Know Thyself

Nothing in Excess
 
HomePortalFAQMemberlistSearchRegisterLog in

Share | 
 

 Objective <> Subjective

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
AuthorMessage
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 14431
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Objective <> Subjective Thu Jan 07, 2016 11:23 am

Hawkes, David wrote:
Money is a language, a system of signs. The material forms taken by these signs can vary; previous ages have incarnated them in the form of conch shells, precious metals or banknotes. In our time, though, it has become clear that money exists only in our minds.It is a medium of representation and, as recent works of economic theory such as Dierdre McClosky’s Knowledge and Persuasion in Economics(1994) have shown, this implies that money can be subjected to the modes of analysis  and critique that have been developed by philosophers of language and semioticians. Equally, the theories and methods of economists can profitably be applied to the study of linguistic and visual modes of signification. The school of literary theory known as the ‘New Economic Criticism’ testifies to this recognition of ‘parallels and analogies between linguistic and economic systems’ and ‘the existence of homologies between language and money’ (Woodmansee and Osteen, 1999, 14, 15).

The proliferating pupils of this school take inspiration from two philosophers whose seminal work appeared in the 1970s, but whose profound importance has only recently been appreciated: Marc Shell and JeanJoseph Goux.
In Symbolic Economies(1990), Goux recalls the origin of his project in the revelation that ‘Marx’s analysis [of financial value] held the lineaments of a general and elementary logic of exchange which far exceeded the sphere of economic value for which it was initially produced’.
The fertile intellectual ambience of Paris in the 1960s and 1970s, in which structuralism and deconstruction called attention to the constitutive role of signification, produced in Goux the epiphany that Marx’s theory of money applied to semiotic as well as to financial value. His work focuses on Marx’s view of money as a ‘general equivalent’ that facilitates the exchange of all other objects. As he traces the historical development of the general equivalent, Goux finds that a similar logic operates in psychology and linguistics: ‘what had previously been analysed separately as phallocentrism (Freud, Lacan), as logocentrism (Derrida), and as the rule of exchange by the monetary medium (Marx), it was now possible to conceive as part of a unified process’.
Goux argues that postmodern representation is characterized by ‘the inconvertibility of the sign’. Until the early twentieth century, it was officially declared and popularly believed that all the money in the world could theoretically be converted into gold. Money was a sign, but it had an ultimate, material referent. In postmodernity, however, money has become an autonomous, self-generating, inconvertible sign – a signifier with no signified. Postmodern linguistics and semiology likewise portray the sign as arbitrary and non-referential, and its meaning as relational rather than essential. The history of money and the history of language are elements within a more general history of signification, and this general history has a logic of development that determines each of its
parts. In Money, Language and Thought(1982), Marc Shell describes a similar narrative of money’s historical development:

Shell, Marc wrote:
Between the electrum money of ancient Lydia and the electric money of
contemporary America there occurred a historically momentous change. The exchange value of the earliest coins derived wholly from the material substance (electrum) of the ingots of which the coins were made and not from the inscriptions stamped into those ingots. The eventual development of coins whose politically authorized inscriptions were inadequate to the weights and purities of the ingots into which the inscriptions were stamped precipitated awareness of quandaries about the relationship between face value (intellectual currency) and substantial value (material currency). This difference between inscription and thing grew greater with the introduction of paper moneys. Paper, the material substance on which the inscriptions were printed, was supposed to make no difference in exchange, and metal or electrum, the material substance to which the inscriptions referred, was connected with those inscriptions in increasingly abstract ways. With the advent of
electronic fund-transfers the link between inscription and substance was broken. The matter of electronic money does not matter.
---Ideology

Detachment of noumenon (abstraction) from phenomenon.
The stage was set for the detachment of the subjective from the objective, where even words, as signifiers, did not have to refer to anything real, but only to an idea(l) - an idea(l) that existed as pure noetic construct, and could increase in utility with the infection of more minds into its premises.

Rise of quantities over qualities.
Words, symbols, used, did not necessarily refer to anything outside human brains...but dependent on human brains to be useful, to attain the possibility of power.
Power through others...power over others.

See the VO debacle: the application of a word in a manner corresponding to nothing outside the brain, and then reliant on seducing as many naive adolescent minds into its emotional promises, its power to exploit by presupposing what has yet to be achieved (path-of-least-resistance).
The signifier, in this case Value- but it could be any positive word, the Christian love application is another example - detached from the real, converting it to pure noumenon (noumenon free from all phenomenal limitations) placed as the starting premises, offers value simply by existing, simply by being able to read (incorporate the insinuation into your own psychology) - a positive message, a universally attractive presupposition, followed by the sacrifice, the pain, of self-hypnosis; in the case of Christian "love", the One God, the sacrifice of reason, of world (possibility), to escape it, to save one's self through the divine magical word.
The struggle follows the presupposition, as the cost to be endured to benefit from it - certainty is the easy part, the assured.


Hawkes, David wrote:
It appears, from the accounts of Shell and Goux, that history involves the
progressive detachment of signs from referents and a growing autonomy and determining power of signification. The postmodern era, in which images of various kinds have attained the power to constitute reality itself, is often said to represent the culmination or telos of this process.
This is why many postmodern thinkers declare that the concept of ‘ideology’ has outlived its usefulness. The term ‘ideology’ usually refers to a systematically false consciousness. But if representation is the only reality, if truth is merely, as such precursors of postmodernism as Nietzsche claimed, a rhetorical device by which the powerful maintain their dominance, then how are we to distinguish between true and false modes of thought?
This case is summarized in Nietzsche’s famous argument:

Nietzsche, Freidriche wrote:
What then is truth?
A mobile army of metaphors, metonyms, and anthropomorphisms – in short, a sum of human relations, which have been enhanced, transposed and embellished poetically and rhetorically, and which after long use seem firm, canonical, and obligatory to a people: truths are illusions about which one has forgotten that is what they are; metaphors which are worn out and without sensuous power; coins which have lost their pictures and now matter only as metal, no longer as coins.
(1954, 46–7)

This is, in essence, the postmodernist position on truth and ideology. It  is impossible to distinguish between these categories because both are constructed out of the manipulation of empty signifiers; truth and falsehood are merely effects produced by non-referential signs.
Shell takes up the question of how to identify ideology in The Economy of Literature (1978). He describes ideology as undialectical thought: that is to say, thought that seeks to reduce a mutually definitive binary opposition to one of its poles.
The first such ideology Shell discusses is materialism:

Shell, David wrote:
Those discourses are ideological that argue or assume that matter is ontologically prior to thought. Astrology, for example, looks to the stars, phrenology to the skull, physiognomy to the face, and palmistry to the hand. In the modern world, ideological discourses look to the biochemistry of the brain, sexual need, genes, and social class; they seek to express how matter ‘gives rise to’ thought by employing metaphors such as ‘influence’, ‘structure’, ‘imitation’, ‘sublimation’, ‘expression’, and ‘symptom’.
(1)

Ideas and matter form a mutually definitive binary opposition and so it is false, or ‘ideological’, to claim that one of these elements determines the other.
If it is false to reduce ideas to matter, however, it is equally false  to reduce objective reality to subjective ideas.
Shell therefore goes on to attack the sceptical relativism that characterizes postmodernity:

Shell, David wrote:
Finding no salve for the wound of the desire to know, they retreat to comfortably relativistic or uncomfortably nihilistic lookouts, from which, grandly surveying the combatants, they argue that all ideologies are equally valid and therefore equally invalid. Who has not heard the liberal injunction to ‘do your own thing’, the rule that ‘you have your opinion and I have mine’?
---Ideology

Sounds like the cAnus, no?
But she's just an extreme, simple, example of a broader trend (symptom of a mental dis-ease), I describe as Nihilistic because it is characterized by an overturning of the real, on the basis that it lacks what humans desire, what they need, to remain sane, to find meaning (rather than create it), to find God, the absolute, out there, as a presupposition the world can but disappoint them with absence.

This is where charlatans and snake-oil salesmen, the culture of victims and misers selling themselves as teachers, find their weak spot to exploit.
They begin with the preliminary self-conviction, because the best lairs are the noes who truly believe in their own lies.
Sacrificing integrity is secondary to their primary goal: gratification (hedonistic delight in the praise and worship of others, in the exploitation of others as means towards this end).
The coin's material value is lost beneath its signifying value.
If accepted as such it is used for exchange, based on a shared delusion, a shared system of insinuations - trust founded no a lie.  
Money, like Nihilistic ideals, is valueless outside human markets. The paper the metal used is worthless.
The symbol, the insinuation, the metaphor, is what holds value, and only as long as all participating parties in the exchange accept it as such.
Shared delusion when, in time, this fact is forgotten. Then money becomes an end in itself.
Words becomes an end in themselves.  


Hawkes, David wrote:
Shell, David wrote:
Shell’s dual definition of ideology echoes Hans Barth’s statement of some thirty years earlier:
‘The principle of ideological interpretations of cultural and intellectual life is to deny the autonomy of mind and the existence of universal truths’ [1951] (1976, 162).

This kind of materialist relativism, which reduces thought to matter in order to deny the possibility of identifying any mode of thought as systematically false or ‘ideological’, is indeed prevalent in postmodernity.
Alan Bloom’s The Closing of the American Mind(1987) is a devastating critique of contemporary ideology that has gone largely unrecognized as such because it is perceived as having come from the political ‘right’.
But people of all political shades should hear a chord striking when Bloom identifies relativism as the postmodern form of false consciousness:

Bloom, Alan wrote:
There is one thing a professor can be absolutely certain of: almost every student entering the university believes, or says he believes, that truth is relative. If this belief is put to the test, one can count on the students’ reaction: they will be uncomprehending. That anyone should regard the proposition as not self-evident astonishes them, as though he were calling into question 2 + 2 = 4.
These are things you don’t think about.
. . .
The relativity of truth is not a theoretical insight but a moral postulate, the condition of a free society, or so they see it.
---Closing of the American Mind

Judeo-Christianity alive and well...hidden in political-correctness, and secular cultural relativism.

Bloom, Alan wrote:
To say that a certain kind of consciousness is ‘false’, to speak of ‘ideology’, is thus to violate the most fundamental tenet of postmodern society.
As Bloom puts it: ‘The true believer is the real danger’ .

Bloom’s attitude recalls that of the literary critic F.R. Leavis, who dedicated his career to exposing the degeneration of moral and aesthetic taste which, as he saw it, a commercial society must produce. In Mass Civilization and Minority Culture(1930), Leavis notes the kinship of authentic, essential aesthetic value to the financial gold standard:

Levis, F.R. wrote:
‘The accepted valuations are a kind of paper currency based upon a very small proportion of gold. To the state of such a currency the possibilities of fine living at any time bear a close
relation’.

There is, however, a ‘psychological Gresham’s law’ whereby, under market conditions, bad taste inexorably drives out good.
This is more than a metaphor. The deterioration of essential value into relativism is the same thing as the unmooring of money from its physical referent.

Recall the Hedonists insisting that art is all good, relatively speaking, if it brings pleasure to someone.
Echoing Nihilistic mantras that "beauty is in the eye of the beholder".
Recall the conversation, here on KT, over whether art was in decline and the Hedonists arguments against it.

Nihilism, the memetic dis-ease, comes in multiple forms....endless transfigurations, limited by nothing other than the biological limits of human imagination.


Hawkes, David wrote:
For Shell, like Leavis and Bloom, relativism is just as reductive as materialist determinism, since it reduces objective truth to subjective preference. In contrast to both forms of reductionism, Shell proposes ‘to understand dialectically the relationship between thought and matter by focussing . . . on economic thought and literary and linguistic matters’(1982, 2).

The shifting relationship between thought and matter is made manifest in the development of signification, whether financial or linguistic.
The various stages through which the history of representation passes can thus be evaluated according to the criteria of ideological criticism. There can, in other words, be a false and a true mode of representation, and a good and an evil deployment of signs.
The absence of such an ethics of representation has hampered attempts to critique the free-floating money of global capitalism. As Werner Bonefeld and John Holloway observe, ‘money has too often been treated as an aspect of “economics”, as an element of the framework within which class struggle takes place rather than as being a form of class struggle itself ’ (1995, 3).

Money is not merely a convenient vehicle for exchange; money has significance, it means something. In short, money talks, and it speaks the language of ideology.

The example of shit-Stain is brought to mind.
Gangsta culture exploiting white-guilt and broken families, attract the lost to their hyper-masculine declarative rhyming rhetoric - the effect matters, not whether what is spoken is meaningful, if it makes sense, what matters is that ti feels good...has a ordered rhythms and a consistent rhyme implying intuitively what it negates actually.


McLuhan, Marshall wrote:
The medium is the message. This is merely to say that the personal and social consequences of any medium - that is, of any extension of ourselves - result from the new scale that is introduced into our affairs by each extension of ourselves, or by any new technology.

The power of the word and how it can influence the simpletons, the fatherless, the desperate...is what is exploited by the aforementioned miser charlatans: those who covet, in otherness, what cannot be found in self, a grounding, pride, identity.
Power understood as declaring one's self autonomous, brilliant, valuable, loved...without having to abide by any external standard - the sovereign, the aristocrat for the desperate slave. He will give himself what the world, nature/past, has denied to him, in relation to others.
He will do so using words, because actions resist his will.


Hawkes, David wrote:
If money has grown progressively more abstract and less material  over the course of its historical development, the same might be said of  the things people buy with it. For millennia, most things that people exchanged were simple means of subsistence. With the beginnings of a global market in the sixteenth century, it soon became possible to conceive of almost any thing as a commodity. And with the complete triumph of the market in our own time, the most valuable commodities traded are not things at all, but ideas, images and brands.
This dematerialization of the economy gives it unprecedented power over the minds of individuals.
As Naomi Klein observes in No Logo(2000):

Klein, Naomi wrote:
The astronomical growth in the wealth and cultural influence of multinational corporations over the last fifteen years can arguably be traced back to a single, seemingly innocuous idea developed by management theorists in the mid-1980’s: that successful corporations must primarily produce brands, as opposed to products . . . this corporate obsession with brand identity is waging a war on public and individual space: on public institutions such as schools, on youthful identities, on the concept of nationality and on the possibilities for unmarketed space.

To attract minds you must produce a logo, a brand, with flashy packaging, and a positive message.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 14431
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Objective <> Subjective Wed Jan 27, 2016 2:17 pm

Hawkes, David wrote:
Negative Dialecticsis an attempt, if not to unlock Weber’s cage, then atleast to make us aware of its existence. In the book’s introduction, Adorno makes it clear he does not accept the notion, which was espoused  by Baudrillard, that use-value is merely an ideological effect produced by exchange-value. The cage, that is to say, is not empty; there is something real imprisoned within it. In the Marxist conception, exchange-value  is the principle of false identity. It renders different use-values identical for the purposes of exchange. Baudrillard would say that these use-values are illusions, produced retrospectively in the act of exchange.

---Ideology


The exchange-value of words, not their utility, is what gives them "value".
Their effect on human minds, not in reality, when "reality" is the construct of "false consciousness", is what becomes the real use of words, and the abstracted value they embody.
So, "first came the word" is still the premise when word is a representation of a noumenon - an abstraction with no referent outside human minds and their externalized projection as human artifices.


Hawkes, David wrote:
It is important to do justice to the full complexity of Adorno’s thought here. He claims that human beings are originally both subject and object.
Under capitalism, however, they are made into mere objects. Their subjectivity is, as it were, squeezed out of them, and it reconstitutes itself in the fantasy form of a transcendental subject.
In our society, this transcendental subject is ‘man’: a supposedly eternal and irreducible apotheosis of human nature. As though to compensate for their loss of real subjectivity, each of the individual ‘subjects’ (who are in fact no longer subjects but objects) then acquires an illusory, ideological ‘appearance’ of subjectivity, which is based on an identification with the fantastic
transcendental subject.
On an individual level, we end up with fully objectified subjects who take their very objectivity as a form of subjectivity.

