Observations and Thoughts too short for their own threads - 1

Who?

OhFortunae wrote:

Who?

Ziit needs to be popped.

Now you're calling me gay too?

I'm yours? I'd beat you to death with one hand and then wipe my ass with your face, cockroach. You ever wanna find out your limits, you come find me.

Where are you

Zoot Allures wrote:

Now you're calling me gay too?

I'm yours? I'd beat you to death with one hand and then wipe my ass with your face, cockroach.  You ever wanna find out your limits, you come find me.

Is that from a movie or a Zappa song?

If you are not, you will be...he's already seducing you with personal messages, insights into his exciting life, affection directed only towards you, making you feel special and "valuable".
How excited you got when he suggested a meeting in the woods.
An excuse for you to escape and live in his commune.

Ah, Ziit...the only thing you'll be beating is your dick...or his.
Reciprocity.

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

O'C'mon, Zootie, don't be so crushed or dramatic.
Besides, we have another commonality: a couple once told me that I reminded them of drummer and percussionist Terry Bozzio. Do you know of him, probably from his past affiliation with Frank Zappa?

But whatever, if the public announcement doesn't work try PMing one of the three with usernames in black.

That double-contraction was just for you, btw.

When they come, they come in droves.
When they leave, they leave one by one.

Look! The little faggot Nazi ballet dancer Fortunae wants a piece too. For you, tough guy, I'll tie one hand behind my back.

Jakob's a good guy. A little naïve, but full of life and spirit. That he could eat you for breakfast in a philosophical discussion about anything is not his greatest asset. It's that life and energy, that youthful spirit he remains even in his aging, that counts.

I understand that if you aren't as intelligent as him, and can't beat him in debate (if you can even understand him at all with your pancake batter for brains), you'll resort to being the pussy that you always were and start in with the gay cracks. That's all you can do, and I understand that.

Quote :

Ah, Ziit...the only thing you'll be beating is your dick

Aw shucks, you mean you don't want to come out from behind that computer for once? Come one man, we'll meet halfway. Fly to southern New York.. it wouldn't cost much. You can make me your bitch. Show me some of that Hellenistic valor and masculinity.

No? Okay, make me a video. Gimme your best. You can even speak some greek and wear your toga.  

If I told you the only reason you haven't been completely shut down on these forums is because nobody wants to bother with your dumb-ass, you wouldn't believe me.

Hating your enemies is futile, and it saps your energies.
One is glad for his enemies, because they establish the border of his domain, and they make the glory of war possible.

One does not hate one's enemies, one rejoices they are present, for without them who would be there to measure against and to feel the pleasure of the kill?

One does not despise one's enemies, for it is nonsensical.
They could not be anything other than what they are, and what they are is what you reject in yourself.

I do enjoy playing with you little Ziit.
*thump *thump *thump...you win...you always win in my heart.
You do realize you went from one Jew (Spinoza) to the other (Marx) and then to another (Jacob)...the progression is downwards, yet the theme is, ironically, exactly the same.

Theory is theory...I can beat you in my mind, a dozen times...and reality is reality....here you are, being my bitch.
You were my bitch from the get-go....way back when echo gave herself to me...but the stink of you on her made me say "no thanks".  
Any woman that would hang around with you and LaughingStock is a no-go, for me.
Did you know Purple Dragon also got a wink?
Yeah, "your" Natalie really got around.
Low standards.

Substance, to class, to value?
He is seductive, I know...for a lost, desperate spirit, like you, he is almost godlike.
He almost makes the words he uses feel meaningful.
Idiotic, naive, like Jesus of Nazareth.  
He, too, seduced young men, lost souls to his fantastic calling...to his convoluted play with words.

I don't want you to forsake him, only to keep me, and us on KT, posted.
He fucked one guy, who will be next I really do not know....maybe not you...Pezer seems a likely candidate.
He's better looking, younger, more submissive...but Ollie is always his favourite, and he is accessible.
I've never come across a more dedicated feminine spirit before.
But you are in the running, with your Travolta looks, so don't worry.
Just cut back on the machismo, he likes his bitches soft.

