered in "good taste" because it promises the easy increase in the organisms own order with lies.

Knowing what an emotional-vampire you are, let me speak to you in a passionate manner, that may get you wet....
Let the passion be anger, thymos, ferocity...to accentuate your delicate whorishness.....
You dumb whore....the previous explains why the Will directs the organism towards the beautiful, that which promises potential higher order, or the maintenance of the order already established.  

The Will directs the organism towards an order already present, or it projects order and directs itself towards its hypothetical presence in the beyond or the future.
The latter is a product of a more sophisticated brain....the latter is a more primitive method...and so you are amongst those who can only understand the latter = a manimal discovering order, recognizing it, and coveting its promise.

You have no scruples because your appreciation of symmetry, of order, is base, primitive, animalistic, intuitive.
You cannot care about any abstraction that is not immediate, sensual, present.