For example, a postmodern individual may well construct his or her ‘personality’ out of an amalgam of consumer goods, fashion statements, ‘lifestyle’ choices, identification with real or fictional celebrities – in other words, out of objective phenomena which are administered to them by
the ‘culture industry’. And yet this utter loss of subjectivity is combined, in our society, with a resounding emphasis on the ‘individual’, on the uniqueness of each and every ‘person’. As Adorno shrewdly sees, this is  a shabby ideological ruse: ‘to a great extent the subject came to be
an ideology, a screen for society’s objective functional context and a palliative for the subject’s suffering under society’ (66–7).
There are thus two subjects: a ‘real’ subject, which is repressed by exchange-value, and an ‘objective’ subject, which is not real, and which is the product of exchange-value. This might not even matter, except for the fact that the relationship between these two subjects is antagonistic:
we are faced with ‘the subject as the subject’s foe’ (10). The ‘objective’ subject is like a zombie in a horror movie, preying upon and destroying the ‘real’ subject.

---Ideology


I've called this the artificiality of man, that now samples symbols of his won making, to construct an identity with - freed, in his mind, from nature/past.
Modern man can now choose from the noetic abstractions offered to him, as if he were free to choose, what identity to wear.
Covering up all appearances determined by nature/[past, such as sex/race, he invents himself out of material man produces.
Noumena externalized as phenomena - fabric, artifices, words.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 14431
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Objective <> Subjective Mon Feb 01, 2016 2:02 pm

It is, perhaps, the crucial aspect of the subjective/objective divide, and the cruellest aspect of the issue that makes minds obsessed with the numbing, escapism, of subjectivism, and why perspective has been converted to a mind-numbing pharmakon: nobody, not anybody, can escape the determining and revealing past/nature.
They can cope, they can cultivate, and attempt to control, to direct and correct, but not escape - they can never escape.
The past IS made present, as appearance, as activity.
The past/nature is evident in appearance, and can be witnessed as (inter)activity, meaning that a third-party with sensual awareness, and a lucid objective mind, can gain a higher understanding of the participants than the participants, in the midst of their energetic, consuming, (inter)activity, themselves.

Some of them cannot understand, or does not want understand, how their past performances, their past behaviour, says all one needs to know about what they are.
To correct this time and effort equal to the time involved in establishing this behaviour, is required...so centuries of evolution cannot be erased with some classes in meditation, and a few hundred-thousand dollars worth of education, of knowledge.
Culture, the meme, established in a few hundred years, may redirect, repress, and control, the genetics evolved through millions of years of natural selection...it does not erase ti magically and using words.

The narcissist, for example, believes he can trick those who have no knowledge of their past, not a mind to analyze it, into believing anything they want them to believe, suing infantile, techniques developed while in their childhood when trying to get their parents to pay attention to them.
But, to an emotionally indifferent observer, with a mind for details, his infantile behaviour is ineffective.

His past exposes him and even if the observer is unaware of this past he quickly sees signs and gains experience by finding patterns that expose this past clearly.
This is why a typical narcissist, fancying himself a predator, will move on to easier prey, as predators thirsting for the kill are prone to do.  
See, a narcissist goal is not personal development, and reality, though he tells himself that this is his motive, but attention, and manipulating others, giving him the fix he got when mommy and daddy gave him what he cried out for...perhaps because this was denied him at some point in those times when a child is developing, or, simply because of a mental, genetically produces dysfunction.

The point being that past behaviour is a good indicator for future behaviour, unless something traumatic, and dramatic has occurred to shift the paradigm.

So, a mind changing its mind, continuously, can be expected to change its mind again, and again.
There are many reasons for changing your mind...

1- Lack of knowledge and understanding, suddenly coming in contact with knowledge and given understanding by an external source, or due to experience, in time.

2- Lack of integrity, because the goal is other than the one the individual claims, using words, or even appreciates in himself, having been convinced of his own lies.
an individual may say, and believe this is so, that he is interested in reality and seeing the world clearly, but his real motive may be personal gratification, through flattery, hedonism etc.

3- Lack of genetic potential for understanding over a certain level. the individual totally dependent no others to give it understanding - as the analysis of the data it is exposed to means - will be unable to be convinced.
It will go from one belief to the next, suing what it does understand: pleasure, feeling.
Such an individual will be exploited and manipulated by those who understand it more than itself, exploiting its low self-awareness, and manipulating its base instincts driving it to pleasure, or anything that is emotionally and sensually gratifying.

In all three cases if one remains true to the method of beginning analysis of other with actions, and not words - these minds addicted to words, and these people attempting to escape past/nature by using text: people of the book, by the book, for the book - then one can avoid being manipulated by them, as they often manipulate themselves.
An action is considered reliable in relation to its duration.
To call something a pattern one must observe it, in time, nuder multiple conditions and circumstances before one is convinced, that it is most probably a pattern innate (natural), or so trained into the other than it has become second-nature.

For instance, in regards to the latter, a martial arts expert makes the fighting techniques he trains in second-nature only after years, and after he has been places in stressful situations where he does not revert to natural, innate, behaviours.
This is the only time we call him a 'master"
All these weekend warriors, buying a few hours of training a week, to pretend they are formidable, often revert to their previous fight/flight reaction when they are put in a stressful situation, or a real-life circumstance.

The body has a logic, a programming of its own - genetics.
To override this more than words are needed.
for a meme to truly override genetics, a will equal to the sum of all previous nurturing must be constantly applied, or generations of social engineering and focused reproduction must preceded the final outcome.






_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 14431
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Objective <> Subjective Thu Feb 04, 2016 12:04 pm

A gap requiring filling is left in the cause/effect chain.
From a neurological perspective what is present between on/off neurological activity?

The brain cannot visualize fluidity, never-mind a multidimensional flux, without fixed points of reference, leaving gaps, reflected in linguistics as gaps between letters, and in mathematics as the nil connecting singularities.
A force is imagines, so mystical power connecting cause and effect in an unbreakable chain of inevitability (fate).
The symbol is taken literally with the void left-over in the causal chain filled in by a mysterious will, a divine essence, a binding fabric.
Some inter-mediating will connecting cause with effect on a transcendental level convinces the Jews of Moses' role, and the Christians of Jesus' profound function, and Muslims of Mohammed's importance.

A conceptual "free-zone" permits the insertion of existential contraptions, ranging from the Abrahamic trio to more recent obfuscations that place man's own will as the connecting force, resulting in the conclusion that the world is a human construct (subjectivity).
The most obvious filler is the symbol, or the number/word, which now has become the popular way of conceptualizing what triggers cause to become effect, or what connects stream of thought in a fluidity of consciousness.
The word has become a Messianic bridge between contradicting world-views - ideal and real, Hellenism and Judaism, the singular and the fluctuating.  

Through this gap man tries to slither his way through, and new Messiahs emerge to lead the flock out of captivity and an unjust state towards some vague promised land, existing belong the rapture, or within, in between letters and numbers.
The problem of "passing over" from the subjective to the objective was dealt with in many ways...


Sloterdijk, Peter wrote:
Looking at the establishment of Jewish monotheism, one must also take into account two sycho-political complications of  no little consequence. Firstly, a suspicion was voiced that it was based on an exported idea that the Jews had taken with them on their semimythological exodus from Egypt under the leadership of Moses – a suspicion that Sigmund Freud expanded into the daredevil theory that Moses himself, as his name suggests, was an Egyptian, possibly from a noble family, who was continuing the largescale religio-political experiment of the Amarna period, the solar monotheism of Akhenaten, among the Jews. Then the Jews of the post-Mosaic period would, in spite of their anti-Egyptian self -image,  have remained a hetero-Egyptian collective with which – semi-consciously at first, then unconsciously – a chapter of experimental High God theology was enacted with all its consequences – consequences of which the internal genocide carried out by the faithful followers of Moses against the worshippers of the golden calf at the foot of Mount Sinai (assuming this incident is not simply a concoction to edify and terrify) would perhaps have been an extreme, but not entirely ineffective, example…

The myth of the exodus remains constitutive for Judaism as, through its dramatic circumstances that are invoked time and again, it creates a strong psychic engram – not least through the admonitory reminder of the deeds of the angel of death, who passed over the Jewish doorways that had been marked with lamb's blood (Hebrew pessach: leave out, pass over, spare) while entering the houses of the Egyptians and murdering their firstborn. The exodus story is unmistakably embedded within a maximum stress ritual which, because of its powerful memoactivity, guarantees the practising community the greatest possible internalization of laws…

Anyone looking for the secret of how Judaism was able to survive for over three millennia should begin here. It is nothing other than the high degree of memoactive fitness inherent in this religion because of its primary myth: it combines the joy at having escaped with the memory of that most terrible of nights. Numerous secondary forms of rehearsal sup-port these first influences, especially ones centred around scriptural study. The proud painfulness of circumcision may have had a similar effect. Whoever lives under the myth of the exodus shares a stable stigma that distresses, elevates, obliges, bonds and excludes.  Its eminent duplicability enables its carriers to pass on their passion and wander through the ages as living transporters of spiritual content.
The second complicating precondition of the monotheistic establishment of biblical Israel stems from its experiences in exile during the sixth century BC. There is a wide-ranging consensus among scholars that Jewish theology entered its critical phase in the time of Babylonian captivity (586–538 BC), when it developed the characteristics that can still be recognized today.  Following earlier zealotic preludes and rigorist episodes, these were the years of monotheistic decision.  
This escalation was triggered by the semantic clinch between the God of the Israelites and the imperial Gods of Babylon. The earlier Yahweh monolatry now brought forth a speculative superstructure that developed into a monotheism that was both theoretically and politically advanced.

The point of these radicalizations is not difficult to identify.  It lies in the emergence of a political concept of God with meta-political overtones that testifies to the resolve to grant the God of  the enslaved people – weeping at the waters of Babylon – absolute superiority, albeit one concealed and for the meantime only capable of being asserted symbolically, over the gods of  the despotic empire.
This turning point constitutes one of the most significant moments in the intellectual history of the later West. It marks the first separation of spirit and power, previously a diffuse unity, into polar opposites. While the rulers in power, like all happy tyrants before them, paid unwavering tribute to worldly success and accumulated reports of victories like holy trophies, the spirit of the defeated withdrew to a sanctuary in which it dreamt of justice and dictated the conditions for its imminent satisfaction. In this context, the concept of truth took on a futuristic tinge and opened itself up for reversal fantasies of a partly therapeutic, partly retributionist nature. Post-Babylonian theology discovered the counterfactual and utopian mode of thinking. Truth and reality parted ways, presenting the option of propagating values at odds with reality in the name of truth, which was henceforth treated as the sharpest weapon of the weak; these values were doomed to failure on the stage of real events, yet they could not, and did not want to, stop anticipating their hour of triumph. [God’s Zeal: The Battle of the Three Monotheisms]


A new parting of the sea with the will of god, the proverbial eternal gap, connecting cause and effect.

The part of Saul was alter played Lenin, and all those “revolutionaries”, apostles of escape from slavery, calling out for freedom.  


Sloterdijk, Peter wrote:
The second position in the field of monotheistic conflict has been clearly marked since the appearance of the Christian antithesis to the Jewish thesis. Although the God proclaimed by Paul and the other apostles retains a number of attributes connecting him to his Jewish predecessor, the subversively new Christological emphases lend his image entirely unexpected, even provocative and scandalous aspects. The crucified God will forever remain a challenge to the worldly understanding of victory and defeat. From a historical perspective, it is decisive that the universalist elements of post-Babylonian Jewish theology were only focused on and invested in an ambitious proselytistic movement as a result of Paul's intervention. The dual event evoked by the names of Jesus of Nazareth and Paul of Tarsus constituted no less than the escape of the One God from the provincial Middle East: it resulted in the alteration of the religious impulse from an ethnically restricted cult to an empire-wide form of telecommunication.
The people's apostle could no longer content himself with local Jewish conversations about holy matters. Following a clear strategic instinct, Paul identified the entire Roman Empire, which at the time meant the whole world, as the field of operation for his mission – enough of a reason for Paul to be an idol for lovers of abstract militancy to this day: one could almost call him the first Puritan, the first Jacobin and the first Leninist all rolled into one.
Perhaps it is no coincidence that Paul's work is documented primarily in the form of epistles, as that genre testifies to his long-distance apostolic effect more than any other. Even today, the reader can observe in them the gradual formulation of Christianity in the very act of writing.
It was not without reason that some claimed one could only call oneself a Christian if one had made a Christian out of  at least one other person; through the mission, the way of  life became its content. Profane subjectivity had to be exchanged for holy personhood: ‘it is no longer I who live, but it is Christ who lives in me’ (Galatians 2:20). What looks from the outside like idealistic overexertion is, viewed from the inside, actually the privilege of being allowed to wear oneself out for a great cause, thanks to the most intimate of convictions. Like revenge, the missionary faith approaches the ‘utopia of a motivated life’.
This shift to the global scale dissolved the conventional folk basis of the faith in a single god. Israel, the first covenant people, could no longer be the sole carrier of the specifically new, Christologically inverted monotheism.  Paul's stroke of genius transferred the covenant with God to a new people ‘called out’ from among the believers of  all peoples – this new collective was hence to call itself  ekklesia or New Israel,  and embody the historically unprecedented model of a pneumatic people.  It formed the prototype of the communio: a large spiritual body joined through baptism.  In this collective, following the same Lord now took precedence over tribal lineage and gender. With a grand gesture, the differences between Jews and Greeks, free men and slaves or men and women were declared meaningless among the ‘children of God’ (Romans 10:12 and Galatians 3:28).  A new associative model, the ‘holy community’, pushed back the ethnocentrism that, until then,  had been the only conceivable option – people were first of  all disciples of  Christ; their identities as clan members and national comrades were secondary.  The underlying belief in the imminent return of the Lord in glory, furthermore, led to a shift of emphasis in which futuristic motives restricted genealogical ones and superseded them de jure.  God had promised Abraham descendants ‘as numerous as the stars in the heavens’ after Isaac had been f reed; for Paul, however, the model of friendship took precedence over that of succession. Spiritual adoption replaced physical descent.
The most important victory of the new religion, however, was in the field of ritual. It was achieved through the transformation of the Jewish Passover feast into the Christian communion – a piratical operation that must be understood as the most world historically significant example of ‘refunctionalization’, in the sense propagated by the dramatic artist Brecht. Communion does not simply constitute a strong ‘misreading’ of the Jewish pattern. It is more than that: its tragic parody. The consequences of this appropriation cannot be stressed enough: it was only through this blasphemous counter Passover, in which the Son of Man placed himself  in the position of the lamb that would normally have been sacrificed (as if  he wanted to reveal the secret of that terrible night in Egypt), that Christianity came into possession of an unmistakable maximum stress ritual that guaranteed its participants the most lively form of  memoactive empathy – and has by this point been doing so over a period of  two millennia….

In every mass it is not simply the commemorative meal that is quoted, but rather the intimate memorability of faith itself.  Analogously, the feast of Whitsun parodies the handing over of laws at Mount Sinai, which the Jews celebrated fifty days after Passover – as if to prove that the preservation of the law is itself the law.

The believer, it is said, could never develop his zeal for God of his own accord if God's own zeal for his coming kingdom were not working within him. With the Pentecost event, Christianity entered the realm of high mediality. Subsequently the church became a place of exchange where one could hand over one's old identity and receive a spirited new self . [God’s Zeal: The Battle of the Three Monotheisms]


Rounding up the triad of dis-ease...