Already the bareback mind-fucking is on track.
Are you pregnant?

Build them the opium den...

Someone who believes philosophy ought not to complicate issues and stay grounded and pragmatic, should question what good is VOt if it isnt comprehensible to the average layman, the forests of this world?

And if its really so simple, why not even one critique or question or clarification posed by innocent/unbiased people besides Satyr or I have not been answered?

But whatever.

Zoot Allures wrote:

Look! The little faggot Nazi ballet dancer Fortunae wants a piece too. For you, tough guy, I'll tie one hand behind my back.

What music is to you, dance is to Fortunae, dear Nazi.

Someone hung up on Zappa calling another a faggot is laughable.

ha, etc.

Hrodeberto wrote:

Besides, we have another commonality: a couple once told me that I reminded them of drummer and percussionist Terry Bozzio.

Now that you mention it, yea!! I see it haha

But you're going to be Ed. to me.

One of the ways you can determine if a theory is based on linguistics, and has no meaning outside of them is this:
If the one proposing an idea(l) cannot explain it using multiple words, referencing phenomena outside human brains, it is, most probably, a delusion, sold as pharmakon.
Words are, after all, tools used for expressing ideas.
They are an artist's means.

Schopenhauer wrote:

Those who have spent their lives reading and have drawn their wisdom from books resemble men who have acquired precise information about a country from many descriptions of travel.
They are able to give much information about things, but at bottom they have really no coherent, clear, and thorough knowledge of the nature of the country.

Those who know what they are talking about, are convinced that it relates to the real world, can express the very same concepts using many different words, many symbols, many metaphors.
Those who cannot are trying to mystify the concept by ascribing to one word/symbol the power of the divine.

Schopenhauer wrote:

The works of really capable minds differ from the rest in their character of decisiveness and definiteness, together with the distinctness and clearness springing there from, since they at all times clearly and definitely knew what they wanted to express; it may have been in prose, verse, or tones.
The rest lack this decisiveness and clearness; and in this respect they can be at once recognized.
The characteristic sign of all first-rate minds is the directness of all their judgments and opinions.
All that they express and assert is the result of their own original thinking and everywhere proclaims itself as such even by the style of delivery....Therefore every genuine and original thinker is to this extent like a monarch; he is immediate and perceives no one who is his superior. Like the decrees of a monarch, his judgments spring from his own supreme power and come directly from himself.

If you cannot explain your positions to a layman, cannot simplify it for the average to understand, then it is all hocus-pocus verbal diarrhea, using linguistic complexity, acrobatics, to replace meaning - magic tricks.
You can impress the moron, and win a debate in their eyes, but what have you accomplished when all you've done is exploit stupidity?
Exploiting children is easy, if that's your goal.

The most successful, in attempts per kill percentiles, not lions, not tigers, not bears...wild dogs.


Stamina, patience, intelligence, team work.

Zoot Allures wrote:

Look! The little faggot Nazi ballet dancer Fortunae wants a piece too. For you, tough guy, I'll tie one hand behind my back.

Jakob's a good guy. A little naïve, but full of life and spirit. That he could eat you for breakfast in a philosophical discussion about anything is not his greatest asset. It's that life and energy, that youthful spirit he remains even in his aging, that counts.

I understand that if you aren't as intelligent as him, and can't beat him in debate (if you can even understand him at all with your pancake batter for brains), you'll resort to being the pussy that you always were and start in with the gay cracks. That's all you can do, and I understand that.

A Modern Mongrel American has not really an opinion; just feeeelingz, like when you hang impulsively your dick out of a car window - you have no taste, no character; keep it with dem selfie-sticking philosophers.

A 'man' who can only make a woman laugh and get only attention through such will never be more than a friend; he instills no sense of fear in her, no respect.

Quote :

A Modern Mongrel American has not really an opinion; just feeeelingz, like when you hang impulsively your dick out of a car window - you have no taste, no character; keep it with dem selfie-sticking philosophers.

