Thermodynamics and Entropy

How serious you become when the masks are torn.

Balance...

In a universe of increasing entropy, where no effort is needed to increase it....and where ordering requires effort, most states of balance, if not all, can be achieved, willfully.
In fact "balance"only makes sense in relation to an established order - a state where chaos and the reaction to it are in equilibrium.
In the Hellenic ascetic ideal I've compared balance to riding a wave on a surfboard - I was inspired by Evola's "Riding the Tiger" metaphor.
The wave has not stopped going towards the shore, the air and the abyss have not disappeared, but for a short while there's that almost perfect state of equilibrium where rider, wave, air, abyss, are in sync - in harmony.

In fact, other than randomness, only will, as in "will towards" can decrease entropy to any significant level...and then only ephemerally.
The ordering of life is in (re)action to the natural state of disordering.
This is why your pet moneky's claim that the opposite to my position that 'pleasure is a temporary decrease in need', holds no water - despite your obsession with perspectivism to save your arse from the inevitable.


Two types of chaos...
I think I've explained it already.

Complexity, in relation to the observer, where the patterns are so subtle, or non-perceptible, that the mind interprets it as darkness.
Man invents tools with more sensitive sensors to perceive these more complex/subtle patterns.

Randomness, where there are no patterns, and so the energies are inconceivable, imperceptible, even by human machines and sensory enhancing tools; nothing the mind can make sense of - it interprets it as darkness, as well.
This is chaos-proper - sheer randomness with nil pattern.

A mindless woman, with no clue, might be obsessed with the idea that 'all is good', 'it's not that bad', and that chaos is not increasing...despite being presented with vids explaining the contrary...which she does not watch because she's a nit-wit who wants to believe that her pleasures come at no cost, and the cosmos is interested in her whims, and her tastes, and is influenced, directly, by her word-games.
Life IS the localized decrease in entropy.
That's what "ordering" IS, you retard.
Ordering is a slowing down of the movement towards entropy.

Now, your claim of a localized reversal of entropy (a going backwards in time), whether true or not - has no affect on my positions...as the state in which life emerges can only be a towards increasing chaos.  
I've, actually, proposed the possibility - if you ever cared to bother with more than your emotional needs - that entropy might be decreasing, simultaneously with it increasing, like in a looping effect.
"Eternal return, and Hindu, and eastern spirituality, in general, allude to such a possibility.

They call the "looping" (a visualization allegory), cyclical...and they often represent it as circular, yin/yang.
This would help to make the universe an enclosed self-sustaining whole...and yet, still, even if this is proven to be more probable than not, it still changes nothing about life and its relation to chaos.
More importantly it contradicts nothing I've said.  

The world is threatening to life, because it is increasing in entropy, which conflicts with life's ordering processes.
This is why life must constantly struggle to maintain itself within the world.
The stress upon the ordering body is what makes it need, or feel this condition as need; and it makes it suffer, if these need(s) are not satisfied. The body must be constantly repaired, healed, every cell replaced; the body is in a constant state of agon, fighting off viruses, dealing with emerging infections, cancers, repairing small damages, replacing cells.
Most of it automated, requiring no consciousnesses....consciousness evolved to deal with the big stuff, you dumb hypocrite.

When the automatic processes can accomplish their jobs, the mind feels at ease, comfortable...even though it is constantly fighting, struggling, repairing...
The conscious mind is alerted to something only when it reaches a level where it requires immediate attention.
It then senses the need, and it begins to grow towards what we call suffering/pain.
Pain, you simpleton, is how the conscious mind is alerted to a possible threat. That's why consciousness evolved.
It was not to get you off, dear. It is a survival tool.

How and why consciousness has become more is another story...and one i will not be explaining to you, dear.


During replacements of cells, or of genetic data, it is flux which creates mutations...this including in the womb when a recombination of previous genetics in affected by the cosmos - all that exists being activity.
Matter/energy being slower or faster forms of (inter)activity.  

What kills you in the end is a slow decline, when the energies required to heal the damage done by entropy, over long periods of time, do not suffice to retain the organism at its peak condition - its highest potential order.
The organism's ordering cannot keep-up with the accumulating effects of temporal attrition.

This same process also explains SuperOrganic decay - as in civilizations, empires, declining over time.

Dear....saying "no" and nothing else might work with the men-children you can impress with your bullshit mind-games, but they leave me desperately bored.
What you should do, to keep me interested and you well-fed with the emotions you lack in your life, and you crave, is google fun facts, for us.
Then bring them here, post them, and imply that you've told me something new that contradicts my positions, or that you actually understand my positions or the fun-fact you brought over...you know pretend that you've "taught" me something.
If that fails, just repeat the insinuations, wanting to raise an emotional response in me.
If I pretend to be affected, sit back and applaud yourself, because a simple female, like you, managed to get a Satyr upset.

Use the length of this post to flatter yourself, dear...as if you are not my means, and not my end.
Fuck, I once spent an entire summer explaining my positions to the autistic boy, Purple Dragon.
Not because I thought I could convince him, ro that he could understand, or that he was worth it, but because he provided me with an opportunity to expand upon my views, for any passer by to read.
I do that all the time, dear.
I did it with the shit-head Kovacs and with shit-Stain on ILP.
When a citric retard appears, I take the lemon and I try to make sweet lemonade.

You know what I remember about Varda, back on sciforums and in the monkeybarn?
Nothing.
I had to go back and skim through your gushing, womanly boring shit.
No wonder nobody noticed when gendy or xev were around.

You were, and are, one boring woman.

All you have are mind-games....luckily, for you, I enjoy them.
It's my feminine side.

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

Quote :

"By accepting the theory of the expanding universe we are relieved of one conclusion which we had felt to be intrinsically absurd. It was argued that every possible configuration of atoms must repeat itself at some distant date. But that was on the assumption that the atoms will have only the same choice of configurations in the future that they have now. In an expanding space any particular congruence becomes more and more improbable. The expansion of the universe creates new possibilities of distribution faster than the atoms can work through them, and there is no longer any likelihood of a particular distribution being repeated. If we continue shuffling a pack of cards we are bound sometime to bring them into their standard order — but not if the conditions are that every morning one more card is added to the pack."

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

Quote :

Balance...

In a universe of increasing entropy, where no effort is needed to increase it....and where ordering requires effort, most states of balance, if not all, can be achieved, willfully.
In fact "balance"only makes sense in relation to an established order - a state where chaos and the reaction to it are in equilibrium.
In the Hellenic ascetic ideal I've compared balance to riding a wave on a surfboard - I was inspired by Evola's "Riding the Tiger" metaphor.
The wave has not stopped going towards the shore, the air and the abyss have not disappeared, but for a short while there's that almost perfect state of equilibrium where rider, wave, air, abyss, are in sync - in harmony.

I am not sure what you are going on about here. You seem to be thinking of balance as a temporary state of low entropy. But when it comes to entropy, as in the second law of thermodynamics, equilibrium is when the maximum state of entropy is reached. There is nothing willful about it. Heat energy dissipates until all parts of the system bare no gradient.