Sloterdijk, Peter wrote:
With the advent of Islam, the third exclusive monotheism appeared on the scene. Its establishment was defined by the fact that it viewed itself emphatically as the latest and most perfect manifestation of the Abrahamic one god complex.  Islam took its late arrival as its most precious spiritual chance, as it claimed the advantage of seeing and correcting the errors, both alleged and real, of the two preceding monotheisms. This is why Muslim clerics refer to the founder of their religion as the ‘seal of the prophet’. The idea of correction in the process of monotheistic revelations is constitutive for Islam, as it permits it to make a virtue out of necessity by converting the deficit of non-originality into the advantage of a later clarification.
Just as the Christian message before it could only come about through a partial abrogation, a corrective revocation of Jewish teachings (literary critics would add: through a severe misreading), the Islamic revelation presupposes the partial abrogation of the two older versions of monotheism. (Here this misreading of its two predecessors is taken to a spectacular level; yet it is precisely the success of Islam that shows that the adepts of  this new holy book had more important things to do than draw on the sources of existing cults in a philologically correct fashion.)
Consequently the religion of the Qur'an, like that of  the New Testament, was substantially characterized by a position of  theological contrast; its first front stood in the tradition of the Jewish and Christian zealots who waged war against the gods and idols of their polytheistic surroundings, while the second opposed the Jews and Christians directly. The former were accused of being frivolous and hypocritical, as they did not even take their own prophets seriously, while the latter were presented with the charge of falsely declaring the prophet Jesus ‘the Son of God’ in their deludedness, whereas all true knowledge of God, according to Islam, begins with the realization that the Highest is alone for all eternity and has no child.  The pathos of the Islamic thesis of God's solitary position is based primarily on the polemic against the Christian doctrine of the Trinity, which was regarded with suspicion as a form of tritheism. [God’s Zeal: The Battle of the Three Monotheisms]


Claiming their place as the only “true” inheritors of Judaic escape, Islam rejects Christian representations of the sacred, adopting Jewish ambiguity to avoid being exposed as those who worship the representation, the conceptual void between cause and effect, the 0 converted into 1.
This is the same as Moderns refusing to define their own representations, or to connect the noumena they worship, and hold as sacred, with phenomena outside their heads.
Escaping in the gap between cause and effect, requires the conversion of the counter-intuitive into intuitive, in the form of symbol, word, emotion, ego.  


_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 14431
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Objective <> Subjective Wed Feb 10, 2016 9:38 am

Environment determines the value of what is selected – objective reality.
The subjective, interpreting organism, selects and faces the consequences of its judgment, in relation to environment.
To be in-tune, or out-of-tune with reality, is to be in a state of disharmony with world, resulting in stress, and the anxiety it produces in the organism that seeks to alleviate its stress.
Stress is the sensation of being in conflict with world (agon), or with the sum of all (inter)acting patterned and non-patterned energies.
An organism, being a self-ordering, self-perpetuating, aggregate of patterns in congruity is always in conflict with the world’s ongoing (inter)activity producing increasing complexity (fragmentation) and chaos, loss of order(ing).
This perpetual state of continuous distress, increasing and decreasing in degree, and in relation to the organism’s aggregate energies and its ability o cope, is what we understand as the “human condition”: Dionysian/Apollonian is how the idea(l), interpreted abstraction, relates to the real, of indifferent fluctuating, (inter)active, dynamics.
Noumenon relating to phenomenon creating the subjective/objective divide.

MANifesto: Politics – A War Like No Other – Logos versus Mythos – Phenomenon/Noumenon

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 14431
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Objective <> Subjective Mon Feb 22, 2016 3:03 pm

Unable to break out of the binary either/or Nihilistic paradigm, the modern either believes in absolutes, existing in some hidden "beyond" or "underneath", or totally dismisses it all as being a personal choice, a nil man fills with his own creativity.

Sexual roles, morals, fall into this either/or absolutism: one absolute, or absolutely nil.


_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 14431
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Objective <> Subjective Wed Feb 24, 2016 2:40 pm

A modern's mind is so intertwined in the Nihilism paradigm that it cannot and will not dare thing outside its premises.
With God dead, and the nil as the only options it flees into the esoteric world of subjectivity, refusing to acknowledge a reality that acts like a unconscious authority, a standard that has no care, no emotional triggers to manipulate and exploit.
Terrified of what it defines as "nihilism", because it lacks the uni-versal absolutes of morality, order, reason-ing, meaning, it confuses the description of it for the intent - that which is absent it hears in the consciousness describing it to him.
So desperate to preserve a secret mind, a directing will, a purpose, that it prefers to accuse those who express reality of fabricating it, like he fabricates the excuses he uses to dismiss it.
For such a coward speaking about how nature works is the same as supporting it, liking it, constructing it, because no matter what he tells himself he still believes in a underlying, hidden, god that is renamed as something else.

To describe race, for example, is to promote it, to exploit it, to support it, to, yes, create it, because, You see, all is a social construct and humans are what is implied in the term "society" - a community of HUMAN mind deciding what is real, and what is not.
To describe violence, discrimination, rape, differences between the sexes,, death, suffering, is to like them...because what offers no pleasure, for a hedonist coward, is not to be taken seriously, or to be spoken of.
Though they will vehemently refuse to acknowledge that they are true nihilists, evaluating the absence of a telos, absolutes, as a negative, that they still believe in god, though they call themselves atheists, that they are emotional thinkers, though they return to the same tired accusations, they are what is common among Moderns: self-hating, nature despising, hedonistic, cowards; simpletons thinking TopBottom, egotists using "subjectivity" to justify their inability to measure-up, and to test their self-flattering comforting tactics; indifferent to how things are, but obsessed with how they ought to be, calling it their "will to power".

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 14431
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Objective <> Subjective Fri Mar 04, 2016 2:12 pm

If we are to attempt a convergence of genetic mind/body with its memetic extensions as idea(l)/real, or subjective/objective, we must begin with the body, and then advance upwards, to the mind – because mind, as projection of brain processes, is attached, dependent, and united with body.
The division ensues when consciousness, outwardly focused, produces self-consciousness, as the awareness of awareness, creating the dichotomy of mind/body, which only Nihilists wish to exploit for their own psychological reasons.
Considering the nervous system as the link between mind/body, the proverbial Holy Spirit intervening between sacred, divine God/mind, and corporeal, earthly, body/son, we can appreciate the different sources of data, entering God/mind as exoteric, and esoteric.
To fully understand nihilists, and their obsession with subjectivity, we must take this into account.
For them the esoteric sources of stimulations, such as feelings sensations, pleasure, overpower the exoteric ones, making them think of world from the prism of internal desires, wants, and feelings.
For exoteric, or objective thinkers, the world and its stimulations overpower, usurp, the esoteric needs of the body, making them consider world without emotion and personal preferences interfering with their judgments.
This is where the noumenon/phenomenon relationships takes effect.
For subjective thinkers, the external are problems it can ignore, if it is protected from them, indulging in its esoteric world, where noumenon holds sway; for the objective thinkers, the exoteric world, where noumenon submit, adapts, to the phenomenon, because it will suffer the consequences if it does not, holds sway.
For the subjective thinker the objective thinker is, like itself, dominated by feelings, self-interest, forcing it to make sense of them as “haters”, or forcing them to seek out a motive other than the exploration of world – a personal, self-serving angle they can then relate to and point to shame and dismiss as no more than the typical.
For the objective thinker the subjective thinker is an emotional, self-serving, vane, hypocrite, who selectively ignores the world, because he is sheltered, and can choose to do so, because there is no dire consequence to remaining blind and partially ignorant.
Herein lies the true divisions between left-wing and right-wing politics.
MANifesto: Politics – Right/Left
Extremes on both sides tend towards absurdity, and a balanced positions must lean towards the “right”, because the mind cannot survive without the body, and the body cannot survive with a mind detached and blind to a world that confronts it.
In the end, the mind is not something other than body – it is the body becoming aware of itself, and to do so it must detached, distance itself, using the imagination; mind is brain processes, first outwardly focused, and then, inwardly focused, interpreting, and abstracting phenomena of internal or external origins.
The shell, the skin, which divides organism, body, from world, is not other than world – it is world becoming aware of itself, and organism is a tiny part of it.



_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 14431
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Objective <> Subjective Fri Mar 04, 2016 3:37 pm

Fight/Flight (re)activity, finds expression in Right/Left political dynamics – separating the noumenon from phenomenon as the neurological means of fighting against, or fleeing before, the inescapable.

Mind (re)cognizes a threat, preparing the body for a (re)action to it.
Masculine minds tend to prepare for a fight, which may be against fabricated foes, in an endless paranoid battle against overestimated threats; feminine minds tend to prepare for flight, which may take the form of denial, or a reduction of the real to an illusion, or to what will be imagined away leaving an empty/nil space for the “better” one – the mind fleeing inward, into an overestimated internal reality.    

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 14431
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Objective <> Subjective Mon Mar 07, 2016 7:39 pm

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

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

A+ B = Individual organism (becoming)
C = Parents in heterosexually replicating organisms.
D = Grandparents...
E, F, G, H....Bloodline determining potentials: organic/genetic probabilities, countering increasing/inflating possibilities.


------------------------------------------

Objective = past/nature - {A-B-C-D....}

- Immutable, Determining, represented by the anthropomorphic Abrahamic One God, converted in Modern times into theoretical (divine) substance, #1, whole etc.
The non-existence absolute can be imagined in any way, and named by any name, but the concept remains the same: absolute unity, telos (dynamic or static), Divinity...
- Know Thyself implies knowledge, and understanding of Objective world: that which cannot be changed but known, understood, and dealt with in the present - adaptation (Evolution Theory).
- Nature = sum of previous nurturing, past (inter)actions, establishing a successful pattern - behaviour - Spirit when it is animated, living.

------------------------------------------

Subjective = immediate past, nurture {present} - {A}

- (Inter)Activity, fluctuating dynamic, continuously producing past/nature.
- Manifesting as appearance - empirical, sensually perceived and interpreted.
- Determined by the individual organism's metabolic rates : systolic/diastolic cellular, off/on.
- Meditation: shrinking of {A} to the smallest possible coincidence of past/nature with present/interactivity.
- Experience (first hand knowledge/understanding) + training/education/indoctrination (second hand knowledge/understanding) = automated (re)activity to stimuli in the present, determining future.
- Meme determined by genetics, establishing a shared behaviour, a common subjectivity, spirit of becoming, in relation to objective world.
- Subjective mind samples experiences/knowledge, finding and/or adopting patterns, to project towards the unknown future. Depth of the sample determines its cultivation - if the sample is second-hand this determines its reliance on theory and other; if it is first-hand determines its reliance on self.
- Genes and Memes overlap in the past/nature. The first exceeding in breadth and depth the effects of the second. Particular memes (morals, ideals, principles, beliefs, relationship/attitude towards world etc.) emerge out of particular genetic types, evolved within particular environmental conditions, and influenced by particular historical events.
The relationship of gene/meme reflects the relationship of consciousness/self-consciousness.
Memes, like genes, can be transported (metaphor), transmitted, transplanted into other genetic lines, usurping their own, but not completely buried, replaced. Transplanted memes are shaped by the me it is grafted over - the body never completely accepting the transplant - requiring constant interventions (medications, pharmakon: repressing already present autoimmune systems) to maintain the graft.            


------------------------------------------

Future = projection using imagination, of A+B+C+D... into the yet to be, (inter)activity, determining efficiency and effectiveness.

Brain = Evolved to function as the gathering and processing organ (hub of nervous system, collection from external [exoteric], and/or internal [esoteric] sources patterns to integrate into mental models (abstractions, noumena), in preparation,anticipation of future phenomena (what will become apparent).
Mind = projection of past/nature towards future. Projections may be genetic (automated, over centuries of natural selection, or memetic, trained/experienced into the organism from birth.
x0 = Mind - interpretation/abstraction of past/nature and present at the point of contact with the ongoing (inter)activity (flux).
Nature/Past (objective) combined with Present/Nurture (subjective) are confronted by the Flux, converting to past/nature.


------------------------------------------

x1 = Increasing complexity/fragmentation, tending towards absolute chaos - absence of patterns (possibilities expanding, reduction of probabilities).
z1 = increasing convergence/unification, tending towards absolute order - singularity, certainty, absence of (inter)activity (absolute, one, probability)

Movement towards x1-z1 never finalizes.

Consciousness and life emerges only towards x1 making z1 a imagined point in space time: idea(l).
Like an echo this past is felt as a Divine presence, or lamented as lost Paradise - nostalgia/melancholy the bane of higher minds.
The past is understood as inevitably resulting in the present, as if it is all part of a plan - as if the present was pre-ordained by a universal, all encompassing, singular pattern.


------------------------------------------


x1, x2, x3, x-1, x-2 .... represent projections of idea(l)s into future.
x0 is the point of contact between organism (self-organizing congruities of patterns/processes) and world (patterns and non-patterns coming into congruence and falling out of it) = it is the vague point of (inter)activity.
Phenomenon/Noumenon merge in x0 = Mind.

x1 = ideal alignment of past/nature with projected idea(l) = Nobility

All divergent projections (x2, x3, x4...etc.) projections out of alignment, tending towards the negative.
All divergent projections (x-1, x-2, x-3, x-4...etc.) projections completely out of alignment (ignoble), tending towards conflict/contradiction with past/nature = Nihilism

Axis y1-y2 represents the noetic field of (inter)activity, which the individual is a part of = reality.
The particular individual's depth and breadth of awareness is the point of contact between projected x and interactive y, establishing a perceptual-event-horizon = consciousness.
Self-consciousness completes the perceptual circle backwards, towards past/nature.  

Nihilism rejects the exoteric, leaving only the esoteric, where all projections, into "future" are really regression, and denials, and contradictions of past/nature.
Nihilism inverts all meaning, describing the absence of universal morality, telos, God, meaning, as negative, when it is positive, in the sense that it makes life possible.
Similarly, this projection contrary to past/nature it calls "progress", when it is regress - all returns to a primal state, which is denied, resulting in linguistic paradoxes, or disparity between words and deeds - irony and cynicism are the psychological fallout.  
 

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν


Last edited by Satyr on Wed Mar 09, 2016 10:33 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 14431
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Objective <> Subjective Wed Mar 09, 2016 7:46 am

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

From the above we can (re)cognize the source of many of the Abrhamic myths.

From near-absolute Order, life is created, and man falls away from it.
Chaos increases without end, and this is converted to a falling, loss of control - humanity as the falling out of Paradise (near absolute order) where there was no need or suffering, as there was no life, no consciousness, bathed in light - absolute order would proceed to the explosive expansion of time-space...from darkness/nothing, the absolute singularity where there is no movement.

Need/Suffering = organic interpretation of (inter)activity (existence) - the sensation of friction between (inter)acting patterns and non-patterned energies/vibrations/flows.

But order is never absolute as there is no absolute - it is absent.
The absolute would be an end(ing).
In relation to life/consciousness an ending has a double meaning:
1} It is implied in the concept of a singularity, as the absence of movement, of (inter)activity, without which no organizing is possible, as there is no possibility, no space/time, nor necessary, as there is no need/suffering.
2} It is implied in absolute Chaos as the slow deterioration of patterns (order-ing), expansion of possibility (space) to the state where all is possible, a state life cannot exist within.

Therefore, for an organism both absolute poles are an ending, but for the cosmos only absolute order implies an end.
Both absolutes are impossible, as it insinuates absolute time/space - infinity - which is a meaningless concept having a meaning within human abstractions that begin with 1/0 as a given.
Infinity is another way of describing the absence of an absolute, using linguistic (mathematical) terms.
In order to negate a human conception one must fabricate it and then its opposite.
From man's (representing life) addiction to order(ing), the static, the whole, one, a singularity (love, value, will etc...the many names of "God") must be contradicted with another fabrication, such as nil, infinity, emptiness, to nullify it absolutely.
The word becomes the symbol/representation of a human simplification/generalization (abstraction), which can only be contradicted with an equally absolute word/symbol/representation.

In all of it what is attempted is the description of an absence of what an organism needs, and suffers because it lacks it: absolute order (eternity, immortality, unity, God, Paradise); description of constant, (inter)activity within which patterns can be appreciated, (re)cognized = existence.    