Not just that, but I'm also a dirty Jew who would rape your sister while you watched.

Saying that philosophy is nonsense unless it makes you money, makes you a true Jew.
The dis-ease is a mental one.
You can be infected and be black, white, oriental, from any nation, any creed, any tribe.

We associate this memetic virus with the Jews because of historical reasons...through them, and their inversion, Christianity was born, and it infects western man ever since.
In the east the same mental dis-ease was expressed through Buddhism, in relation to Hinduism.

No hate.
Describing a virus does not mean you hate it.
There's no emotion behind the analysis.
Passion, yes, not hate, or love, or envy, or anything.
I analyze the flu virus to protect myself from it, not to eradicate it from the face of the earth.
I don't hate lepers...I want to know what their disease is. to not be one of them.

Being one who is not really interested in philosophy, you will fit in with the clan, becoming a cult, of hedonists.
You jerk-off physically, they do so mentally.
Small difference...your disagreements can be bridged.
Find a common ground. In Pakistan, or Venezuela.
Maybe you can learn, from them, to masturbate using only your mind, and they may discover the joys of jerking-off in public.
A performance of both, simultaneous, will be entertaining.

You gather the clan, with matching hoodies...or you ride in on your matching scooters, one hand on the bike the other holding your selfie-sticks...long robes flowing in the back, like Knights on their steeds.
You get off, in unison...this has to be synchronized to multiply the effect.
One hand free, and the other still with the selfie-stick, you pull back one flap of the robes, exposing yourselves naked.
Then you jerk each other off...in unison, again.
Homoeritca....extraordinaire.
Brotherhood of hedonists....sex, race, what does it matter?
It's all pleasure, and value.
Don't know if you can mange this but a synchronized orgasms will really be a nice finish.

JofA being the leader gets the first spot....where her is jerked-off but does not have to jerk-off anyone else.
Alpha-dog, the pitcher not the catcher.
I pity the last guy...the omega.
May not be you....I hope.
Second and third spots are taken.

Zoot Allures wrote:

Quote :

A Modern Mongrel American has not really an opinion; just feeeelingz, like when you hang impulsively your dick out of a car window - you have no taste, no character; keep it with dem selfie-sticking philosophers.

Not just that, but I'm also a dirty Jew who would rape your sister while you watched.

We all know you like others to see your dick. What else.

So much time and energy wasted on a sociopath with a victim card that exposes himself to children and makes excuses about how wrong the system is that punished him for his crimes against said innocent child.

I seriously don't know why you guys bother, he's obviously broken.

Arditezza wrote:

So much time and energy wasted on a sociopath with a victim card that exposes himself to children and makes excuses about how wrong the system is that punished him for his crimes against said innocent child.

I seriously don't know why you guys bother, he's obviously broken.

We bother, for the same reason we bother with ILP.
They are the outcome of this Nihilism...symptoms, specimens of decay.
Each one a variant of the same virus.

Like I've said before, Nihilism is versatile, multifarious, because it is detached from an objective world of patterns (inter)acting, that would restrict imagination and behaviors.
With no external restraints, they are "freed" internally.

Except for human law, they know no boundaries.
They want to exist in whatever reality they like.
The virus being sheltered is highly mutable.
We study its variants and how the same virus manifests in different ways.
Different symptoms from the exact same memetic dis-ease.
It's fun.

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

Regarding Dawkin's question if it would be more sensible to let children choose for themselves once they have become matured enough in regards to cultural practises: Where does one stop, how much must be ''experimented'', or rather tolerated, propagated, until all becomes so neutralized that this ''neutrality'' itself becomes dominant. Besides, as the Rabbi saw trough it himself, then those children who need to decide themselves without 'forcing' an identity upon them relating to traditions, already will presume that the dominant culture is the norm and is natural to choose between - there is no such choice, only degrees and limitations relating to genes and nurturing and circumstances.