Quote :

In fact, other than randomness, only will, as in "will towards" can decrease entropy to any significant level...and then only ephemerally.

This is true, but it's not about order. You can decrease entropy locally by returning your system to a state of imbalance, by cooling down the recipient end of a heat transfer, which would be an increase in molecular order, but you can also decrease entropy by heating up the giving end of a heat transfer, which would be a decrease in molecular order. To use the life form example, you decrease entropy by trapping energy into matter. However, you can see here how extrapolating entropy to a living organism can't be taken to be a scientifically literal example, because to release entropy from matter is is not at all an effortless reaction, a spontaneous flow. It is in fact a very effortful, energy expensive reaction.

Quote :

The ordering of life is in (re)action to the natural state of disordering.
This is why your pet moneky's claim that the opposite to my position that 'pleasure is a temporary decrease in need', holds no water - despite your obsession with perspectivism to save your arse from the inevitable.

It is a reaction to the natural state of entropy increase, but by no reason other than the rapid release of heat energy from matter by stars making this energy available to be captured by emerging life forms. In fact, it is more accurate to say that it is a reaction to the force of Gravity, since it is what causes matter to pack so densely as to behave as a fusion reactor.

Quote :

Two types of chaos...
I think I've explained it already.

Complexity, in relation to the observer, where the patterns are so subtle, or non-perceptible, that the mind interprets it as darkness.
Man invents tools with more sensitive sensors to perceive these more complex/subtle patterns.

Randomness, where there are no patterns, and so the energies are inconceivable, imperceptible, even by human machines and sensory enhancing tools; nothing the mind can make sense of - it interprets it as darkness, as well.
This is chaos-proper - sheer randomness with nil pattern.

OK.

Quote :

... and that chaos is not increasing...despite being presented with vids explaining the contrary...

Chaos is increasing, yes. Not randomness. "Randomness" is a meaningless word, as there is no such thing as "random" in physics.
In physics, as in the Chaos Theory, any outcome is predictable as long as all the variables are accountable. In a highly chaotic system, the outcomes are unpredictable not because they happen at "random", but because there are way too many variables at play, making keeping track of them impossible. The correct word to define such systems is stochastic.

Quote :

Life IS the localized decrease in entropy.
That's what "ordering" IS, you retard.
Ordering is a slowing down of the movement towards entropy.

Yes, dear.

Quote :

Now, your claim of a localized reversal of entropy (a going backwards in time), whether true or not - has no affect on my positions...as the state in which life emerges can only be a towards increasing chaos.  

Without going into the merits of Relativity, which I think are beyond the scope of this discussion, why you've elected to say that a localized "reversal" of entropy means a going backwards in time is unexplicable to me. In the paragraphs above, you stated that life is the localized decrease in entropy. Why is it now a going backwards in time? Haven't we come to agree with the definition of the law, that systems can suffer local entropy decrease? Why most you now throw this nonsense into the discussion?

And once again, no. I am not out to debunk your positions. However when I see factual/conceptual missunderstandings, I am inclined to point them out.

Quote :

I've, actually, proposed the possibility - if you ever cared to bother with more than your emotional needs - that entropy might be decreasing, simultaneously with it increasing, like in a looping effect.
"Eternal return, and Hindu, and eastern spirituality, in general, allude to such a possibility.

They call the "looping" (a visualization allegory), cyclical...and they often represent it as circular, yin/yang.
This would help to make the universe an enclosed self-sustaining whole...and yet, still, even if this is proven to be more probable than not, it still changes nothing about life and its relation to chaos.

I remember that. I think we had a brief conversation on that two years ago. The application of such possibility can be no more than symbolic/allegoric at the moment, as there is nothing that we have been able to measure in the physical world to indicate that.
Perhaps our universe is an open system. We don't know.

Quote :

More importantly it contradicts nothing I've said.

More importantly? Is the point of this discussion to prove you right?
Silly me, I thought it was about understanding thermodynamics.

Quote :

The world is threatening to life, because it is increasing in entropy, which conflicts with life's ordering processes.
This is why life must constantly struggle to maintain itself within the world.
The stress upon the ordering body is what makes it need, or feel this condition as need; and it makes it suffer, if these need(s) are not satisfied. The body must be constantly repaired, healed, every cell replaced; the body is in a constant state of agon, fighting off viruses, dealing with emerging infections, cancers, repairing small damages, replacing cells.
Most of it automated, requiring no consciousnesses....consciousness evolved to deal with the big stuff...

When the automatic processes can accomplish their jobs, the mind feels at ease, comfortable...even though it is constantly fighting, struggling, repairing...
The conscious mind is alerted to something only when it reaches a level where it requires immediate attention.
It then senses the need, and it begins to grow towards what we call suffering/pain.
Pain,... is how the conscious mind is alerted to a possible threat. That's why consciousness evolved.
It was not to get you off, dear. It is a survival tool.

Once again, there is misuse of concepts here. Entropy is not a force. It is not out there breaking things down into pulp. It is an unit of measurement, a yardstick. Entropy is not related to the order of the matter itself, it is related to the potential for energy flow. Matter does not simply break down through mysterious, effortless forces of nature. It takes effort to break down a rotting tree, oxidize a piece of metal, digest a piece of bread. Entropy increases NOT because matter is broken down, but because when it is broken down, some energy is dissipated in the form of heat. The stress upon the ordering of the body occurs as a result of natural chemical reactions, oxydation being the primary one. Entropy is threatening to life only in the sense that potential for heat transfer is necessary in almost all chemical reactions, which we need to keep our bodies running.

Quote :

How and why consciousness has become more is another story...and one i will not be explaining to you, dear.

Poor me.

Quote :

During replacements of cells, or of genetic data, it is flux which creates mutations...this including in the womb when a recombination of previous genetics in affected by the cosmos - all that exists being activity.
Matter/energy being slower or faster forms of (inter)activity.  

This paragraph sounds like it may have some content, but it is incomprehensible. Would you care to rephrase?

Quote :

What kills you in the end is a slow decline, when the energies required to heal the damage done by entropy, over long periods of time, do not suffice to retain the organism at its peak condition - its highest potential order.
The organism's ordering cannot keep-up with the accumulating effects of temporal attrition.

Entropy does not do damage. It's a unit, like meters or kilos. Entropy cares nothing for what you understand as order/disorder. In fact, we could increase molecular order on a person to a level never before reached by freezing their corpses. Of course that doesn't mean anything in terms of entropy, as what it matters is what temperature the surrounding environment is in. Globally, of course, everything is moving toward maximum entropy, meaning entropic equilibrium, meaning maximum dissipation of heat, meaning a frozen universe, meaning high molecular order.

Quote :

This same process also explains SuperOrganic decay - as in civilizations, empires, declining over time.

I am fond of metaphors, too.

Here's one, the "garbage dump". As a courtesy to you dear, so you can keep track of how much time you're wasting:

Garbage dump wrote:

How serious you become when the masks are torn.

A mindless woman, with no clue, might be obsessed with the idea that 'all is good', 'it's not that bad',...
..which she does not watch because she's a nit-wit who wants to believe that her pleasures come at no cost, and the cosmos is interested in her whims, and her tastes, and is influenced, directly, by her word-games.