**************


Divine/Sacred Order has a flaw, Satanic Chaos, (good is not perfect, it entails an evil; the one is incomplete, negated by its own failure) causing conflict/friction/antagonism which produces existence.
The inevitability of life is converted to intentionality - the myth o divine Will, the Creator One God is born out of human binary thinking/dualism: the on/off neurological switches, evolved to cope, to deal with existence, projected as universal mechanisms.  
Consciousness and Will emerging/evolving in the increasing  fluctuating time/space to deal with it, is converted to a Creator God, of a Universe Deus, willing existence as part of a plan: this plan is the mind of god: mathematical algorithm, M-Theory, fabric, substance, a-tom, god particle....science takes over from the religions of Abrahism.

The double-edged sword of free-will: in contradiction with itself.
Fatalism looks at the consequences of past, which cannot be intervened upon (altered) as being intentional, following a universal rule, some secret plan (purpose, reason) - (inter)activity is converted to Will , to anything insinuating the familiar (organic ordering) to make it less uncertain and, therefore, less stressful on a mind/psyche that craves order, reasons, causes, meaning, purpose, telos.

Man-kind as living organism places himself on the side of lost Absolute Order, pushed to its finality using the imagination - a finality which corresponds to nothing experienced, and so absolute order, acquiring many names and description, becomes the absolute IDEA(L).
As life he is ordering, reflecting the lost near-absolute in the past, projecting it as his own intention, his Idea(l) - man becoming God to fill the absence, filling his world with his own fabricated order(ing), symbols, metaphors of his internal processes.

The only way to convert the inherit contradiction in free-will, as indicating Independence needing, striving, or of the absence of absolute as an absolute itself, and imperfection as perfection, is to exploit the inherent dependence of language on binary concepts, divide away noumenon from phenomenon, and project one as more real, than reality, and life as a flaw within perfection, incompleteness within completeness, evil within Divine goodness, symmetry in asymmetrical (inter)activity - denying Chaos is denouncing the Devil.
Mysticism has to retain its potential for demystification - Alexandrian Age, Modernity: all can be known, will be understood- the end of awareness found, emerging man with the divine Mind: congruence of human will with God's willing; salvation through adherence, submission, cosmic harmony.  

On the other end of the psychological spectrum those honest, true Nihilists, abandoning themselves to Chaos, wishing/willing the end of all life, imagining chaos as a telos: if they cannot enjoy existence, nobody ought to; if they cannot fight with no meaning, no purpose, no final, absolute goal possible, then nobody ought to.
Integrity of the weak spirit, avenging itself on those it envies, and cannot imitate - envy with no possibility of imitation, converts inspiration to vindictiveness.


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

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν


Last edited by Satyr on Wed Mar 09, 2016 4:40 pm; edited 4 times in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 14431
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Objective <> Subjective Wed Mar 09, 2016 9:43 am

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

At the ambiguous/vague "point" of x0 (niter)activity occurs, as the relating of organism (becoming) to other patterns or congruities of patterns, or absence of patterns.

Past/Nature being immutable beyond this x0 can only be engaged, known/understood, noetically, using the imagination.
This lends itself to the confusion plaguing Moderns, fitting into their Nihilistic "positivism/progressivity" (liberty of will) as it uses noesis, which is malleable, to engage the immutable, determined, past/nature, converting one into the other - the inversion magic of words.
Inaccessible past/nature, what is determined and cannot be altered, is converted to the symbol, the representation of noumenon, which is malleable, flexible.

Projections into the yet-to-be Future, represented in the graph by the x1, x2 ...x-1, x-2... emerging from the x0 "point" are the noetic projection of the organism's intent, either in alignment with its past, or slightly askew or contrary to it.
Projections back towards the esoteric (past/nature) are noetic attempts to intervene upon the immutable past/nature, explained, as a delving into the mind of "God".
Nihilistic desire to alter, or contradict, what has already been determined, exposing a dissatisfaction, and a dis-ease with what is, in relation to Future: to be ill at ease, un-comfortable, with the x0 as the "point" of engagement.
The organism does not choose to be born, it is "thrown into world", as some have metaphorically defined being born, slowly awakening (gradual emergence of self-consciousness, and slow expansion of the perceptual-event-horizon) to a past/nature, determining their potentials (limits of their becoming).


**************


At the "point" of x0 the organism comes in contact with reality, as the sum of all (inter)activity.
x0 is the point of friction, felt as need/suffering, producing complexity and chaos as it (inter)acts with other patterns and congruities of patterns, and fluctuating non-patterned energies.

Projected towards the unknown, Future, is the focusing of the organism entire past (sum of all previous nurturing - Nature/Essence) towards an Objective/goal/Idea(l).
The "positive" numerical values {x1, x2, x3,...}, whether in alignment (noble) or not, indicate a degree of engagement with world (exoteric), where esoteric and exoteric merge, via the nervous system, and engage world; the "negative" numerical values {x(-1), x(-2), x(-3),...}, whether in antithesis (negative alignment) or not, indicate an inversion, a return to the esoteric (subjectivity projected towards the immutable objective past/nature); wilful desire to immerse into self, noetically, so as to reinterpret past/nature while avoiding the indifference of a contradicting nature/past experienced as an unyielding Future.
World being the sum of all (inter)acting patterns and non-patterns, is, relatively, unaffected by the desires of a single organism, and its aggregate patterns.  

Modernity, with its positivist Nihilism, {progresivity, liberalism, Marxism}, is an immersion in a noetic subjectivity – projection of self, at the "point" of x0, back into self – a fleeing reality inwards, rather than directing the esoteric outwards, funnelling it, as it was meant to be, spilling forth, growing, exploring, engaging, rather than conserving self inwardly – low esoteric energies, cowardice (stress/anxiety before the unknown) incapable of coping and making excuses – converting a weakness into spiritual strength.
Unable to face the consequences, the challenge of world with its own inherited, immutable, past/nature, the organism flees inward, directing “growth” internally, trying to build up resources: miserly collection of energies (symbolism, words, numbers, alliances, proxies, strength in association, support in others, second-hand knowledge, adopted understanding, social networking, monetary wealth, fame/popularity etc.) to make a push outwards, or, if a sheltering mediating force is in place, to remain there, constructing noetic empires with theoretical power, seducing others to validate the fabrication: quantification of qualification.

Language (mathematics, symbols) being the noetic representations of x0 engaging world, becomes the tool of escape inwards, into subjective malleability, and reinterpretation of past/nature so as to convert it from immutable to mutable, saving freedom of will.
The individual is convinced that it has changed past/nature, escaped its determinations, by reinterpreting the past/nature.
Reinterpretation begins with interpretation of the apparent.

Subjective interpretation of appearances, of what is present, is how the organism discovers, un-covers past/nature.
Past/Nature is revealed in the present, as presence (appearance): the immutable converted to abstraction (simplification/generalization).
All interpretations are now accurate or equally valid. Their projections into Future, without any mitigating sheltering force, determines their degree of accuracy.
If sheltered from the repercussions of their interpretations a false sense of ego and of world is gradually built: belief that mind is god, and world adapts to human contrivances.  

Interpreting appearance, as the manifestation of this immutable determining past/nature, is the function of the brain, producing mind.
Past/Nature, and how it relates to Future, confronts mind, forcing it to do-or-die; adapt, and/or redirect, and/or dismiss/reject/deny.
The Interpretation (abstraction), whether in cohesion or fragmented, is the noetic representation of past/nature, in reference, or not, in relation, as a (re)action, to an immanent, indifferent, unknown Future.
It becomes the flag of Modern positive Nihilism: annulling world, past/nature, with a "positive" idea(l), replacing the immutable with mutability.
Change is the metaphor binding Chaos with modern versions which always contain absolute order, either as given, or as intent/inevitable.
Inevitable/Intentionality conveniently coincide in confusion, as does Chaos (increasing randomness, absence of patterns...), and Chaos, as a description of change, of infinite expanding possibility with an underlying order (reason, meaning, purpose, God, oneness, whole-someness, thing-in-itself).
In this purposeful linguistic confusion we add the inversion of Nihilism to meaning a world void of human idea(l) such as universal morality, absolute order, telos, God etc.: the "positivity" of a world void of such human fabrications, giving rise to life, is reinterpreted as a "negative" that is rooted in deceit.
x(-1), x(-2), x(-3)...projections, esoterically, bury, hypothetically, theoretically, the exotreric, when in fact ti is the mind burying itself in self, in its internal processes - inter-subjectivity as a community of brains, the like-minded, founded on this comforting confusion, building on linguistic frameworks (words void of references outside brains: first came the word and the words was...{?} place desirable positive nihilistic symbol here): sociopolitical of nihilism (memetic Nihilism).  

 

**************


Absence of absolute is absence of what never was, and never could be - nostalgia for the impossible, felt as melancholia - lamenting what can never be.
Organically it is interpreted as need/suffering: the echo of the near-absolute order in past/nature, as a echoing underlying "radiation/heat".

Social instinct is the longing to Be - to be-long.
A instinctive hunger, to be-come, to come to Be, as in absolute Order - to re-turn towards the near-absolute, which never was.
Tragedy of the Apollonian psyche is to strive for what is impossible, fighting battles in a lost war - masculine idealism; Comedy of the Dionysian laughter - female's intuitive, mockery of masculine dominance: merger in the joy of fighting.

Masculine = striving towards absolute Order, inspired by past/nature but a personal Creation.
A Male is defined by his past/nature, and his own awareness/understanding of it - exposed by his projections into Future, his objectives/Idea(l)s.
Feminine = attracted to ordering, intuitively rooted in the reality of increasing Chaos - assessment of a man's Order(ing).
A female judges and then continuously tests a male's order(ing) - she invests in her judgment, but may cut her losses is she decides she evaluated wrongly.  
 
   

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

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 14431
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Objective <> Subjective Thu Mar 10, 2016 7:45 am

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

The nervous system (sense organs - skin, the vague outer boundary of an organism's domain) converts stimuli (cellular activity, agitated, interacting) into a form it can transmit, and/or incorporate into the body's organization - it does so by simplifying/generalizing, by using evolved a priori methods reflecting the organism's past/nature - its organization: the bioenergy frequencies the cells in its organization have established as part of their coexistence, settled upon, in time, using the lowest-common-denominator. this determines the particular individuals metabolism, as this relates to a species, or type's average metabolism - the potential inherited genetically setting an upper and lower limit.
These limits can be exceeded due to environmental (inter)activity, usually of a traumatic/severity sufficient to divert patterns - such diversions are called mutations and are part of natural selection: organism relating, (inter)acting with world.

Brain, if it is part of the organism, gathers these cellular agitations, organizing, them according to frequency and then combining them by using a priori simplifications/generalizations, evolved through trial and error (natural selection) into mental models (abstractions).
Mind is this continuous (stream of thought) conversion, combination experienced as sensation, feeling, emotion, imagery, pressure etc. juxtaposed against precedent - memory/experience (first or second hand only possible in higher organisms).
Memory is the amount of data stored, as simplified/generalized code, and accessible to the organism in A - present, and/or immediate past.
Juxtaposition results in automated (re)actions, established over time as instinctive, intuitive, later controlled to enable reflection, contemplation, imagination etc.

The period of time required for this processing to happen creates a disparity between x0, and perception - the organism is never totally "in the moment" sub-consciously, necessitating the more efficient automatic (re)actions on a regional, cellular level, called visceral, or intuition, or instincts.
Consciousness refers to an after-the-fact perception of x0 - appreciating what has already occurred and has been (re)acted to.
More primitive organisms are not as burdened by this processing lag, because they have less data to process and they need not abstract world to direct themselves within it.
As the sophistication of the organism increases the disparity increases (distance, disconnect of noumenon form phenomenon), compensated for by a practice that converts this disparity into an advantage: the brain's abstractions, constructed and juxtaposed, can be projected into the yet-to-be Future, anticipating, pre-dicting, enabling pre-paration, which increases efficiency: focus of aggregate energies (patterns, exploiting the advantage of synergy), multiplying the organism's probabilities, within the world's possibilities.


*****************      
 

Symbols (visual, acoustic etc.) are representations of mental abstractions - these are, then, organized into formal combinations (letters, words) creating language.
Language is the expression of the nervous system, connecting mind/body, or exoteric/esoteric sources of stimulation (cellular agitation exhibiting a frequency, patterns, within the limits of the organism's evolved bioenergy/metabolic potentials).

Language is, therefore, the implosion of the graph into a "point" in space/time, somewhere within the A (present), tending towards x0, but never attaining it.
Even when the mind projects its abstractions into Future, it is always before x0, attempting a noetic approach towards it.
The risk, with this method, is that if the organism loses control, or is confused, or it is not self-disciplined due to anxiety, because it is sheltered, it will remain in this Future, noetically detached from A, B, C, D etc.
With no pressing need to remain aligned with its past/nature, and no Future threatening it, it can project backwards, in antithesis to past/nature, contradicting, dismissing, conflicting with itself - Nihilism.  
The degree of contradiction determining the degree of detachment from the exoteric.
The mind believes it is progressing when it is immersing itself in the esoteric, altering, using the imagination (now fantasy, delusion), to noetically alter the immutable, which cannot be changed.
The result is disillusionment, detachment, dis-ease, as the organism constructs automatic (re)actions to stimuli, which inhibit, further, engagement with world, or the approaching of x0.
New timelines, new pasts, a new nature, and so a new identity is possible, if such an organism is protected from world which remains indifferent to organisms and their welfare.
To cope, cosmos is converted to universe, and ascribed will, an emotion, consciousness, reason, and care - the mind can now fantasize without care, supported by its own sheltering into the arrogance of its own delusions. Because it does not pay a price, or not one which is significant enough to matter, it begins immersing itself in the esoteric, contradicting past/nature, convinced, by its own continuance, that it is delving into a more real reality.
If a mutation is not culled, but is protected from its own unfitness, its inability to survive within world, or to deal with the (inter)activity, it multiplies, adding new mutations, like a shell, over the original.
In time A, B, C, D .... is buried, forgotten, denied.
Multiple new nihilistic idea(l)s, projections internal (esoteric) emerge, unhindered, by any limiting past/nature, or the costs of an indifferent Future.

With no exoteric costs, the mind is "liberated" to indulge in self, in exclusively esoteric pursuits, trying to deal with past/nature which is immutable, and determining, and cannot be left behind, nor forgotten, but only buried in the sub-conscious where consciousness eventually comes to believe it has ceases to be relevant.    


*****************      

Infinity, and divisibility, represented linguistically and mathematically, is the expression of a contradiction between Flux, patterns (inter)acting, and human abstractions, constructing binary logic, dualism, and fractals, which begins with the presupposition of an absolute - the abstraction, the noumenon, simplifying/generalizing patterns into things, into static mental models.
This contradiction, if taken literally, leads to an impasse and to delusion; when taken figuratively it is compensated for with art - mathematical fractions algorithms representing processes, linguistic nuances, metaphors.
If this is confused as reality, symbol mistaken for what it represents, a magical token for exchanging fabricated value, or if it is applied selectively, and not consistently, motivated by a desirable outcome, the end-result is nihilistic detachment - either wilful or not; either lucid, or engulfed by its own genetic limitations, and convinced of its own delusions.
A selective application is what we refer to us schizophrenia - the application of one standard in one context and another in another, disparity of words and deeds - or the compartmentalization of abstraction not requiring cohesion: coexisting in the same brain, though they contradict one another.
Most of the time this is a consequence of genetics limitation, establishing a potential, but some times it is a purposeful double, or triple, standard established, consciously or unconsciously/intuitively/instinctively, to protect organism from awareness that may lead to its demise - cowardice, low constitution of mind/body, purposeful self-deceit to become more effective in deceiving others etc.