The reduction of beauty, and everything else to the "eye of the beholder" is a reduction to the worthless, the meaningless.
If beauty is different for everyone, and is everything, then it is worthless.
often Moderns use the same word in different context, in reference to different concepts, making the word shallow, stripping it of its utility as a tool of refinement of sharpening awareness.
When the same word is used in different contexts the word is convoluted with unnecessary baggage, and buried in subjective emotionalism.  

Three components to beauty and its appreciation.

---The first is based on the essence of what being a living organism is.
A living organism is ordering; an organization of patterns in congruence, that are self-ordering, or relating to each other in harmony, symmetry, but not entirely.
There is an element of imperfection in all, because nothing is absolute, complete, perfect, whole.
As such, an organism can perceive and appreciate, evaluate, ordering, pattern, in the world.
it finds order, in all its forms, beautiful.
Some less so, some more so, because not all order is as symmetrical when interacting in involved.
Every congruence of patterns is less or more ordered, and the conscious mind appreciates this as less or more beautiful.


---The second is an extension of the first, but with the component of reproduction.
an organism is self-ordering, but it is also self-replicating.
The original method is division, but later combination evolved to increase adaptation to changing environments.
The organism now appreciates order, in general, but now it also appreciates it in the context of its reproductive needs.
It recognizes a congruence of patterns as similar to itself, appreciating the possibility of combination and reproduction.
This is preceded by a recognition of what is similar to self for feeding, to consume nutrients...and so sex is a evolution of the need to consume, but this time not to ingest energies which are lacking but to expel excess energies which have accumulated due to feeding.
The organism evaluates the other first as being of its kind, and then its proportions...how each organ relates to the others - its symmetry, indicating fitness, because in a cosmos in Flux, tending towards chaos, ordering is increasingly rare, and precious, and under stress.
Proportionality, symmetry, exposes fitness, within a world in flux.
Proportionality, how each organ relates to the whole, indicates fertility: potential ability to bring a birth to a successful fruition.
The second definition of beauty is the erotic, the reproductive, which follows from the first.  


--- The third component has to do with space/time.
Space is possibility, and matter/energy, or any pattern, is order, or probability within this expanding possibility.
Man feels anxiety in relation to this reality.
Anxiety and a thrill. Space opens up to him possibilities for gain and loss.
As a self-organizing, self-replicating ordering, probabilities it needs to increase his chances of finding the particular, and possibilities it has to decrease, in its movement towards its objective.
Fear and joy combine to create the sense of awe before the world.
This heightens its excitement, and makes it feel alive.
It calls this feeling beautiful, and ascribes it to other, because humans tend to ascribe fear to that which stimulates fear in them, and hate to that which makes them hate.
They confuse their reaction to other, for the nature of the other.    
The sensation of awe before nature, is misconstrued for the essence of nature, just as man often mistakes his own consciousness as universal consciousness, and his own values for universal values, and his own pleasure for universal pleasure, and his own abstractions (noumena), for phenomena.

By intervening upon world and reducing the possibilities, ordering nature into parks, or manmade environments, or gardens, man decreases his anxiety and increases his joy in relation to nature.
This he calls beauty.

So, no, beauty is not decided by the observer, no more than order is, or symmetry, or fitness, or nature, but it is nature that determines the organism, and how its reactions to world.

Quote :

The noble values of males, among males, runs contrary or even inverse (opposite of) the values of females, among females.

Satyr wrote:

The fighter loves to fight, and in lieu of any fighters offering a challenge he fights a lesser, to practice.
The lesser is flattered by this. 
He feels his equal, and in the ensuing fight he learns to become a better fighter.

A lesser fighter who remains self-conscious about his status, who knows he is not an equal, will be grateful for the challenge and, if they make mistakes, will feel slightly ashamed for them - for not giving the superior fighter their best challenge. Only if they value the (future) continuation of a sparring relationship would they express shame for wasting the others time. This is only when the engagement is not meant to be fatal. 
Any young boy would light up at the opportunity to practice fight with who they idolize. One that is self-conscious and already at their limit in training, who is advancing at their own pace, knowing they're not yet at another's level, will engage that other begrudgingly only when it is necessary or offered to them - this is if they do not want to spoil first impressions. A weakling who acts superior would be worse than one who is conscious of their own weakness. 