..., you dumb hypocrite.

...you simpleton, ...

Dear....saying "no" and nothing else might work with the men-children you can impress with your bullshit mind-games, but they leave me desperately bored.
What you should do, to keep me interested and you well-fed with the emotions you lack in your life, and you crave, is google fun facts, for us.
Then bring them here, post them, and imply that you've told me something new that contradicts my positions, or that you actually understand my positions or the fun-fact you brought over...you know pretend that you've "taught" me something.
If that fails, just repeat the insinuations, wanting to raise an emotional response in me.
If I pretend to be affected, sit back and applaud yourself, because a simple female, like you, managed to get a Satyr upset.

Use the length of this post to flatter yourself, dear...as if you are not my means, and not my end.
Fuck, I once spent an entire summer explaining my positions to the autistic boy, Purple Dragon.
Not because I thought I could convince him, ro that he could understand, or that he was worth it, but because he provided me with an opportunity to expand upon my views, for any passer by to read.
I do that all the time, dear.
I did it with the shit-head Kovacs and with shit-Stain on ILP.
When a citric retard appears, I take the lemon and I try to make sweet lemonade.

You know what I remember about Varda, back on sciforums and in the monkeybarn?
Nothing.
I had to go back and skim through your gushing, womanly boring shit.
No wonder nobody noticed when gendy or xev were around.

You were, and are, one boring woman.

All you have are mind-games....luckily, for you, I enjoy them.
It's my feminine side.

For some "balance" is a word describing the absolute...as in absolute perfection.
A uniformity of the possible, which I've described as this chaotic state; within which no life is possible, because life is a manifestation of disparity - ergo "survival of the fittest", and the need for consciousnesses to discriminate, to direct the organism, to choose.
If there is no disparity there is nothing to discern.
Uniformity, in an absolute, would mean to not discern anything....darkness.There would be no fluctuations, no Flux, to perceive patterns in.

Disparity meaning the multiplicity of patterns, which man categorized as different forms of energy/matter.
There is no life in a uniformity...even in a theoretical state of absolute ORDER - as in God.
The Christian description of "God" are contrary to life-affirming...and this is why this nihilistic construct must be placed "outside" space/time, to make it plausible on a theoretical level.
Theo-retical.
In secular humanist terms, Marxist contexts, Liberal ones, parity constitutes a uniformity that would mean atrophy, degradation, decay.
An ant-colony offers us a glimpse into what social uniformity would look like - individuality loses all meaning.

Zero stress, perfect parity, absolute justice, are concepts denoting the end of life.
There is no life, no growth, no evolution without disparity, injustice, conflict, struggle - without agon there is stagnation which inevitably results in death, because these concepts have no meaning outside human minds; minds deluded and desperate to deal with their anxiety/fear, dreaming of conditions nowhere to be found, as a form of escape.
Nihilism is not only the denial of the world directly, but it often comes in the form of "good tidings". I've explained this before.
If I propose a desirable state, a fantastic imaginary world, which contradicts everything which we can experience, then I am proposing an alternative to the world - a no-thing to the world's some-thing; a theoretical nil to the world's presence, interpreted as one.
It does not matter if this imagined perfect world makes me feel good, or is more to my tastes, if everything about it comes into conflict with everything I experience in the real world; it does not matter how I project my ideal world, as a future or a beyond, as a "should", if it contradicts the past/nature.
Even if we claim that it might be possible, what we propose describes a reality withing which we, as we are, would not be possible - because we ARE a manifestation of this past, though some reject and deny it.
We annul all future emergence of I - self-hatred in the guise of hopeful idealism.

When such a state is expressed as a longing, a desirable, end, it exposes life-hating resentiment.

The uniformity of energies, is a description of nothingness.

Randomness = in fact Quantum physics points to such a condition.
But besides this, randomness owning to the fact that it is an absence of patterns, which the mind cannot make sense of, will not be perceived directly...but will be present as a theoretical form of energy needed to balance scientific models.

Models concerning Dark Matter is such an attempt.

Of course "balance" as a word detached from reality, can mean anything.
I can call falling down a new, more refined, form of balance.
I can call chaos order, if I wish, and in this way deal with the uncertainty and flux.
I can call the zero one...
I can apply the symbol in any way I like, making perspectivism, as a soothing ideal, possible.
But if I am guided by honesty, and integrity, and not cowardice, seeking relief/pleasure in word-games, then I try to connect the word/symbol not back to my head, to another abstraction, or to a noetic device, but to an empirical, apparent - a phenomenon.
I refer my abstractions to what is outside my willful control; I recognize them as symbolic representations of a some-thing, real.

There is no state of balance in reality.
All is flux.
If there were balance there would be no death...the processes for and against life would be balanced.
We can baptize change into balance, if we like, but this does not deal with how the reality of the situation affects us as living organisms, struggling to order and to maintain ourselves in the Flux.
We can call suffering/pain pleasure, but it still does not change the distress we feel.
I might even baptize death as a higher form of life, to deal with my inevitable demise...and still I would not do anything about the reality of what death means to me.

It does not matter what word-games one uses.
He may call chaos a higher state of order...why not?
He might refuse to consider the possibility of randomness to make everything that happens part of some pattern he might one day understand - the "all can and will be known" of Godliness.

How serious you become when the masks are torn.

phoneeeee wrote:

How serious you become when the masks are torn.

It's because my Dionysian side is the mask, dear.
I am Apollonian.

And as an Apollonian spirit I know what Dionysus is, as I know what a female is, and what an animal is.

When you figure out how a cold, rational, seemingly detached external facade is really hiding an emotional, perhaps hysterical, mind, and how a passionate, emotional facade can hide a cold, detached spirit, you might begin to understand why pretense always exposes itself by what it pretends to be.


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

Old-Goat wrote:

Hannibal, in the movies - the Hopkins version - is the inversion of the Hannibal, in the television series - the Mikkelsen version.

Hopkins/Hannibal is expressive, passionate, over a cold, calculating, controlled internal psychological structure.
Mikkelsen/Hannibal is cold, reserved, calculating, controlled exterior, over a passionate psychological structure.

Now you keep skimming those posts, sweetie and then expect me to take you seriously.
Back to your Bovine herd, woman...mooooooooooooooo.

Why am I using Satyr as my on-line avatar, sweetie?
I've given you everything and still you are stuck in your desire to "pull me down" to where you live: in the shadows, in the corners, waiting for some poor sap to fall into your traps.
Your spider is your mask.

Most of the time, but not always, the public face is the reverse of the private one.
Show me a carefree, seemingly happy, braggart, who claims to have it all, and I'll show you an insecure, unhappy, desperate hypocrite, frightened that someone might discover how embarrassed he is of himself...because he can't live-up to what he thinks he must.
One day he's this, the next he is that....he be a playa.

Know why such desperate cowardly minds have no principles no scruples, no ideals, other than the popular?
because to make a stand would ruin their game.
They need to be ambiguous, mysterious, non-descript enough to be whatever suits them at whatever time.
They never say much, and are cynical about everything, because then they can hide, no matter the circumstances.
Taking a stand requires exposure...which you fucks call narcissism, because you prefer to slither in the corners and love yourself through others.  