The brain is an organ evolved to facilitate survival, and growth with the excesses this may result in (procreation/creation), and not, necessarily, to become aware, wise, in relation to an existence beyond a certain point in its perceptual-event-horizon.
Just as an inferior organism need not understand metaphysics, appearances, art, language, sociology, to survive, the human animal need not go beyond a certain point of awareness to remain functional - philosophy, therefore, is the practice of minds unconcerned with survival, and dedicated to perceiving, as much as possible, even if it leads to their own death.  
The connection between genius & madness is well documented, and the pattern of intellectuals failing to live in harmony with their past/nature is well known, even if not understood by most.
An organism which is not constituted to delve into existence, expanding exoterically/esoterically its perceptual-event-horizon indefinitely, or as long as its lifetime permits, despite the consequences to its well-being, indulges in a type of thinking, it calls "philosophy", which is no more than sociology, psychology, a form of self-flattery, self-comforting, self-promotion...etc. - coping made into a intellectual endeavour with profound implications, shared with others, of its kind, as divine wisdom (networking, constructing webs of supportive relationships).
The esoteric bubbling up to produce a community of subjective thinkers, obsessed with remaining detached and aloof to the exoteric, and to the deeper past, the objective - immutable past/nature, which is neither flattering, or caring, nor is it manipulated by emotion, and coercion, and words because it lacks consciousness: community of inter-subjective, interdependent Nihilists (Moderns).
within a protective socioeconomic, political field (meme) they can indulge in self-creation, creative escapism, recycling self-identifications, hedonism for its own sake, conversion of immutable past/nature into mutable idealism, directed by fantasy, pushed on, via the nervous system, from internal/esoteric sources of cellular needs, creating an internal organ hierarchy (psychology).
Since cells lack a brain to create abstractions, these cellular neuro-pulses are collected and abstracted, by the brain, using its own experiences - its selective engagement with the exoteric - without having to discipline itself to this exoteric, because sheltering makes the organism relatively immune to it (depending no the degree of sheltering), at least in the immediate (short-term) - imploding perceptual-event-horizon producing increasingly infantile, shallow minds), cellular (inter)actions are abstracted in novel, bizarre, surreal ways: without the restricting world, and detaching, noetically, from an immutable, determining past/nature, releases the mind to fantasy - "freedom/liberty, free-will", the central idea(l)s of modern man, producing the current identity crisis.  


*****************      
.  

Detaching the signifier, the symbol/metaphor, from its reference point in world, disconnecting the noumenon from the phenomenon, manifests as a loss of meaning in words, the loss of intrinsic value in money, when detached form the gold/silver standard, and the loss of artistic quality, immersion in psycho-somatic subjective projections.

When the value of word/money/art is detached from world, it becomes dependent on law, human law disconnected from natural law - the product of whim, motivated by a desire to exploit, manipulate, control minds that can abstract themselves out of existence.
State is the grantor, but the position of legislating authority, giving noetic "value" to what is without any instincts value can be taken over by a priest, a confidence man, a salesman, a usurer.
Nomos, as the law of man, reflecting the law of nature, loses its attachment, and becomes pure fabrication - based on trust/faith, and the inter-subjective codependency it produces.


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

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 14431
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Objective <> Subjective Thu Mar 10, 2016 3:19 pm

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

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

*************

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

Distillation, using fire (stressor), and gravity (environment - bringing it all down to earth and first principles Bottom>Up-Thinking), purifies all - separating the superior from the inferior.
With fire, from below, the bowels of the earth, or from above, the stars, excess is left behind, or is boiled away, depending on the relationship of stress/heat, and the element you need to extricate from the desired outcome.  
A vine is stressed, dehydrating its fruit, leaving behind the sweetness it has gathered and processed, from the earth - sun acting as the stressor.
If, on the other hand, you need to purify water, you bring it to a boil, collecting the vapours, leaving behind sediment, toxins or any other undesirables.

It is this absence of stressors, of fire, that defines sheltering, allowing sediments, genetic/memetic toxins/mutations to accumulate, until what you have is sludge: a soup of non-distinct mixed patterns, unrecognizable from one another.
With heat (passion, conflict, war, stress...) purity is distilled and collected, using the right tools.
It is, in times of war where the true nature of man, and of each individual is exposed - it is in moments of passion (thymotic rage, or erotic ecstasy) when the other is revealed, pure and honest.

Comfort, produces stagnation; murk gathers and settles into cesspools of decay.
Agitation creates movement, increasing (inter)action, friction, tension, what is of excess burns away, like fat is burned with exercise, and the mental fat is burned away with asceticism.

What remains to decide is if the element you wish to purify and collect is of a thicker, denser, essence than the corrupting, polluting element: if it is more phenomenon than noumenon, more act than deed, more real than idea(l) – density is also a description of time, and the sum of all past nurturing preceding the presence of a noumenon and of a phenomenon.
Given that mind evolves after life, the density, suing temporal criteria, is usually a reference to phenomena, as these manifest as the sum of all past/nature.

To purify the noumenon {the idea(l)}, the physical, the body, has to be stressed away, leaving behind pure mind; to purify the phenomenon {the body}, the mind needs to be stressed away, leaving behind pure physicality - if, on the other hand, a Hellenic balance of mind/body is the desired goal, where the mind dominates, the correct measure of stressing mind and body, one slightly more than the other, ought to be the practice.
This will determine what source and from what direction, stress will be applied - if the desirable essence is of a physical kind (body, phenomenon) then an earthly flame will be required, boiling away the undesirable; if it is of a lighter, noetic, spiritual, essence, then the flame ought to be from above (sun), and the mechanism used to collect and preserve would have to be one where the desired element is collected, condensed and then returned to its original form, allowing it to cool, and relax.
     
This is the case for all things requiring purification - such as genes/memes, subjectivity/objectivity, love/hate, friendship, art, quality/quantity.
This is the case for such historical events, as the Holocaust, Black Plague, Ice Age, all the revolutions, and wars.
These were purifying events, dealing with the excess that had accumulated over generations, like forest fires burn away brush, leaving behind strong trees, airing the environment out, creating natural fertilizer for those that survive to feed on for years - this is what it means to cull a herd, and why protecting it from natural predators leads to illness, which, ironically, threatens its survival.    


*************

Understanding reproduction in the context of distillation, we can place the female sexual role as the collector of purified genes/memes, the male as the element to be distilled, and sexual passion as the heat/stressor.
Natural selection, and evolution theory, describe the genetic distillation process, from which sociology, psychology, politics describe the memetic distillation process.
Memes are directed using a predetermined idea(l) indoctrinating females into its mechanism, whereas genetic purification is determined by environment, shaping female preferences subsequently fulfilling the role of filtering, distilling agency, nevertheless in both cases some common ground can be found in metaphysics and order, relating to chaos, where value is defined outside human behaviours.
By finding these common principles we can now place human behaviour as the outcrop of this common grounding in metaphysics.

What is valuable is what is durable within the Flux - other words for it is "fit", "health", "constitution" etc.
What order, or congruity of patterns, can endure Flux, in time/space, is deemed reliable, useful, dependable and consequently appreciated as valuable.
But, there is the case of what is ordered being more fragile, more stressed by chaos, that a less ordered congruity might be.
because such fragility cannot endure for long, it is rare, and its rarity makes it valuable in the sense of a higher order, which inspires, which we can appreciate and desire, as an echo of the past/nature, of near-absolute order. We relate to it as we would to God, or the divine, as something precious, magical, and forever unattainable by us who appreciate and endure as it vanishes - swept away by Flux.
In this sense the beautiful as symmetry, physical proportionality, is precious, has power, because it is more fragile, and rare - time leaving its mark on its near-perfection, so that we notice the slightest effect - lost, to us, in less beautiful phenomena.
It is, precisely, the near perfect symmetry, the delicate balances, where all imperfections are lost to our sensual acuity, that make any slight corruption, any diversion noticeable.


*************

Beneath all obsession with subjectivity is the desperate need to reduce it all down to nurturing, so as to dismiss past/nature, or to reduce its immutable determining limitations upon our presence.
To overcompensate for a lifetime of nurturing, memetic effect, (education, training, popularity, indoctrination) in relation to hundreds of thousands of years of nurturing, genetic effect, the Modern Nihilist uses linguistic contraptions, detachment of symbols from their referent points in world, denial/rejection/forgetfulness, confusion (feigned or actual, alluding to complexity), and compartmentalization, to frustrate and make the point too costly to pursue.


_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 14431
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Objective <> Subjective Wed Mar 16, 2016 7:50 pm

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

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

***********

Using the above simple graph we can attempt to trace the human condition in a visual way, which is more comprehensible to a predatory species, such as man.  

The x0 represents the moving point in space/time, the noetic point where organism, the self-organism (Becoming) comes in contact (friction) with world (sum of all patterned, and non-patterned energies), experiencing it as need/suffering (agon), and becoming aware of it, after-the-fact, as already part of the immutable past/nature.

Mind projects outwards, before-the-fact, in preparation of it, so as to gain the advantage of efficiency which is what intelligence provides, and has proven to be dominant as a trait.
Each projection is represented by the spoke-like {x1, x2, x3, x4...}  lines, with the negative {x-1, x-2, x-3,...} representing the Nihilistic projection contrary to past/nature, inwards (esoteric) often called with no sense of irony, by modern, "progress", when it is a retrogression to an infantile, animal state of awareness, a fleeing world (dumbing-down).
Each line is the projection, suing imagination, of accumulated knowledge/understanding, overarching the point of contact (x0), so that, in effect, the mind perceives itself - using the imagination (see Levels of Cognition in my War Like No Other) from a detached, advanced theoretical point of view {Idea(l)- noetic)}.
Attempting to bridge the distance between consciousness and Becoming, to achieve perfect congruity (being, fully, in the moment) - although impossible in a fluctuating dynamic process - the approach towards "self" follows two direction - inwardly {Bottom<>Up}, and outwardly (Top<>Bottom).

This projection is also called idea, and/or ideal, and so the problem ensues when the Top<>Bottom approach begins with a theoretical, idea, an idea(L), if it is imagined as preferred, or positive, begins with a theoretical, idea, an ideal, and then perceives self from that noetic direction - this can also be called an esoteric direction because, although the position is external to self, in noetic time/space, its focus, direction is back towards past/nature, the esoteric, represented in the graph by the two parabolic lines towards past/nature, representing the two level of awareness: 1- Self-knowledge, Self-Consciousness, and not necessarily Self-Understanding, and 2- Intuition, Instinct, also called Sub-Consciousness: from where dreams and emotions bubble up to confront the lucid mind with, sometimes, irrational imagery and sensations.

Meditation would be the closing of the mind off from future (projections) advancing towards x0 from internal, bottom<>up directions = from the subconscious upwards towards self-consciousness.
since the concentric circles extend outwards indefinitely and the entire model is in constant motion along the x-y axis Meditation is a constant search for the point furthest back (into the sub-conscious) and the total detachment form the coming future.
The movement back follows the nervous network all the way to the cellular level, or, perhaps, further back towards pure pattern, when, and if, the one meditating has mastered the discipline.
At this level the lowest-common-denominator is approached - regression to a pre-natal state.




***********

When you protect individuals from the repercussions of their own thinking you get endless, nonsensical, worthless, debates over semantics and what “truth” is.
Then the value of “philosophy" is questioned.

The Nihilist rises, full of uncontested confidence, using words with casual abandonment intuitively knowing, even if not understanding, that nothing he says matters, because none of it has to correspond to objective reality, but can remain in the field of semantic subjectivity, restricted by law and popular ostracizing.
Cynicism becomes a matter of fact, the mind directing excess energies towards distractions, adrenaline highs, hedonism to numb them down to a manageable state, and nonsensical exploration of fantastic noetic contraptions.
Everything form reality to morality becomes a ploy to occupy itself, and to appease its sub-conscious anxieties, and intuitive sense that it is losing itself in its own mind - subjective extremism is solipsism. with nothing to correct the movement inward, detachment from reality proceeds towards the absurd - the surreal, the un-real - what negates and dismisses world suing the only remnant of it, words, left over from its earlier contact.  
Then, such a mind, indulges in his favourite self-abuse, its only meaning in life, pleasure; using words like women, and children, use emotions - for effect, to cause a reaction in the other, to find agreement (sympathy).

Repercussions no longer apply, unless it relates to human re-activity, a stir, creating a buzz, gathering numbers, seducing aesthetic hunger, rooted in a desire to self-numb.
Ambition replaces integrity, and the search for an objective truth is replaced by the search for popular appeal and market value.


***********

Perceived, in hind-sight (after-the-fact) looking back, towards determining, immutable, past/nature, Consciousness becomes aware of past/nature, to whatever degree it does so, as an absolute inevitability, believing that the present, appearing to it, was always “meant to be”, as if some Will was at work – this develops into the concept of Divinity, God.
Its own organizing (Becoming – congruity of patterns interacting internally), its congruity of patterns, (inter)acting with world {sum of all energies, patterned (order) and not (chaos)} will be interested as something external (exoteric), something other imposing its will, and/or as something internal (esoteric), some mysterious force expressing itself through it – mystical.
Self-consciousness emerges after consciousness of world (otherness) has already developed to a certain degree. It perceives consciousness as the unknown, participating in the sum of (inter)activity – as otherness itself.

Self-Knowledge is not a given, it is what develops gradually, just as knowledge of other develops gradually. Its relationship with its own processes, its own patterns in congruence, is one of detachment, alienation, ignorance; it is mysterious, mystical to its own self.
The existential distance produced by the noetic lag between (inter)acting and perceiving (interpreting), lag between phenomena, and noumena, caused, not only by the space/time required for processing {interpreting (inter)activity}, but also by the constant fluctuating, dynamism, making xo a noetic point in space/time and not an actual one, an unbridgeable distance between Be-coming, and Being, the theoretical static point called to-Be, always immanent, never made present. This disparity between interpretation and (inter)action producing the relationship of mysteriousness.
Perceiving mind relates to the sum of all exoteric (inter)activities, known and unknowable, and esoteric (inter)activities, known and unknowable, in the same manner: as the mysterious other(ness). Its own pattern collection and processing placed (projection outside of self) in the position of observer, even what is observed is part of the congruity that makes this observation probable. What it then interprets as a Will outside of self {external to its patterned congruity, in constant (inter)activity} is, actually, its own automated patterns, (inter)acting in the way they always have been to produce awareness of otherness, and then of themselves.
Their assumed “inevitability” is a twofold product of hindsight, and of the probabilities caused by its own patterned congruity; their, seeming, willfulness, as if they were following some Divine principles, is actually the simplified interpretation of probability, as inevitability.
Evolving self-consciousness, taking the position of detached observer of its own consciousness {its own patterned (inter)activity, (re)acting, relating, to world}, begins to “know self” as otherness, relating to otherness not belonging to self (congruity of patterns creating an ambiguous, incomplete, unity). It then begins to realize that these patterns are really automatic processes part of its own Becoming, which are focused upon an objective/idea(l) by Will – Will is the focus of known and unknown, controlled and automated patterns upon a goal.
Then, finding similarities, patterns outside self which correspond to a pattern participating in the congruity of self, it makes the leap of faith, reasoning, and assumes that the similarity (partial and superficial as it may be) corresponds to a universal rule, where all patterns are directed, focused by some mysterious Will.
At first this leap also assumes a goal, a universal movement (motive) towards an objective – which it calls meaning/purpose/morality (God), and finally is given a more sophisticated/abstracted symbol and is called telos.
Then it advances towards the elimination of a telos, placing the end in the beginning – nihilistic inversion, re-interpreting this end/telos as immanence, as thing-in-itself, as Deus.
Its own congruity of patterns, directed by will, is converted to a conduit focusing a Divine Will, as if it was meant-to-be, or inevitable.
This is the conversion of God, as projected Future, into God (Deus), immanent, past projected as inevitable Future – immutable past/nature retains its determinism as determination (now called Creation), but is amplified (echo of past near-absolute Order converted to a crescendo) with the addition of Consciousness, of which organic consciousness is a small part of… a universal focusing Will, of which organic will is a piece of… and the patterns, participating in organic ordering (congruity of patterns), projected outward, as other-than, as if they belonged to another, and are now placed as the Divine Other Being, of which self (Becoming) is but a piece of.
The inevitability of what is present (appears), becomes reason-enough to assume a universal purpose, a directing motive (spirit), as if what-is (apparent, present) was always meant-to-be (inevitable = absolutely probable)… and when the organism, evolving self-awareness, and discrimination (perception of specific patterns independent from Flux) the organism dis-covers the same patterns participating in its own congruity, (inter)acting independent of its congruity, then conveniently assuming, that since this pattern (element = matter/energy) is found in an emerging-unity it calls “self”, directed by reason, focusing on objectives willfully, then this pattern, external from its congruity (Becoming), must also be part of a greater Self, a universal reason, focused by a cosmic Will – then it perceives all congruities, as inevitable (absolutely probable), and all (inter)activities, perceived from an external perspective (observer), are understood by sampling its own growing self-awareness as the standard, concluding that all (inter)activities, of patterns, means all (inter)activities are patterned, and, more than this, that all (inter)activities have intent – the renaming of telos.  