Then there are those who are pure fighting spirit - they will challenge anyone at any time, accepting all the risks. Even when they are weak, they lose with a smile. They maintain their boyish spirit for fighting - any challenge to them is a joy to partake in. The problem being, if they miscalculate, they may lose some teeth or simply die. No engagement is without risk - which is why every battle should be chosen wisely.

It seems to me that modern era is very sub-consciously abusive to the point where conscious concentration, or the capacity for it, is highly limited, disturbed, if you will. everything is evidence of something, inside and outside. Perhaps, this is where the conscious mind enters a splitting where internal thoughts bring about a constant disruption. Perhaps, a natural defense response from the brain when exposed to this environment, attempting to solve the problem by exhausting all energies inwards, since that's where the problems lie. The environment being of a sheltering nature where active engagement is not necessary further hindering the external development of the being, in all ways, resulting in a large unfulfilled space where excessive contemplation and rumination takes place, internally, as there is little to "distract" the being from itself, despite being exposed to typical social routines, the typicality of it possibly reinforces the expansion of this space, until the being is consumed completely by itself.

I believe the following is the same as what lies in the narcissism/schizophrenia thread, but it came from my own reflection - the words are mine, so to speak:

The cowardly idiot or retard, who cannot deal with the suffering that becomes them from their own ignorance, naivety or stupidity, will create a ghost within themselves - another self which they detach from but issue orders to. This ghost performs everything they would, but it always maintains a plausible deniability, some escape route in case things go wrong. They can kill the ghost at any time, without feeling like they've lost something meaningful - it wasn't them, but a figment of their imagination, a character, a persona that they write the script for. They are rarely within their own eyes, they do not feel their heart and they don't desire anything but that which is hedonistic, which includes the uninterrupted acquisition of their pleasure. It is only from this desire to be uninterrupted that arises in them some kind of a conscience. 

In their daily life, this ghost is at the forefront. It is their default position - this malleable character which they manipulate and sacrifice at will. When they are themselves, they are sad, angry, fearful or anxious. Having control over this ghost, having people valuing (intersubjectivity) this ghost they created in themselves - it makes them feel like they have control, they're powerful. Others value this "thing" which they have complete control over - they can kill at any time. It is when they are exposed that they get heavily irate or depressed. When someone rips the mask away, when others don't pretend with them and they're called on their bullshit. 

REDACTED wrote:

The man wants to expose the gap between the real and the ideal. He tears the mask - his actions revolve around the eyes.

The woman wants to close the gap… it is in the synchronization, the dissonance is heard. Her actions revolve around the ears

Those who are authentic don't get so upset when they are questioned. Any offense to the authentic person is processed personally instead of in comparison to a standard for their character's story. One who wants to act Hollywood,wants to be the cool gangster or player character, will get irate when they're not given the "respect" needed to maintain the illusion with everyone that they are that character. This kind of pressure is viscerally sensed as a particular need - one that forces you to walk on glass around them, making sure not to probe too deeply/critically and expose them,  or else they will get belligerent and perhaps even attack you.

I do not think this means all character is bad - there is an aspect of character we all have when we are upset, when our expectations are betrayed. The problem is inauthentic character, used as coping mechanisms for their weaknesses and as excuses to continue along the path of least resistance. 

In times when they do not have a distraction - when they don't need their ghost/character - they experience an emptiness. An emptiness that would be filled with their own passions and desires if it weren't something out of character for them. Acting out of character can, for them, feel as if it is fatally dangerous. Anxiety rushes and they desperately seek a distraction, something to get their mind off the things they must do for their real selves - involving responsibility. Responsibility for their finances, their education, their life, personal relationships or loneliness. Indeed, they are the most lonely because they never express themselves spontaneously. Every move they make is calculated and performed by a ghost. Calculated and performed to make as little waves against them as possible while maximizing their enjoyment.

The State's ghost as it were to give calculated meaning to their pathetic lives. Well written.