Show me a clown and I'll show you misery.

Satyr wrote:

It's because my Dionysian side is the mask, dear.
I am Apollonian.

It's not a mask, it's just as much a part of you as the other.

It's not your mask, it's your shadow, at least to you, Lyssa and Apaosha.

To everyone else, the other is your shadow.

Are you going to address my answers to your post?

One of the main 'clarifications' on Satyr's post is supposedly his perception of entropy in terms of order/disorder as opposed to energy dissisipation.

But if Order and structure itself was defined by him in terms of flow of energy, then I fail to see how anything he said was inaccurate;

Satyr wrote:

"Flow implies an uninterrupted continuum, merging, converging, conflicting, resiting producing pools of greater or lesser flows, or speeds of flow, swept away by a current veering towards uniformity.
The universe is cooling, after all, and "cold" is a term denoting the diminishing of a activity, the decline of energy.
Even this more current interpretation of the universe expanding in exponentially greater rates of speed, only signifies a decline in order.
For, if order is a resistance, a rarity, in the norm towards entropy then its gradual decline would mean a proportional increase in the movement towards entropy."

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


In fact, I find it practising what it cautions Satyr of. Speaking of local entropic decrease [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] to make a case against feminization and calling it a glorifying a 'cult of pain' is It thinking of entropy in terms of structure alone, as in any mixed humanity, any kind of order is supposedly a sign of decreased entropy.
When one affirms there is something positive in all things, and uses that to justify race-mixing, this kind of levelling - this kind of thermodynamic 'balance' - all superior resistance being dissisipated into the system till there is an equilibrium - this is not 'glorifying' a cult of pain but one more sign of the Drift towards max. entropy occuring even locally I would say. Objectivity is the Discernment that not every kind of 'order' is life-affirmative; the current system and the 'order' it promotes is very life-denying. Satyr has already commented on this;

Satyr wrote:

"In aristocratic social systems where authority was not centralized an individual leader of a clan could withhold his particular group’s, his family’s, excess energies, or offer them partially, to a central figure, representing the Head, the King, of many clans/bloodlines.
This King was nothing more than a figurehead; first amongst equals.
He symbolized the groups and their shared past; their common ancestry and culture: common Ideals.
The King was not only a genetic marker but also a memetic one.
This decreased the synergy of the group directed by the will of a King, yet it retained a degree of autonomy, resulting in a relationship of equals rather than one of master towards his slaves.
This loss of synergetic force was compensated, somewhat, by the shared genes, the shared blood, which united all the families/clans, making their actions towards outside aggressors more passionate.
The fearsomeness of the old pagan warriors, the famed berserkers, was due to this empowerment, through free-will, which bonded the different strains of the same blood into unions rooted in history; deeper roots fed into the shared trunk upon which the different branches grew and extended themselves over the world.

In modern social systems this is no longer the case. In fact the previous aristocratic synergy would be detrimental to modern-day unity.
In modern systems heterogeneous peoples are forced into cohabitation, and into cooperative (inter)actions.
To exploit the synergy of each, by reducing the lost energies produced by the frictions between them, the system must reduce the individual’s appreciation/awareness of its past; it must detach it from its heritage, from the trunk it has grown upon; it must lower self-identification to a level where all can find commonality within the all-encompassing, all levelling fold; it must redefine individuality and free-will, associating it with behaviors and activities and thoughts that increase service or that increases actions which produce a surplus of energy the centralized agency can then exploit…and direct.
By defining freedom in a way which is antithetical to its nature, turning dependence into independence, the system brainwashes generations of minds, turning them into willing, happy, servile automatons, content to find self-worth in communal appreciation, and forever measuring their own quality by using the popular standards.

Any residual free-will present within a unity can only decrease the unity’s overall synergy, as this individual will, not being totally subdued by the central Will, may withhold or deny, in whole or in part, what aggregate energies are in its control.
This loss represents a loss of internal efficiency.
The reduction of free-will is necessary if the parts participating in the sum are to provide, as close to total, the surrender of their individual synergies, in this way increasing the synergy of the larger unity.
What (inter)actions occur between individual parts within the whole, leads to the loss of energy which then dissipates as heat, or lost energy (lost wealth).
Conflict, or the rejection of otherness, which is a part of being an individual human being, is another way of saying: friction, or internal strife, resulting in this loss of aggregate energy.
To carry on with the metaphor, this loss of energy dissipates within the system as heat, which may, if the energies which are lost are large enough, result in an internal systemic overheating.
The decrease in any friction caused within the unity is a necessary part in increasing the system’s total synergy.
This includes, within human social unities, the elimination of anything that may cause interpersonal frictions.
Certain morals, attitudes, behaviors, values, can produce the desirable outcome.
Any identity which separates or distinguishes in ways that increase internal friction or in ways that produce energies the system cannot exploit, are deemed worthless or even dangerous.
In effect, what is occurring here is that the individual is losing all sense of self, losing itself within an Identity outside itself, which then reduces any friction its (inter)actions may possibly produce. The reduction of internal friction entails a loss of individuality – or the sense of self – by the individual parts.
For a human system (unity) it is essential to reduce all internal friction, increasing, in this way, the efficiency of the utilization of the synergies of the participating parts.
Eliminating all natural distinctions is important to the wealth of the system, if it measures its own value in this way, and if it identifies with wealth or the control of resources – money being the abstraction of resources.
In time, as we shall see, this elimination of natural distinction also leads to the elimination of money’s connection with anything tangible. The disconnection with reality increases to the point where money has no reference to anything material.

Dumbing-Down, or the manipulation and seduction of the participants minds, making them associate servitude with self-worth, or the goodness of the whole with their own good, is one way inner friction is reduced and the total synergy available to the centralized Will (the government) is increased.
Laziness is then defined as a reluctance or avoidance to offer one’s own energies towards production/consumption.
Promoting certain values, such as the work ethic, and by retarding and repressing the development of any personal will the system manages to exploit its individual parts more effectively.

But let us continue with the symbolisms.
Given that an increase in internal (inter)activity, in an efficient way, leads to an increase in the system’s aggregate energies, and therefore to the increase of synergy available to the centralized agency (institutionalized Will) it is no longer necessary for wealth to refer to resources.
Here we have the beginning of this detachment from nature/reality which abstractions can facilitate.
By abstracting resources into monetary codes, credits, and by making activity, energy the system’s source of synergy, turns (inter)actions between the individual parts into an exchange of services, or potential services, with no correspondence to anything tangible.

Interactions, interpersonal exchanges, become more about concepts than substance.
All is expendable because exchanges are now about ideas…the hypothetical.
No resources, no substance, is at play…because all has been reduced to a concept.

The market system finds its ideal in the manufacturing not of goods but of exchangeable concepts, representing services rendered or promised and yet to be rendered. Now (inter)actions become based on expectations and probabilities, rather than resources and reality.