***********

The discovery and appreciation of patterns does not grantee an accurate projection into the future (prediction, preparation).
There is the matte of correctly evaluating the pattern, using precedent, preferably of others, so as to reduce subjective corruption.
There is the matter of integration of patterns into congruities, so as to predict, by understanding greater (more complex) phenomena.
There is the matter of chaos (random interactions) that can never be predicted, because they lack order (a pattern to perceive and integrate) – the mind can take them into account as the unforeseeable, the unknowable, it calls luck/chance – and complexity, patterns so subtle, lost in the complexity of (inter)activity that the mind cannot distinguish them from the overall confusing Flux.
There is the matter of disparity between perception and (inter)action, the lag between perceiving and processing patterns, and the ongoing, ceaseless (inter)activity that waits for nothing, and is always perceived after-the-fact, which means that an (inter)action may occur in that gap between perception and existence – man prepares for such events by training himself to automate (re)activity so as to reduce the necessity for processing; making (re)activity instinctive, more automated – using techniques/technologies.
MANifesto: Economics – Techniques
Intelligence, a group of traits that working in conjunction to perceive, subtle patterns, construct intricate abstractions by integrating them into a harmonious unity (noumenon), and then using the imagination, project this mental construct in anticipation, preparing by bringing into focus all of the organisms aggregate energies, thusly multiplying their effect (synergy).
This method does not produce certainty, as no absolute is possible, but it increases probability, and therefore, by the outcome does it judge its own performance – again, a looking back, so as to adjust, and prepare for the next similar event.
This process is ongoing, like (inter)activity (existence) – a constant adaptation, increasing probability not creating certainty.
What benefits/costs are accrued become part of the past/nature – they become precedent – to be used in future evaluation.
The degree the projection was contradicted by the actual event, determines the degree of error, and insinuates, over repetitions, the quality of the mind at work – of course, this process is corrupted when the cost/benefits are intervened upon by some external, to the organism, will, such as a protective parent, teacher, or a social system.
Without the full benefits/costs affecting the organism its adjustments need not be severe – it begins to atrophy, becoming complacent, cynical (humorous/sarcastic dismissal of all, as nonsensical, as irrelevant, inconsequential), because nothing seems to affect it to a degree that would make it consider it serious, it becomes presumptuous, expecting its error to be a universal truth, never disrupted, or ending... in other words a certainty.
Anxiety/Fear decreases, the mind reduced to the level of a child (care-free, care-less), and detachment from world begins, since the world no longer affects the organism directly, but only through the mediation of this protective entity, be it parent, church, institution, or state – we can include narcotics, and all mind-numbing effects, but in their case sheltering is not actual, the mind, merely, remaining ignorant of the coming costs, and not being protected from them.                    
 

***********


There is no omnipotence, no omniscience, no perfect health, no normality, no absolute whatsoever, there are only varying degrees of these concepts (describing/referring to conditions of Becoming), determined by, and in relation to, the objective world, if, and when, (inter)activities are not mitigated by an external, to the actor (acting organism), protective Will, altering the cost/benefit balances.
The most objective way to determine which noumenon, which subjective interpretation of it, is in harmony with world (objective reality) is to permit the choices made, based on the noumenon themselves, to proffer the individual organism the full benefits and costs of their application – a second method, if the first is not possible, is to project, using the imagination by using precedent, potential cost/benefits if the particular noumenon, are to be permitted to (inter)act with no mitigating entity with world, directly.



_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 14431
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Objective <> Subjective Thu Mar 17, 2016 3:19 pm

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

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

Experiences, both first- & second-hand are the establishment of a precedence-pool of knowledge, making it possible to dis-cover patterns in this precedent to establish probabilities.
Difference between first & second hand knowledge can be restated, here, as indicating experiences one is affected by the cost/benefits personally, and ones whose cost/benefits are appreciated but not experienced personally - detached appreciation increase the probability of objectivity, but at the loss of an intimate sensation with the phenomenon... and is reliant on the mind's quality, motive, and imagination.
This pool of experiences can now be analyzed (memory) so as to determine potential (probable) Future cost/benefits, without ever being certain, gaining the advantage of choice.
If the mitigating effects of an external entity, affecting cost/benefit, is impossible, or deemed undesirable, then imagination must be sued to eliminate its influence and allow cost/benefits to affect the individual noetically, gaining third-hand knowledge. To direct imagination the individual can sample second-hand experiences from those who were affected, to a degree, by cost/benefits with no mitigating entity.      
 

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

******


Existence is dynamic, Dynamism is existence.
Static, even when it is implied as a possibility, is a description of non-existence.
We name this dynamism "energy", or ascribe to it a lower rate of dynamic and call it "matter".
The dividing, ambiguous, line separating energy from matter is the metabolic rate of the organism observing and formulating categories, in this case the human being.

To be "thrown into existence", using Heidegger's metaphorical language, is to awaken to this dynamism, this constant (inter)activity, which is senses, on a primal level as need/suffering.

Constant (inter)activity, this existential state of dynamic movement, is what is referred to as "overflowing".
Ever-flowing from the perspective of a funnelling Will, is an over-flowing.

To clarify...
Will is the focusing of an organization (organism) upon an object/objective; the directing of aggregate energies {patterns (inter)acting} creating an internal; dynamic separated from the external by a porous, ambiguous, barrier (skin, exoskeleton) delineating the domain the organism claims as self.
This "domain" is space/time possibilities, organized into probabilities: the individual's authority, sovereignty, constantly reaffirmed and expanded – in relation to the organism strength/power - bringing the organism in constant conflict with world, and internally as each organ, each cell, asserts itself in relation to other organs and cells participating in the emergent-unity we call organism.
Over time this internal conflict settles upon a low grade antagonism – the organism by ordering harmonizes the participating patterns to a level where synergy can benefit the emergent whole - but never absolutely.
Agon contrary to other(s), is also an internal agon to attain the highest degree of order.
All life is dependent on establishing dominance over arche, principles that exist before and after awareness of existence.
Principles, laws, are descriptions of patterns, (re)acting to particular circumstances (rules of conduct), and/or simply (inter)acting.
To be-come, to come-to-Be, come-into-Becoming, master of your own domain is to hold power over your own patterns, and the principles that govern their relationships – disciplining self to awareness.
This is what is called willing.
The disciplining (control) of internal (inter)activities, as these have been determined by past/nature, is to funnel them, focus them, like a lens focuses light, towards an object/objective (Will to...Power).
The Will can do no more than direct as much of this internal energy, without shattering, as such it acts like a dam, directing a river's waters towards or away – allowing these energies to pool/collect (libidinal), is called will-power (self-control, power to wheel) and then to release them intentionally (passion = erotic/thyumotic).
Intentionality may be confused, allowing energies to spill out indiscriminately, or focused upon its object/objective, allowing the full force of this spilling power to come to bear upon this object/objective – it can be destructive to this otherness, if this other is fragile, or surprised by the surge.
Lucidity is the clarification (clearing away, cleanliness, the hallmark of a sovereign nobility) of the object/objective – its discrimination among otherness – it is to un-cover, dis-cover, re-veal, what is buried, lost in the confusion of otherness.
The organism has no possibility of arresting this constant dynamism, even if some Nihilists propose this state of "peace" as their highest life-hating idea(l).
The awareness of this absence of choice, in the matter, is indicated by the term "throwness" as part of what he called dasein.
On a simpler, more Judeo-Christian, level we can understand this as the absence of choice in being born, or choosing which place and from what parents to be born to, which implies a being outside appearances – a soul, being the living representation of the more scientific particle, atom: indivisible, immutable, monad of Being... the favourite mythology of all binary thinkers - (1) casting (0) as the "evil" negator/denier of the absolute.
To be born, into the world, is to be taken by the awareness of the flow (Flux).
Flow is Flux with a linear direction (un-dimensional, or tri-dimensional) – from the perspective of life (life on earth, to be more precise).
Dimensions indicate the field of awareness of projected possibilities/probabilities, given the (inter)activity of self-ordering (Becoming), which produces fragmentation (complexity) and randomness (chaos), as a by-product of (inter)activity – internal and external.
Within this field of awareness, with the perceptual-event-horizon representing the falling away of awareness, the limit of sensual acuity and pattern recognition; a noetic barrier is created (the concept of wholeness is based here), as if the world ended there.
Light as the extreme point of cognition, perceived as a brilliance with no distinguishing patterns within it (whiteness is the entire spectrum as one).
Light is the most dynamic energy the human brain can process, and as such it created a cognitive field of awareness – representing all of existence.
To bring into light, is a metaphorical way of saying to bring into awareness, or to pull into a mind’s perceptual-event-horizon what lies outside it, or beyond its cognitive barrier.
To un-cover, re-veal, is to shed the light of perception into the darkness of hidden, in the dark, patterns.
Patterns are never, actually, hidden, they are always present, apparent, but the observing mind fails to perceive them – as if they were concealed intentionally… ergo, to deny what one perceives, as “superficial”, is to intentionally choose to blind one's self to the present, the apparent – intentionality, here, comes from the organism's Will (internal), or from an alien Will: communal Will, state Will (external) – externally willed blindness is also called institutionalization, and/or indoctrination.
Intent is to be motivated, to Will one's self towards an object/objective. In this case the will directs the mind towards darkness, blindness, returning what was brought to light back to darkness, rejection of world, by exploiting its naturally occurring anxieties/fears before the uncertainty of world, as ceaseless (inter)activity.


******

To be noble is to hold dominion over the patterns participating in your Becoming, and to accept the consequences of their (inter)activity, directing them to towards an object/objective {(idea(l)} that accords, is in harmony/agreement, with the principles that govern their (inter)actions.

Will, funnelling excess energies (libidinal), towards an object/objective aligned with past/nature - acting as conduit, restricting to increase its force (Hellenic Asceticism), and not restricting to stop the flow (Nihilistic/Modern asceticism).
Excess is what is left-over once the consequences of internal (inter)activity are returned to their past/nature relationships - healing of how organs (cells) relate, as tried and tested, and established as automatic (innate).
Synergy produces a multiplication of aggregate energies, the surplus called libidinal are directed/funnelled, by Will, towards an object/objective.
The advantage synergy offers later evolves into the heterosexual reproduction method, and social behaviour.
Morality becomes the study, the bringing to light, of the principles governing relationships, and/or (inter)actions.

Awareness of these principles is what we call Philosophy.
Principles relating to living and non-living (inter)activity - wisdom.
Given that principles can only refer to patterned (inter)actions, philosophy is a amalgamation of science (study of patterns, creating cohesive models), and art (allusion to what cannot be included into a cohesive model) - the utility of metaphor and mythology is evident here, as the bridging between science and art which is really another bridging of mind/body, and/or exoteric/esoteric, subjectivity/objectivity.


_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 14431
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Imitation Tue Mar 22, 2016 10:17 am

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

Subjectivity as imitation, reflection, of the objective.

Mental processes attempt to replicate the external, to it, processes - the noumenon reflecting/imitating the phenomenon, constructing a simplified/generalized representation (abstraction).
Bonini's Paradox
The subjective attempts to imitate the objective, but it has to reduce it to a manageable level - so it encodes it.

Nihilism is the conscious or unconscious mistaking of the imitation, the counterfeit, for the actual, the real - the preference for the more manageable, more convenient subjective, as representation of nothing but itself, or another's, or grouping of other subjectivities: inter-subjectivity.
This is the self-referential modern world of artificiality.  

All IS a social construct means this: all refers to another, or group of other abstractions, preferably the second because value is now measured numerically (quantity) - it has an innate, starting, value of one.
Intellectual integrity becomes a desire to be popular, fame, and fortune as a tangible benefit of this fame: popular appeal, positive communal appreciation.
To accomplish the latter one must make the other feel appreciated (reciprocity) feel good (hedonism), feel hope (salvation) - all is politics, using psychology to manipulate and bring-out, and bring-about, from esoteric worlds, what lies, and lies, in hiding.

If noumenon is all that matters, the subjective unlimited by any objective world, then words, as representation of the representation, becomes magical means towards this populist end.
It does not matter what reality is, all that matters is how many agree on what it is - shifting trends, fashion, shifting reality - change is "good" because ti is an expression of a community motive, movement towards an agree(able) objective.
The world as nature/past is refused its relevance.    


***

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

Feminine (females of social organisms) inclination towards the inter-subjective is related to her reproductive role, which necessitates stable, safe, cooperative environments.
Her sexual role, evolved the psychology of passive aggression (repressed/controlled fight/flight), first to not fight/flee an approaching male, necessary for heterosexual reproduction, and then tolerate his physical (later to develop to include mental, via the sperm of words) penetration, then evolving into social survival strategies.
The feminine spirit is inclined towards anything that promotes and mainlines group harmony and cohesion, or expands the group to make it more sheltering.
Her natural subjectivity is expressed as tolerance of all perspectives, that do not disturb the whole, as equally valuable, because her goal is not to expose reality, but to conceal it, and to find a way to cope within it.


***


Schopenhauer, Arthur wrote:
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.


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


Unable to see, the average mind requires community to think, and approval to accept what it sees; unable to interpret, to find patterns, it adopts the popular, shared, interpretation, modifying it slightly to personalize it, retaining the identification of "free-thinker".
This slight modification is memetic mutations manifesting in a multiplicity of variants of the same virus, the same memetic dis-ease.
The virus preserves its uniformity and sense of Independence, by personalizing itself to accommodate all psychologies into its communal psychosis.

Social sheltering, the herd psychology, may create a cocoon within which the individual can escape (inwardly into inter-subjectivity) but the world is not affected, not changed, by this method of dealing with it.
In the end, like the skin, or any exoskeleton, it does not suffice to create a perfect barrier between the organizing organism and the disorganizing, world in Flux.
The entire system must adjust, periodically, incorporating and reinterpreting within its own established contexts, what it cannot evade.
The process of integrating the unavoidable, so as to not disturb the established harmony of inter-subjective delusion, is one of a slow acceptance, similar to the grieving process, where the end result is the feeling that what was once denied and denounced, as ridiculous, was always considered self-evident.
Past error is converted, in true Nihilistic style, into another example of its own "genius" - defeat averted by reinterpreting it into another victory.
When words, symbolizing noumena, need not adhere to a limiting phenomenon, they can be shaped into any form required to preserve, to save, to conserve...and then it will be renamed and called "progress".  



_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 14431
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Objective <> Subjective Wed Mar 23, 2016 9:09 am

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

From the simple graph we can appreciate the fact that the past/nature cannot be changed, intervened upon, ignored, nor returned to.
To know and understand it is not to accept it as desirable, but to use it to inform your projections forth, as object/objective, goal, as motive and movement towards an idea(l), that will shape my (re)activity.