But this is not the entire truth, because resources are in play, only they’ve been abstracted out of mind. Those who control the resources control the game, the rest play on a theoretical, idealized, Platonic level, trying to find substance in a world where it has been taken out of play."

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

My view as I have said elsewhere and even in the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] thread,

Lyssa wrote:

"on one extreme mythos and logos are separated through abstraction - extreme drying up,,, and on the other extreme - everything is mythos or everything is equally logos - extreme fluidification.

There's been a lapse into two extremes."

In other words, there is a negative Apollonian tendency where order tends to petrification, abstraction and a severance of word to phenomenon characterizing Modernity, and there is a negative Dionysian tendency where order tends to extreme fluidity and undifferentiation, an extreme merging of word into the phenomenal current, characterizing the simulacra and the polysemantic fictitiousness of Post-modernity.

Nihilism is a tilt in either way. Balance in the aesthetic sense, is a Dionysian checking on apollonian petrification, and Apollonian checking on the dionysian over-fluidity. A healthy synergy.

To which, Satyr had replied in that thread,

Satyr wrote:

"And this is what makes the schizophrenia of modernity a way of coping, without going insane, and without having to take a stand.

The modern can deny both sides because both participate in him, at one time or another.
He remains cynical because nothing touches him. He is safe within the social, which allows him to remain as schizophrenic as possible, if he pays the price for this "privilege", now called a "right".

His madness has no real-world consequences, beyond what can be corrected with the appropriate effort/work/commitment.
The system shelters him so as to allow him to remain as confused and internally fragmented as he wishes, gaining control over him through this internal absence of cohesion ...the only rule is that you do not disrupt, disturb, the internal fragmentation of others."

Lastly Increase in chaos can also imply an increase in randomness, as even though regularity to some events can be predicted, while outcomes remain probabilistic, unpredictable, there's nothing to say these unpredictable outcomes don't reloop again into events disturbing those regularities.

Lyssa wrote:

But if Order and structure itself was defined by him in terms of flow of energy, then I fail to see how anything he said was inaccurate;

Then let me help you.

Satyr wrote:

For, if order is a resistance, a rarity, in the norm towards entropy then its gradual decline would mean a proportional increase in the movement towards entropy."

If order is a resistance, order isn't flow.

Quote :

In fact, I find it practising what it cautions Satyr of. Speaking of local entropic decrease here to make a case against feminization and calling it a glorifying a 'cult of pain' is It thinking of entropy in terms of structure alone, as in any mixed humanity, any kind of order is supposedly a sign of decreased entropy.

That's his logic, not mine. I was pointing out that according to his own logic, hedonism is order.

Quote :

When one affirms there is something positive in all things, and uses that to justify race-mixing, this kind of levelling - this kind of thermodynamic 'balance' - all superior resistance being dissisipated into the system till there is an equilibrium - this is not 'glorifying' a cult of pain but one more sign of the Drift towards max. entropy occuring even locally I would say. Objectivity is the Discernment that not every kind of 'order' is life-affirmative; the current system and the 'order' it promotes is very life-denying. Satyr has already commented on this;

We are not at a risk of elimination of any particular ethnicity, so long as we respect the rules that have been established within societies, which give the individuals the ultimate authority on their reproductive functions, and therefore, aryans may continue to be attracted to and mate with other aryans and thus provide many future generations of beautiful, pure [in]bred blond babies. Unless they don't want to, in which case, they are the ones to answer for their choices, aren't they?

I don't think that anyone needs to justify race-mixing as much as they need to justify race purity, and I don't think anyone does. I think that these considerations only come into place when someone makes it their business to go and actively criticize race-mixing, which I think nobody has the standing to do.

I for example, have a different definition for what is life-denying, like an omnivore to refuse to eat meat. But I'm not about to make it my business.
I want for those weaklings to fall under the weight of their own poor decisions.


In any case, there is absolutely nothing at all in the natural world that compels peoples of different races to mix. This is not a flow that is comparable to heat flow, which is spontaneous.

Quote :

In other words, there is a negative Apollonian tendency where order tends to petrification, abstraction and a severance of word to phenomenon characterizing Modernity, and there is a negative Dionysian tendency where order tends to extreme fluidity and undifferentiation, an extreme merging of word into the phenomenal current, characterizing the simulacra and the polysemantic fictitiousness of Post-modernity.

Nihilism is a tilt in either way. Balance in the aesthetic sense, is a Dionysian checking on apollonian petrification, and Apollonian checking on the dionysian over-fluidity.

Thank you for the use of the word tendency, dear.

In any case, I am not criticizing the use of entropy as an allegory to philosophical proposals. What I am criticizing is to confuse what is allegoric with what is scientifically factual, and then to pretend that your philosophical proposal is scientifically factual.

Kind of like when you were going "Prove that entropy is not real! Prove it!" ...

Forgot this.

Lyssa wrote:

Lastly Increase in chaos can also imply an increase in randomness, as even though regularity to some events can be predicted, while outcomes remain probabilistic, unpredictable, there's nothing to say these unpredictable outcomes don't reloop again into events disturbing those regularities.

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

Quote :

Lyssa wrote:

But if Order and structure itself was defined by him in terms of flow of energy, then I fail to see how anything he said was inaccurate;

Then let me help you.

Satyr wrote:

For, if order is a resistance, a rarity, in the norm towards entropy then its gradual decline would mean a proportional increase in the movement towards entropy."

If order is a resistance, order isn't flow.

Degrees. Nuance. No Absolutes.

If the world is a becoming - a flux, then the flow as a differential rate of relative becoming that resists the flux is a degree of order.

In other words, people with no grasp of his views wholesomely and simply nit-picking on bits and parts Get Off on accusing him of inaccuracy in the pose of pure academic interest, at the cost of simply having to put him down first to appear more knowledgeable than they are.
Losing credibility on one's own and then accusing the other of not taking it seriously and then taking the absence of response for having won the upper hand is s o  old news and a dull trolling.

Quote :

Quote :

In fact, I find it practising what it cautions Satyr of. Speaking of local entropic decrease here to make a case against feminization and calling it a glorifying a 'cult of pain' is It thinking of entropy in terms of structure alone, as in any mixed humanity, any kind of order is supposedly a sign of decreased entropy.

That's his logic, not mine. I was pointing out that according to his own logic, hedonism is order.

It is not his. And I have already provided his quote on synergy for whoever is interested. It is one's own error.

Does it matter if after I point out, the hedonists now try to deny and wriggle their way out after citing modernity as a case for local entropy decrease? Whatever.

Quote :

Quote :

When one affirms there is something positive in all things, and uses that to justify race-mixing, this kind of levelling - this kind of thermodynamic 'balance' - all superior resistance being dissisipated into the system till there is an equilibrium - this is not 'glorifying' a cult of pain but one more sign of the Drift towards max. entropy occuring even locally I would say. Objectivity is the Discernment that not every kind of 'order' is life-affirmative; the current system and the 'order' it promotes is very life-denying. Satyr has already commented on this;

We are not at a risk of elimination of any particular ethnicity, so long as we respect the rules that have been established within societies, which give the individuals the ultimate authority on their reproductive functions, and therefore, aryans may continue to be attracted to and mate with other aryans and thus provide many future generations of beautiful, pure [in]bred blond babies. Unless they don't want to, in which case, they are the ones to answer for their choices, aren't they?