A fool pretends the past/nature (sum of all nurturing) does not apply to the present, the more immediate past/nature, and that it does not affect projections into the future.
To explore past/nature, describing it as it is, finding patterns in the data to make it comprehensible, to increase understanding of it, does not mean one adopts it as the idea(l) nor that one rejects it as irrelevant.
World must be endured, not reinterpreted, covered up, and forgotten.
To explore the world, honesty, and courageously, is to bring to light what lies hidden, buried, in the dark - it is to un-conceal.
This is the necessary first step before one formulates a (re)action to it, in relation to it.

Moderns have been infected by the easy solution of changing your perspective, for so long, that any comment on past/nature, on world and reality as it is, is accompanied with the conviction that it is agreed with, because this is what they do to cope with what they cannot escape.
To speak of and explore past/nature, describing ti as it is, is the same, as adopting ti as a desirable, in their minds, because they are inclined to dismiss and reject, and pretend that it is not there, when what is revealed does not fit into their projected desired outcome.
As such modernity, as the most up-to-date, variant of Nihilistic dis-ease, is a constant fleeing from past/nature, and from intellectual discourse about the objective world {immutable determining past/nature), into their fantasies and an exploration of their shared subjectivity - inter-subjectivity; an endless appreciation of their creative subjectivity, unleashed upon the world when no determined restrictions from past/nature are accepted.
They live in the perpetually shifting space/time represented by {A} on the graph - the immediate, shallow past/nature which they call nurturing, or the "moment" the present, the now.
This constant maintenance within the {A} is what is called progress, as it demands a constant adopting of the most current, up-to-date, popular, fashionable, trending, subjectivity - this is why they claim to like change, though it is inevitable and requires no liking or disliking, no urging, no belief.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 14431
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Objective <> Subjective Mon Mar 28, 2016 7:07 pm

There's no way of evading the time/space continuum, the ongoing Flux.

From the time of your birth, when you begin experiencing your condition, to the time of your death, when the experience ends, though the Flux goes on, the accumulated fragmentation and chaos is the cost you pay for the benefit of life, the benefit of experiencing the Flux as need/suffering.
Wisdom informs us that you can postpone payment of need/suffering, but you cannot escape it - either in increments, or in lump sums, you will pay, or you will stop payments and you will cease enjoying the benefit.

This can be transferred to all aspects of human existence.
A young boy having not the burden/benefit of a present and dominant masculine figure, a father figure to overcome and mature through his challenging presence, will, later in life, surrender to father figures, or to overbearing authoritarian masculine entities, abstract or corporeal.
This postponed challenge can prove to be decisive in its impact, because alternative masculine figures may not be as caring about the boy's welfare, sharing no genes with him and possessing no deep investments to limit the extent of the dominance and its expression.

The dominance will be as shallow and caring as the motives of the masculine father-figure.
The boy, sensing this lack of true sympathy may rebel against all authority father-figures, releasing his vengeance, for a missing and necessary part of a boy's development, upon all masculine figures that do not exhibit a boyish naivete, and an adolescent anxiety full of secret fears.

For a more delicate boy, a more feminine one, the absence of a father-figure, early in life, will instill in him a longing for what it missed and knows not what, or why. He will find and cling onto the first entity, abstract or corporeal, that provides this overbearing, yet caring, fatherly sense of security and control - through it be fake and shallow.
The attachment may prove stifling, as the fatherly entity has no intent of letting his charge go, unlike a father who, under the pressure of his own mortality hopes for his son's liberation, and surpassing.            
Fatherly love, harsh and sometimes cruel, may turn to a fake friendship, hiding a inferiority/superiority dynamic, compensating for it with extreme delicacy and tolerance approaching patronizing duplicity.

The natural processes broken, or postponed, the boy never experiences the cycles of coming of age, during a time when his mind/body are still pliable and not as rigid and weighed down by ego.
His sense of self will never go through the required stages of humility, before his own blood, to make him wise and noble.
Instead he will jump straight into "maturity" with the appreciation of a boy that has never earned what he achieves, and with no past experiences to guide him he will become unduly proud and resentful towards everything and everyone who reminds him of this missing part of his necessary rites of passage.           


***


Trauma is, often, the consequence of unforeseen events, multiplying the effects of Flux upon organism, and/or it is the consequence of postponed costs, allowed to accumulate.
Gradual attrition of increasing chaos may become a sudden, shattering, event in space/time, leaving behind it an organism in pieces, or broken beyond repair.
Recuperation may take a long time, if it succeeds at all, nevertheless the event will leave its mark, like a windstorm upon a seedling.
Healing can be strengthening, thickening, or it may result in warping, a corruption of mind and body.  

An organism may stop growing, remaining stuck in the moment of the event's impact, forever reliving it as if it were recent (retardation); it may begin growing sideways, or backwards, not up towards the sun, but back inward, downwards, into the earth, wanting to hide from all possible future events, forever lost in its own image before the pain (narcissism); it may split in two, each part growing separately as if belonging to a different organism (schizophrenia); it may bend and then turn upward again, the curvature a reminder of its past.


***


Islamic Jihadists reminds us of the dangers of permitting imbeciles the comforts of their own subjective parity.
Permit the masses to believe they are respectable, no matter what they think, and the mutations of the mind you leave uncorrected will grow to quantitative monstrosities drowning all quality in their wake, choking everything that has not grown above it.
The solution will then have to be more severe and dangerous, if it is no longer possible to think of solutions for issues allowed to flourish under an idealistic umbrella of emotionalism.
So severe that bigger monsters will have to be evoked to deal with what has been permitted to grow with no limitations.

If the underbrush is not burned away with continuous lightning strikes, and are permitted to spread and grow, the coming forest fire will burn more than bushes.      

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 14431
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Objective <> Subjective Tue Mar 29, 2016 7:15 am

Imagine a marble rolling in a multi-dimensional rut.

Dimensions = possibilities of (inter)action

Marble = pattern
Rut = space/time or sum of all patterned and non-patterned energies - environment

Energy = dynamic (inter)activity

The marble's aggregate energy, in relation with environment determines its direction of flow - its mass creating its own path-of-least-resistance.
Marble (inter)acting with other patterns in a constant dynamic = existence.

Now, imagine another marble (M1) which begins to (inter)act with first marble (M2) so that in conjunction with it their aggregate energies establish a new "least" (power).
M1 & M2 patterns in relative harmony, in agreement.

Their synergy will now flow along the path-of-least-resistance together, and their combined patterns will now relate to the other patterned and non-patterned energies in a symbiotic/sympathetic unity, which may appear, to an external observer, as if they were wilfully choosing to do so or that some internal/innate force was keeping them together; as if some mysterious, divine, motive were urging them to remain relating to one another in relation to other patterned and non-patterned energies.

After a period of sympathetic/symbiosis each pattern will, through attrition, acquire the aggregate energies in relation to the partner pattern, to make their conjunction more balanced - extraneous energies lost to the friction cased by earlier disharmony/disagreement.
This will decrease the resistance caused by (inter)acting with one another, while the resistance of what remains outside their sympathetic/synergistic unity will remain the same - fluctuating.
The two patterns will now remain attached to their (inter)action, until a force in excess of their aggregate energies forces them apart.
Two, or more, such patterned sympathetic/synergistic unities are what we call particles, and/or elements, or the various types of matter/energy.

If and when such a unity develops iteration we have the beginning of the possibility for what we call life.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 14431
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Objective <> Subjective Tue Mar 29, 2016 10:09 am

Objectivity = coming to a judgment, opinion of probability {perspective}, by sampling the greatest amount of data, from as diverse a source group as possible.
Subjectivity = coming to a judgment, opinion of probability{perspective} , by sampling a singular, most often your own, or a limited - wilfully, or not - source group.  

The quality of the source data should be taken into consideration when evaluating the quantity of sources - discriminating and emphasizing quality over quantity so as to establish reliability.
Reliability = order - consistency of outcomes (superior probability).

Quantity = amount of sources, and the data, stimulation, they provide
Quality = data evaluated by its details (quantity of details) and how they refer to observable, phenomena (quantity of noetic connections to the phenomenal world).
Quality is evaluated by if and how well the data can be integrated into a single mental model which retains its relationship to the observable, sensually perceived (phenomenal) objective world (past/nature manifesting as presence/appearance).

Organism then applies its judgment, by projecting it as a goal, or by preparing for it as a soon to be part of the immutable determined/determining past, (subjective processing and analysis), and the outcome {objective world - (inter)activity} determine's its quality of judgment = success/failure, intent {benefit - goal, motive, idea(l)}, and cost {degree of divergence}.
Quality of Judgment will be evaluated by other minds as reliability - authority based on "Right is Might".

The alternate method of establishing authority "Might is Right" begins by intervening upon world (phenomena) to then determine judgment quality (noumenon), in relation to the quantity of minds participating in the intervention.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 14431
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Objective <> Subjective Wed Mar 30, 2016 9:04 am

Past is both determined, in the sense that it can no longer be changed {sum of all (inter)actions}, and determining, in the sense that it manifests as presence, the apparent, which a conscious organism interprets (subjectivity), evaluates, knows and may understand, given that understanding is the (re)cognition of patterns within the known (data), giving the known (first-hand/second-hand experiences) “meaning”.

Objectivity refers to this immutable determined/determining past, made into an objective so as to explore it, know it, and understand it.
Objective refers to a direction taken, a movement towards (motive). It can either be a projection of accumulated knowledge/understanding into future {idea(l), goal}, or the making of past/nature into the focus of study to find, within it, knowledge and understanding.
In both cases objective refers to a destination.
To make reality/world into an objective is to make it a destination to explore, know, and understand, interpreting its manifestations.
Overcoming individual limitations in knowing/understanding the organism may sample second-hand, and/or third-hand knowing/understanding (experiences), juxtaposing it with its own and then with the apparent, the ongoing past/nature made present.      
Meaning = evaluation of past, being perceived as apparent, future manifestations – it is a word referring to an organism’s capacity to project, what it has accumulated as knowledge/experiences, into future as predicted probabilities.
The conscious organism uses experience to pre-empt the future consequences of the ongoing (inter)activity (Flux), gaining efficiency in preparation, and gaining an increase (enhanced) focus (will) and application of its aggregate energies.
To these it ascribes a “value” (qualitative judgment), or a degree of projected probability, and gives it a numerical code, in the case of an organism, like man, with a broader, and deeper, perceptual-event-horizon.  
Value is an assessment of a pattern’s or a congruence of patterns, quality in relation to (inter)activity (Flux) – an assessment of their constitution, their order(ing) within the Flux; their utility to the organism.
Utility being an evaluation of reliability (order = repeating, predictability), and effect, relating to need/suffering or movement towards an objective {idea(l)}.
Repeating, replicating, the essence of order(ing), as it pertains to life, as self-order(ing) within contradicting (inter)activity of patterned (order = consistent) and non-patterned (chaos = randomness) Flux.
An organism interprets presence, the apparent, giving it meaning and value, in relation to its own motives (movement towards), its own goal as this is dictated by its need/suffering – the sensation of Flux upon its organizing.
Need/Suffering may be immediately (re)acted to, such as with simpler organisms, where the motive is as simple as the continuous correction (healing) and accumulation (collection) of energies required to deal with the ongoing Flux, or it may be postponed, using a longer time-frame, where the organism may even relinquish the demands of its own wellbeing so as to direct itself, or a unity of organisms towards a goal (objective) it has evaluated highly, in that it has found in it deeper meaning and has appreciated it as having a higher value; value as a comparison to the motives of other organism and in reference to Flux, and the endurance of it.
Past is not escaped, but it may be misinterpreted, ignored (selectively or totally), forgotten (lethe), dismissed (rejected), as irrelevant, and buried, under symbols/words (covered by the symbols referring to them, not to reveal but to conceal), but it can never be contradicted because it is manifesting as presence, which the organism perceives and interprets as apparent, as that which appears.
Past/Nature challenges the organism to be interpreted as precisely (correctly) as possible, and to then alter its direction (slight modification due to willful intervention) once patterns predicting direction are discovered, or to adapt to it, altering self (ego) in relation to it (self-control, self-cultivation), and/or to cope with it, accepting the immutability of past/nature, by facing it completely and directly (part of self-cultivation).
Self-Control = gathering and directing aggregate energies (patterns), or what is in excess of what is required to heal the attrition of flux upon the organism.
Self-Cultivation = increase in the quality of patterns required (judgment based on awareness) participating in the organism’s congruity, as (re)action to the shifting dynamics of (inter)activity (Flux)  

The presence of past is also called world, or reality, or nature as the sum of all past (inter)activity (nurturing being the most recent past).
The quality of the organism’s interpretation (subjectivity) of what is present, or apparent, will determine its own future, motivated by its own objective, which in its simplest, primal, form is self-preservation, and may later evolve past it towards higher objectives, such as self-growth, self-expansion beginning with reproduction – re-peat what has proven itself in time/space (natural selection).  
What is re-produced is what has been judged as being reliable, as in order which has remained relatively resistant to the attrition of (inter)active Flux – this is where the appreciation of symmetry (beauty), of mind/body, applies.  

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 14431
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Objective <> Subjective Wed Mar 30, 2016 11:11 am

Science deals with patterns – that which is perceptible, and produces techniques/technologies as extensions of how patterns are known and understood, reflecting the biological process of assimilation and reproduction/replication.
Spirituality deals with what is unperceived, claiming to know the mind of God, absolute order, the all-encompassing pattern (singularity), or it indirectly symbolizes (metaphor) what is incomprehensible, reducing it to a code the organism can process (know and seek patterns within = understand, find meaning, utility).
Science cannot integrate chaos (randomness) into its abstractions, its linguistic/numerical codes, excluding it from theories.
Chaos has no meaning, no utility, in that it cannot be used to predict future – what confronts this desire/need to predict, prepare, and reproduce.
Philosophy, if it has integrity and courage, if it is honest (honourable) in its intent (motive), cannot ignore chaos (unpredictable predictable), as the (inter)active (existing) which exhibits no expectedness, reliability, repeating consistency. If it fails to do so it becomes another spirituality, assuming a universal pattern, or a science that cannot exceed its utility as collection and processing of patterns – extension of body as mind, replicating (reproducing) self in world, or as world.
Philosophy as an amalgamation of science and art, integrates spirituality as the indirect expression and appreciation of what is mysterious, or inconceivable – that which lacks order – and like an artist/scientist the philosopher uses science (study and understanding of (inter)acting patterns) to indirectly (metaphorically) expose a reality that no ordering mind can directly.
Spirituality, of the Abrahamic kind, by assuming absolute order, or that all hides an underlying pattern, implies that the “mind of God” is knowable, presenting self as the conduit of this knowledge – sometimes claiming to also understand it.
Self (ego) projected as the technique/technology that is timeless, possessing innate value, utility, meaning, and the particular as the superior expression of this utility (priest), and the one who can accurately perceive and translate/decipher (interpret) what, for most, lies beyond their perceptual-event-horizon.
In this all-is-ordered paradigm even the chaotic is converted into another form of order – either as complexity, or as an intimate symbol reflecting individual anxiety (reactivity) towards world as Flux.
Devil/Satan and 0, nil are the spiritual and scientific symbols representing this assumption.    
In this case both Abrahamic spirituality and Science share a Nihilistic leaning, as they assume what they seek, and assume it to be an end (telos) – potentially knowable (omniscience).
This is particularly so when science takes its symbols (representations) literally, like Abrahamic spirituality does, and not figuratively (approximations reflecting biological methods).
Spirituality precedes philosophy, and science follows it. As such this literal approach to the codes/representations of science reverts science back to spirituality, circumventing philosophy altogether – reflecting the process of mind circumventing nervous system and reverting back to body.