"Not at a risk of elimination" is a subjective ignorance of a very serious objective reality of what's occuring today.

Those who wish to remain in denial can remain so, but let them not accuse the other of glorifying a 'cult of pain' as an unscientific fact just because their limitations limit them from seeing it.

Quote :

In any case, there is absolutely nothing at all in the natural world that compels peoples of different races to mix. This is not a flow that is comparable to heat flow, which is spontaneous.

As if that's not the point Satyr has been saying over and over? We don't live in a natural world anymore... again, those cannot step outside of the artifices they are mired in stand little chance to exercise critical discernment, irrespective of whatever tales they convince themselves with.

Quote :

"Thank you for the use of the word tendency, dear."

Satyr wrote:

"If the other offers an explanation you did not think about say:
"Yes, THAT's what I meant by" it.

-

I know what stochastic is, and the wiki link doesn't contradict what I said.

Aw, I was hoping to hear a comment on your vegetarianism.

phoneeee wrote:

If order is a resistance, order isn't flow.

Ha!!
Simple woman...all that exists is flow.


Let's use a image to explain for the simple minded:

A man enters a river.
The river is flowing down the mountainside.
Some parts faster others slower (locality).

Is the man static?
No.
Only in reference to the flowing river is the fluidity of the man's corporeality more static - not absolutely static...MORE static, or less fluid, to be precise.
The man's relative substance (re)acts to the flow of the river...he resists it.
He exerts energy to maintain his place...and if he wishes to move upstream he must multiply the energies being used.

Absolute order would be a state of no flow...and so non-existent.
Order, the singularity, is the absence of dimensions...of space/possibility.
It is one, encompassing a singular possibility which can be thought of as an absolute probability.

But, there is no absolute, and so even the conception of a singularity is of an incomplete, near-absolute.


Chaos is the expansion of space/possibility, veering towards the infinite.
Energies would be uniformly distributed eventually coming to a state of almost absolute uniformity....
Infinite possibility means an absence of probability.  

Probability is also a word for ordering, or pattern.
Something is more probable when there is a discernible pattern, an order, which makes it predictable.
Probability is a restriction of possibility....veering towards the absolute , as in absolute order, the singularity, which was explained.
Saying something is probable is saying that not all possibilities apply to it.

Randomness is the reverse.
Infinite possibilities...as in expanding space, where probabilities, ordering, slowly declines towards a state of uniformity - all possibilities becoming equally possible.

In my view it is this increasing state of possibilities which makes the emergence of new near-absolute singularities - new universes - possible.

How is chaos created...from a singularity towards expanding space/time multiplicities, tending towards uniformity?
Through the (inter)action of different levels of fluidity.
Different levels of fluidity (flux) being what we call different patterns, different rates of ordering - different types of matter/energy.
Interaction produces fiction, attrition.
A pattern loses a small part of its flow. This energy becomes a free-radical, so to speak.

And here lies the crux of the matter.
Does this energy cutting away from a pattern retain a lower level of fluidity, changing, in effect, its type through the interaction, or does some of it lose all pattern and become random energy free-floating in time/space, still interacting but lacking order?

I say both.
Some of the energy splintering off degrades in ordering, becoming another form of matter/energy...a different type of ordering...and some is reduced to pure chaos - randomness.
This slow accumulation of free-radical energies, lacking any pattern, are what is increasing chaos.
Particles seem to pop out of nothing and then vanish, because they cannot maintain any order.
In such a state life is impossible, because life depends on predictable patterns...and that's why we find them so damn attractive....beautiful, inspiring...delightful...and we long for that singularity in the past: we long for completion. It being a Death-wish.
The desire to be ONE and to be None are both death-wishes - nihilism.

In such a state no patterns would mean that nothing ordered would maintain itself for long.
No matter would exist.
Everything would become unpredictable energy interacting with no pattern...

But let's say randomness is not a fact...that chaos means increasing complexity.
Here interactivity would tend towards uniformity due to interaction.
All energy would eventually vibrate on the same wavelength...and be uniformly distributed.
This means no divergence would be possible, and divergence is required for life to emerge, contrary to what nihilistic morons think who worship the end of life.
With no divergence there is no evolution, no bone, no skin, no blood, no other species, no other matter, all is the same.

With no divergence there is no consciousness as there is nothing to be conscious of.
Consciousness is the perception of divergence.
The perception of similarity comes after the fact...
The mind sees a difference and then in that difference it perceives a similarity with another.
The mind must be other-than before it can perceive in the other a similarity.
Divergence is a precondition to the perception of similarity.

I first see other, then I see similarities between other and myself, or this other and that other...and I create categories.

Similarities are of degree, and not absolute. not even clones are absolutely alike...not even you are absolutely the same as you ten minutes ago.
Absolute similarity would be a description of the singularity of of the uniformity of chaos ...both different sides of the same nihilistic coin.

Chaos is a double-edged razor: Order, Dharma, is managing to comprise of the unitarity and locality, flux, between construction-destruction, compression-rarefaction.

Hrodebert wrote:

Chaos is a double-edged razor: Order, Dharma, is managing to comprise of the unitarity and locality, flux, between construction-destruction, compression-rarefaction.

Although I barely know him, that sounds like something Super Aryan would say.

From Super Aryans profile:

Supra-Aryanist wrote:

Location: Intergalactic Space, where locality and unitarity become indistinguishable.

It seems you and him share similar views.

Divergense wrote:

Hrodebert wrote:

Chaos is a double-edged razor: Order, Dharma, is managing to comprise of the unitarity and locality, flux, between construction-destruction, compression-rarefaction.

Although I barely know him, that sounds like something Super Aryan would say.

From Super Aryans profile:

Super-aryanist wrote:

Location: Intergalactic Space, where locality and unitarity become indistinguishable.

It seems you and him share similar views.

Analogous with spatial-temporal.

I'm having trouble following your "subtle logic", forgive me.

Divergense wrote:

I'm having trouble following your "subtle logic", forgive me.

I typically don't get along with Canadians, eh; then again, I butt-heads with most people I encounter.
In any case, I do have a couple of alright mates there.

I typically don't pursue friendships with people, online or off.

However, if while philosophizing online, or whatever, I happen to meet someone with common hobbies/interests/goals/objectives, sure.

Divergense wrote:

I typically don't pursue friendships with people, online or off.

However, if while philosophizing online, or whatever, I happen to meet someone with common hobbies/interests/goals/objectives, sure.

As long as one remains true to one's true self, or follows with intention one's own path, then every passerby is a potential to understanding oneself and in effect metamorphosing.
Opportunism is a salient vehicle.

You'll notice I start a lot of sentences with "what I meant". That's a result of you adding meaning to my sentences that isn't there. Interpreting a person's writings is not the same as interpreting your thoughts into a person's writings. Be aware of that.

Lyssa wrote:

Degrees. Nuance. No Absolutes.

If the world is a becoming - a flux, then the flow as a differential rate of relative becoming that resists the flux is a degree of order.

It works as a metaphor. Only as a metaphor... one of limited effect.

Quote :

It is not his. And I have already provided his quote on synergy for whoever is interested. It is one's own error.

It is not his? Then whose  is this entire metaphor we're discussing?

Quote :

Does it matter if after I point out, the hedonists now try to deny and wriggle their way out after citing modernity as a case for local entropy decrease? Whatever.

As a direct response in the middle of a logical sequence of steps, started by someone else?
You are confused.

Quote :

"Not at a risk of elimination" is a subjective ignorance of a very serious objective reality of what's occuring today.

What I meant is there there is no authoritative act of genocide or eugenics happening against any ethnicity.
If it is elimination taking place, it is by people upon themselves, by their free will to do so.
Can't force pandas to fuck. I say let them fall. Nature at work.

Quote :

Quote :

In any case, there is absolutely nothing at all in the natural world that compels peoples of different races to mix. This is not a flow that is comparable to heat flow, which is spontaneous.

As if that's not the point Satyr has been saying over and over? We don't live in a natural world anymore... again, those cannot step outside of the artifices they are mired in stand little chance to exercise critical discernment, irrespective of whatever tales they convince themselves with.

What I meant was that racial mixing does not work the same as heat dissipation. Heat dissipation is natural and spontaneous, and effort is required to resist it. Racial mixing is dependent on the will of the participants and is not predictable under a law of nature. This is therefore a metaphor of limited effect.

Quote :

Quote :

"Thank you for the use of the word tendency, dear."

Satyr wrote:

"If the other offers an explanation you did not think about say:
"Yes, THAT's what I meant by" it.

What I meant is that by using the word tendency, you admit that this isn't a rule which applies to every situation, sparing me the trouble of pointing that out. My whole point with participating in this thread is to verify that the scientific facts of the laws of thermodynamics do not add factual authority to Satyr's thoughts. It's just a metaphor.

Nothing there to suggest that I agree or disagree with it.

Garbage dump wrote:

In other words, people with no grasp of his views wholesomely and simply nit-picking on bits and parts Get Off on accusing him of inaccuracy in the pose of pure academic interest, at the cost of simply having to put him down first to appear more knowledgeable than they are.
Losing credibility on one's own and then accusing the other of not taking it seriously and then taking the absence of response for having won the upper hand is s o  old news and a dull trolling.

Those who wish to remain in denial can remain so, but let them not accuse the other of glorifying a 'cult of pain' as an unscientific fact just because their limitations limit them from seeing it.

phono wrote:

We are not at a risk of elimination of any particular ethnicity, so long as we respect the rules that have been established within societies, which give the individuals the ultimate authority on their reproductive functions, and therefore, aryans may continue to be attracted to and mate with other aryans and thus provide many future generations of beautiful, pure [in]bred blond babies. Unless they don't want to, in which case, they are the ones to answer for their choices, aren't they?

Giving all individuals free choice IS a way of influencing an ethnicity. It IS a way of changing the genetic composition of a species or sub-species over generations.

If you take a group of chimps, provide them with all the bananas they can eat and punish the individuals for being physically violent to each other then that does have an impact on the genetics. A massive one. Surprise, surprise setting the rules in an artificial way does impact selection and thereby genetics.

We see ethnicities dissolving. We also see health declining (and no, this is not about keeping unhealthy individuals alive with modern medicine).

Individuals being free to choose may be a moral standard for someone thinking within the liberal box. But who made them 'free' and who keeps them 'free' and 'free' from what?

The Ukraine is a good example to see that 'freedom' in action. When there is a government which got voted democratically into office and people start rioting in the streets and occupying government facilities, then that needs to be respected and the police should take the molotov cocktails to their faces and god forbid, fire even a single shot.
But when there is a protest against a not democratically elected government in the Ukraine and government buildings get occupied then.... then there is a military intervention with tanks, helicopters and rockets. And that's a necessary thing to ensure stability.

Could it be that this 'free' and 'freedom' is just an empty buzzword as part of a program to keep the crowd happily, blissfully, ignorant?
Free.... free to be brain dead, to be a zombie.

But you already knew all that - you are just trying to get a rise out of people, aren't you?!

Quote :

You'll notice I start a lot of sentences with "what I meant". That's a result of you adding meaning to my sentences that isn't there. Interpreting a person's writings is not the same as interpreting your thoughts into a person's writings. Be aware of that.

Lyssa wrote:

Degrees. Nuance. No Absolutes.

If the world is a becoming - a flux, then the flow as a differential rate of relative becoming that resists the flux is a degree of order.

It works as a metaphor. Only as a metaphor... one of limited effect.

Quote :

It is not his. And I have already provided his quote on synergy for whoever is interested. It is one's own error.

It is not his? Then whose  is this entire metaphor we're discussing?

Quote :

Does it matter if after I point out, the hedonists now try to deny and wriggle their way out after citing modernity as a case for local entropy decrease? Whatever.

As a direct response in the middle of a logical sequence of steps, started by someone else?
You are confused.

Quote :

"Not at a risk of elimination" is a subjective ignorance of a very serious objective reality of what's occuring today.

What I meant is there there is no authoritative act of genocide or eugenics happening against any ethnicity.
If it is elimination taking place, it is by people upon themselves, by their free will to do so.
Can't force pandas to fuck. I say let them fall. Nature at work.

Quote :

Quote :

In any case, there is absolutely nothing at all in the natural world that compels peoples of different races to mix. This is not a flow that is comparable to heat flow, which is spontaneous.

As if that's not the point Satyr has been saying over and over? We don't live in a natural world anymore... again, those cannot step outside of the artifices they are mired in stand little chance to exercise critical discernment, irrespective of whatever tales they convince themselves with.

What I meant was that racial mixing does not work the same as heat dissipation. Heat dissipation is natural and spontaneous, and effort is required to resist it. Racial mixing is dependent on the will of the participants and is not predictable under a law of nature. This is therefore a metaphor of limited effect.

Quote :

Quote :

"Thank you for the use of the word tendency, dear."

Satyr wrote:

"If the other offers an explanation you did not think about say:
"Yes, THAT's what I meant by" it.

What I meant is that by using the word tendency, you admit that this isn't a rule which applies to every situation, sparing me the trouble of pointing that out. My whole point with participating in this thread is to verify that the scientific facts of the laws of thermodynamics do not add factual authority to Satyr's thoughts. It's just a metaphor.

Nothing there to suggest that I agree or disagree with it.

Garbage dump wrote:

In other words, people with no grasp of his views wholesomely and simply nit-picking on bits and parts Get Off on accusing him of inaccuracy in the pose of pure academic interest, at the cost of simply having to put him down first to appear more knowledgeable than they are.
Losing credibility on one's own and then accusing the other of not taking it seriously and then taking the absence of response for having won the upper hand is s o  old news and a dull trolling.

Those who wish to remain in denial can remain so, but let them not accuse the other of glorifying a 'cult of pain' as an unscientific fact just because their limitations limit them from seeing it.

How serious it becomes when its masks are torn.

Anfang wrote:

phono wrote:

We are not at a risk of elimination of any particular ethnicity, so long as we respect the rules that have been established within societies, which give the individuals the ultimate authority on their reproductive functions, and therefore, aryans may continue to be attracted to and mate with other aryans and thus provide many future generations of beautiful, pure [in]bred blond babies. Unless they don't want to, in which case, they are the ones to answer for their choices, aren't they?

Giving all individuals free choice IS a way of influencing an ethnicity. It IS a way of changing the genetic composition of a species or sub-species over generations.

c. Heathen.

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

Anfang wrote:

phono wrote:

We are not at a risk of elimination of any particular ethnicity, so long as we respect the rules that have been established within societies, which give the individuals the ultimate authority on their reproductive functions, and therefore, aryans may continue to be attracted to and mate with other aryans and thus provide many future generations of beautiful, pure [in]bred blond babies. Unless they don't want to, in which case, they are the ones to answer for their choices, aren't they?

Giving all individuals free choice IS a way of influencing an ethnicity. It IS a way of changing the genetic composition of a species or sub-species over generations.

If you take a group of chimps, provide them with all the bananas they can eat and punish the individuals for being physically violent to each other then that does have an impact on the genetics. A massive one. Surprise, surprise setting the rules in an artificial way does impact selection and thereby genetics.

We see ethnicities dissolving. We also see health declining (and no, this is not about keeping unhealthy individuals alive with modern medicine).

Individuals being free to choose may be a moral standard for someone thinking within the liberal box. But who made them 'free' and who keeps them 'free' and 'free' from what?

The Ukraine is a good example to see that 'freedom' in action. When there is a government which got voted democratically into office and people start rioting in the streets and occupying government facilities, then that needs to be respected and the police should take the molotov cocktails to their faces and god forbid, fire even a single shot.
But when there is a protest against a not democratically elected government in the Ukraine and government buildings get occupied then.... then there is a military intervention with tanks, helicopters and rockets. And that's a necessary thing to ensure stability.

Could it be that this 'free' and 'freedom' is just an empty buzzword as part of a program to keep the crowd happily, blissfully, ignorant?
Free.... free to be brain dead, to be a zombie.

But you already knew all that - you are just trying to get a rise out of people, aren't you?!

No, I am not trying to get a rise out of people. What I am doing is helping clarify that the laws of thermodynamics do not apply to racial dynamics in a literal way. Even as a metaphor, the relation is questionable.

We can discuss this, if you want to, even though I know I am shooting myself in the foot for suggesting that we do
Put this post in one of the race threads.

phoneutria wrote:

Anfang wrote:

phono wrote:

We are not at a risk of elimination of any particular ethnicity, so long as we respect the rules that have been established within societies, which give the individuals the ultimate authority on their reproductive functions, and therefore, aryans may continue to be attracted to and mate with other aryans and thus provide many future generations of beautiful, pure [in]bred blond babies. Unless they don't want to, in which case, they are the ones to answer for their choices, aren't they?

Giving all individuals free choice IS a way of influencing an ethnicity. It IS a way of changing the genetic composition of a species or sub-species over generations.

If you take a group of chimps, provide them with all the bananas they can eat and punish the individuals for being physically violent to each other then that does have an impact on the genetics. A massive one. Surprise, surprise setting the rules in an artificial way does impact selection and thereby genetics.

We see ethnicities dissolving. We also see health declining (and no, this is not about keeping unhealthy individuals alive with modern medicine).

Individuals being free to choose may be a moral standard for someone thinking within the liberal box. But who made them 'free' and who keeps them 'free' and 'free' from what?

The Ukraine is a good example to see that 'freedom' in action. When there is a government which got voted democratically into office and people start rioting in the streets and occupying government facilities, then that needs to be respected and the police should take the molotov cocktails to their faces and god forbid, fire even a single shot.
But when there is a protest against a not democratically elected government in the Ukraine and government buildings get occupied then.... then there is a military intervention with tanks, helicopters and rockets. And that's a necessary thing to ensure stability.

Could it be that this 'free' and 'freedom' is just an empty buzzword as part of a program to keep the crowd happily, blissfully, ignorant?
Free.... free to be brain dead, to be a zombie.

But you already knew all that - you are just trying to get a rise out of people, aren't you?!

No, I am not trying to get a rise out of people. What I am doing is helping clarify that the laws of thermodynamics do not apply to racial dynamics in a literal way. Even as a metaphor, the relation is questionable.

We can discuss this, if you want to, even though I know I am shooting myself in the foot for suggesting that we do
Put this post in one of the race threads.

Ever consider that maybe your identity as a mongrel is clouding your judgment on this topic, Dear?

We all have our biases. Take these humble sentences for what they're worth.

phoneutria wrote:

Anfang wrote:

phono wrote:

We are not at a risk of elimination of any particular ethnicity, so long as we respect the rules that have been established within societies, which give the individuals the ultimate authority on their reproductive functions, and therefore, aryans may continue to be attracted to and mate with other aryans and thus provide many future generations of beautiful, pure [in]bred blond babies. Unless they don't want to, in which case, they are the ones to answer for their choices, aren't they?

Giving all individuals free choice IS a way of influencing an ethnicity. It IS a way of changing the genetic composition of a species or sub-species over generations.

If you take a group of chimps, provide them with all the bananas they can eat and punish the individuals for being physically violent to each other then that does have an impact on the genetics. A massive one. Surprise, surprise setting the rules in an artificial way does impact selection and thereby genetics.

We see ethnicities dissolving. We also see health declining (and no, this is not about keeping unhealthy individuals alive with modern medicine).

Individuals being free to choose may be a moral standard for someone thinking within the liberal box. But who made them 'free' and who keeps them 'free' and 'free' from what?

The Ukraine is a good example to see that 'freedom' in action. When there is a government which got voted democratically into office and people start rioting in the streets and occupying government facilities, then that needs to be respected and the police should take the molotov cocktails to their faces and god forbid, fire even a single shot.
But when there is a protest against a not democratically elected government in the Ukraine and government buildings get occupied then.... then there is a military intervention with tanks, helicopters and rockets. And that's a necessary thing to ensure stability.

Could it be that this 'free' and 'freedom' is just an empty buzzword as part of a program to keep the crowd happily, blissfully, ignorant?
Free.... free to be brain dead, to be a zombie.

But you already knew all that - you are just trying to get a rise out of people, aren't you?!

No, I am not trying to get a rise out of people. What I am doing is helping clarify that the laws of thermodynamics do not apply to racial dynamics in a literal way. Even as a metaphor, the relation is questionable.

We can discuss this, if you want to, even though I know I am shooting myself in the foot for suggesting that we do
Put this post in one of the race threads.

A law founded upon an irrevocable consistency observed in the natural/physical world applies to everything in that natural world.
Why is that you believe that characterological disposition of certain species are exempt, in a vacuum, from the rest of the universe?
Why is it, as you insubstantially purport, that racial differentiation is deemed exclusive to spiritual and physico-chemical forces?

Because the laws of thermodynamics are about heat transfer.