Science = mind (exoteric)
Philosophy = nervous system, including brain (integrative, connective)
Spirituality = body (esoteric)

Abrahamic model...
Father (absolute order) – Past/Nature
Holy Ghost (spirit) – Nervous System
Son (Jesus) – Reason (man)

Bastardization of the Platonic spirit (charioteer).
Rider = Reason (mind)
Reigns (will: control/connectivity/cohesion) = nervous system
Steeds (black/white) = passions (nature/past) – to know past/nature is to know self (know thyself).

The symbolic hierarchy is not accidental it is indicative of intent, of the psychological approach towards existence – movement towards world.
The Abrahamic (nihilistic) model places nature/past as the knowable/unknown authority (often worshiped as divine, good) dominating nervous system suppressing, directing reason with its demands (law, commandment).
Secular humanism eliminates past/nature as god, leaving man to submit reason to his nervous system, which he fails to comprehend (the most intimate part made mystical), relegating it in the position of mysterious divinity, in place of past/nature (god). Human nervous (re)actions to Flux dictate reason’s conclusions (hedonism, the pleasure principle = need/suffering determining reason) – reverting to an animal state of pure (re)activity to stimuli, with self-preservation the prime concern/care (motive).
God (past/nature) is replaced by brain and nervous system, which is always (re)active to the immediate (Modern), guided by no past/nature, nor limited by it – born a clean slate (no baggage, nothing to shame or limit self-identification and all choices are made possible, in theory, godliness)  

Spirit (soul) is exposed as another word/symbol for past/nature manifesting as the apparent, as present – ergo the spirit of a situation/event/circumstance, or of an individual (self/ego), or an intent (wilful movement towards a goal, such as art) is that which underlies the apparent as past/nature.
Spirit is “timeless” (immortal) as it resides outside space/time (Flux) and is immune to change, interventions, and past/nature is boundless, with no end.
To say that “soul of a man lives on” is to anthropomorphize soul to mean self, indicating that the past (congruence of patterns), which the individual is the manifestation of, will continue on, after his death, to the degree that his presence has made an impact – his (inter)activity reverberating in all patterned and non-patterned Flux, like waves causes and left behind by a stone impacting an ocean’s surface.      
The benefits are psychosomatic for an organism dependent on order, and on accurately and effectively perceiving assimilating it to cope with Flux; the cost is arrogance, and/or delusion, that may approach the level of derangement, compensating for organic need/suffering.
Fear of chaos is essentially fear of death – the dis-ordering of organism.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 14431
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Objective <> Subjective Thu Mar 31, 2016 10:35 pm

Objectivity is not some thing out there, some God out there, determining the future - it is manifest in presence, continuously appearing to the subjective mind, and interpreted sensually - genetic/memetic memory, applicable only to living organisms (self-organizing, where "self" means this aggregate of patterns in congruity, iterating).
The subjective interpreting consciousness integrates this data to adjust its focus (direction) and its cost/benefit (efficiency - effectiveness), either as raw data (knowledge) or by finding patterns in this data projected as probability (understanding).
Whereas non-living patterns, in congruity or not, simply (inter)act and relate to one another as patterns, living congruities can focus their aggregate energies upon object/objective (will), directing themselves towards a goal (motive) - the focus informed by experience.
At first trial and error selecting good from bad, and later evolving into judgment/discrimination incorporating broader/deeper perceptual-event-horizons to produce choice.  

The organism, in essence, adds to past/nature which will determine its future - the degree to which it does so is divided into natural/artificial to designate an intervention upon environment exceeding the influence (determining effect) of the environment intervened upon.
By wilfully directing itself along the path-of-more/most-resistance a competitive advantage is sought, and may or may not be attained.
The organism's depth and breadth of perception may also alter its considerations, its motives, forgoing personal survival for a greater purpose, ignoring immediate gratification so as to contribute to the attainment of a bigger goal; the continuance of the ariston, for instance, though it does not, itself, represent it, nor possess the level (potential) of its particular traits.
 

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 14431
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Objective <> Subjective Fri Apr 01, 2016 5:43 am

Keeping in mind the previous, we can say that the trillions of organisms participating in the ecosystem we call earth, wilfully impose their patterns upon and within world - each in relation/reaction to the other, and in relation/reaction to lifeless patterns in harmonious congruity.

Due to the lag between consciousness (awareness) and Flux {the result of the time required to collect, process and, in higher organisms, understand (inter)actions} the human brain experiences this after-the-fact (as determined/determining)... as if some divine will were directing it all, because there ARE wills directing (inter)acting, relating... determining past/nature which is then perceived, in hindsight, as if it were inevitable, and/or part of some grand plan (telos), or as if it were part of a universal consciousness.

Life wilfully directs each aggregate of patterns towards its own goals (motive), in relation to other aggregate patterns, and to patterns which are lifeless and are simply (inter)acting as patterns (let us, for now, ignore chaos and non-patterned activity), creating a global community of wills, which in Abrahamic terms is called spirit/soul, but is, in Pagan spirituality, the spirit of the land, of nature: the entirety of wilful movements, (inter)acting, and relating as if guided by a singular purpose - experienced externally, as observer, as "whole".
The hierarchies, balances created with this continuous agon, is what is metaphorically converted to the pantheon.
In Judeo-Christian/Islamic spiritual nihilism, this is converted to the human need for immortality, morality, purpose, meaning, into the singular mono-God - lord and dictator of universe (he who dictates the verse, the word): man perceiving his own desire as some Holy other.  
Secular continuance from this nihilistic spiritual tradition (antipathy for existence, past/nature) converts this Divine Other into an abstraction he can exclude self, and all selves, from - humanity, for example, converted from a sexual identifier, a species category, into a spiritual, abstraction, contradicting the phenomenon.
Here quantities of subjective minds cooperate to create an alternate "reality" in opposition, to what they cannot assimilate, tolerate, endure.
Converting phenomena into noumena, and then detaching them from their references, is the same as converting resources into token, money, and then detaching this symbol (abstraction) from its references to resources - money deified, like words, symbols, have been.
Magical power of tokens, icons, symbols...words - but the "magic" has an effect only among those who are integrated, indoctrinated, educated, into these abstractions with no references - inter-subjective power.
From then on references to "world" are references to humanity, and references to "reality" are references to manmade environments - philosophy becomes the study of human politics, psychology, and relationships: cosmos converted to uni-verse, and everywhere man looks, he perceives his projection reflected back...enslaved in noetic prisons, and happy to be "inside" (esoteric) rather than "outside" (exoteric) where it can be dangerous.  
Esoteric, self-reflection (narcissism), no longer informs in relation to the exoteric, but is content to reflect back, containing (veritas), immersing itself in its own devices and artifices - its own abstractions referencing other abstractions.  
Instead of un-covering (aletheia) it begins concealing, constructing safe, ordered, intimate settings to hide within...to cover one's self with, hoping the cosmos will not see him, will not (inter)act with him without his consent.
This is seductive to all those who cannot cope - attracting the majority, particularly those born within sheltering environments, to unfit genes, and/or infected by nihilistic memes.  

Man being the organism that can impose its will on other organisms and upon lifeless patterns looks back upon his interventions as if they belonged to another Being, because often he, as an individual, had minimal participation in this intervention, but more than this, man imposes his will upon lifeless patterns, (lacking will, purpose, motive) by projecting into them his own: anthropic principle.
For him every pattern in congruity, in relative harmony, is governed, as he is, by an internal, secret purpose, motive, will, perceived externally.
Here the phenomenon of patterns (inter)acting are interpreted/translated into code the organism can process (its own) and then abstracted into cohesive models (noumena), representing the phenomenon in a manner the organism can relate to - it converts the alien into its own bio-codes, mistaking this process as belonging to the phenomenon itself - this is how, over time, words, as symbols for noumena, become the tokens of human exchange, and which, in time, nuder the effects of nihilistic psychosis, are detached from phenomena, just as money was detached from the tangible gold standard, allowing the symbolism of money to acquire magical effects, not upon world but in minds participating in these memetic exchanges and conversions.
World of man buries world in its symbols, codes, contrivances, exchanges {memetic, socioeconomic, political (inter)actions}.

Human consciousness awakening to world as Flux, is gripped by care, anxiety, seeing in the (inter)activity myriads of threats to its own unity (ordering).
To cope it converts this unknown, complexity, and randomness, into something intimate, something comprehensible, using self as a standard, after self-consciousness begins to emerge.
This transference of known-self into unknown-other, is part of the bicameral mind and the slow development of consciousness - evolution of awareness.
If the organism is motivated by survival this will determine how it interprets cosmos, and if it is motivated by awareness itself, then its own survival will not factor into its interpretations - courage, psychosomatic constitution and integrity are factors to be includes in the individual organism's qualities.


***********    


The perception of living wilful (inter)actions as if they belonged to a universal mind, eventually leads to the delusion that man's words, can overcome (inter)actions, deeds, most of which lack a motive, and so cannot be reasoned with, coerced, pleaded with, manipulated psychologically using words, nor even understood, in the case of randomness (chaos).
man expects the cosmos to provide for him what he desperately needs to deal with his condition and to understanding it: meaning, purpose, morality, order.
If he becomes aware of their absence, outside himself, he relates to this absence negatively, and verbally/symbolically expresses this (re)action with the word Nihilism.
His own psychological (re)action to the growing awareness that uni-verse can offer no universal morality, meaning, purpose, is converted into a cosmic negative "truth", when it is a positive in that it makes life, and the perception of this absence possible, and burdens life with adapting - creating purpose, meaning, and ethos, in relation, not in opposition, to this cosmos.    

***********    

Philosophy is a method, using abstractions, expressed with symbols/words, metaphors.
Depending no the motive it will provide benefits.

If the motive is to comfort rather than confront, you will use the words accordingly.
Whether you wish to cover rather than uncover, reveal rather than conceal, find comfort rather than clarity, power rather than wisdom, happiness rather than understanding, self-praise (value, appreciation) rather than self-awareness.... will determine how you enter the discipline and how you utilize its tools, its weapons.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 14431
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Objective <> Subjective Fri Apr 01, 2016 12:24 pm

Patterns repeat, as echoes of a past/nature that manifests as presence, appearance.
Tell me of your past and I'll tell you of your future, no mind-reading, magic needed... it is you who tells me all I need to know.

Two ways to break the cycle:

1- Intentional, wilful, exposure to stress.
Stress (pressure), may break the pattern or, preferably, slightly divert it.
Herein lies the power of Will.

2- Unintentional, unforeseen, accidental, exposure to stress.
Same as {1} except the stress is not chosen, and so is not controlled, opening up possibilities: one either is destroyed or adapts/adjusts.

No certainties, no guarantees, no safety-net, no words to twist error into validation... do-or-die.
Re-Adapt, Re-Order, what order was lost (iteration), due to friction (Flux), or shatter, dissolve, become fodder for another ordering.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 14431
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Objective <> Subjective Mon Apr 04, 2016 11:09 am

The subjectivist mind, trapped within the linguistic paradoxes of its self-referential thinking (noumena referring to noumena) convinces itself that by "killing" the noetic connector to the phenomenon, you destroy the phenomenon it represented - conversely, if you convince/seduce/coerce other minds into your subjectivity that you "create" reality.

From this, quantitative standards usurp qualitative standards, replacing the quantities of connectors between noumenon and phenomenon (awareness), with the quantity of connectors between noumena and noumena (popularity) - inter-subjectivity.
Words become magical, when they can affect minds, manipulating emotions (cowardice - anxiety being the mother of emotions), and idiocy (ignorance - shallow perceptual-event-horizon).

The idea(l) God only dies when it no longer infects the minds with its promise, replaced with Humanity as the sum, of minds manifesting God (conviction), and the priest, once more, steps forward as the representative (icon) of this renamed idea(l), for the masses to worship.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Lyssa
Har Har Harr
avatar

Gender : Female Posts : 9035
Join date : 2012-03-01
Location : The Cockpit

PostSubject: Re: Objective <> Subjective Fri May 27, 2016 2:43 am

Satyr wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Hellenic balance between the two.
Let us become a bridge.


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



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

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

"ἐδιζησάμην ἐμεωυτόν." [Heraclitus]

"All that exists is just and unjust and equally justified in both." [Aeschylus, Prometheus]

"The history of everyday is constituted by our habits. ... How have you lived today?" [N.]

*Become clean, my friends.*
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://ow.ly/RLQvm
Lyssa
Har Har Harr
avatar

Gender : Female Posts : 9035
Join date : 2012-03-01
Location : The Cockpit

PostSubject: Re: Objective <> Subjective Tue May 31, 2016 12:56 pm

Gellner wrote:
"Plato believed that there was a correlation between the importance and dignity of a subject on the one hand, and the rigour of kind of thought appropriate to it on the other. This was a plausible supposition, and in a decent, well-managed universe, one trusts that this is how things would indeed be arranged. Trivial, humanly unimportant matters could be dealt with in a logically sloppy and slipshod manner; whereas matters which are of great or ultimate concern to us would be honoured by the highest standards of logical rigour. Thus the decencies and human self-respect would receive their due.

The world which we in fact inhabit is, alas, not at all like this. In it the inverse relationship obtains.

Rigorous techniques are available in many domains which, humanly speaking, are unimportant. Thanks to the rigour of those techniques, a consensus of experts is available in those domains which inspires the respect of onlookers. Many of these domains are rather like heavy-weight boxing: the criterion of excellence, and the manner of determining who satisfies it best, are so clear that there is relatively little room for intrigue, dispute, or disagreement.

The situation is alas quite other in the sphere of those questions that concern us most. Conflicting criteria abound, the manner of their application is obscure, movements proliferate, each of them claims to be in possession of procedures, principles, criteria, which generally re-endorse their own viewpoint and condemn that of their rivals, but which do not really have any evident authority when viewed from outside.

This situation may have multiple roots, but the ones that are specially worth highlighting are those connected not with the human condition in general, but with the special circumstances of western industrial man. Western civilization has two salient features, which have contributed to that unfortunate and humiliating inversion of the Platonic tie-up of rigour and importance. It is based on science and technology; and it is individualistic. The joint implications of these features are not always comfortable.

The individualism manifests itself in what might be called the protestant-Cartesian cognitive ethic: belief and opinion is to be judged before the bar of the individual conscience or consciousness. Assent to belief is ultimately a private and individual matter. The secrecy and loneliness of the ballot-booth only symbolizes the inherent privilege and predicament of private determination of assent or dissent. The cognitive condition of man parallels the constitutional right of the American citizen to possess arms. The reasoning also is parallel: as the firearm at the homestead was intended to be a check on tyranny, so the sovereignty of individual private judgment is meant to be a check on the dogmatism of institutions claiming to possess some kind of monopoly of truth.

As sophisticated and complex weapon systems have replaced individual small arms as the means of coercion, so a similar transformation has also occurred in our cognitive equipment. The protestant-Cartesian cognitive ethic — think for yourself, let all opinion pass before the tribunal of your private, individual consciousness — continues to receive a kind of residual lip-service, but has little inherent plausibility. The individual does not any longer have the illusion that he could possibly pass judgment on all the matters of belief which form the backcloth of his life. One is reminded of the advice given to an English poet by his father: no one can write a poem. Tradition writes it for the poet. All he can hope to do is occasionally to write a line. Thus there is a deep tension between our inherited individualism, which is still important and operative in many aspects of life, and the hard facts of our actual cognitive ecology. It is the tension between what Gaston Bachelard has called the world in which we live and the one in which we think." [The Devil in Modern philosophy]

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

"ἐδιζησάμην ἐμεωυτόν." [Heraclitus]

"All that exists is just and unjust and equally justified in both." [Aeschylus, Prometheus]

"The history of everyday is constituted by our habits. ... How have you lived today?" [N.]

*Become clean, my friends.*
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://ow.ly/RLQvm
Lyssa
Har Har Harr
avatar

Gender : Female Posts : 9035
Join date : 2012-03-01
Location : The Cockpit

PostSubject: Re: Objective <> Subjective Tue May 31, 2016 12:57 pm

Funny stuff.


Gellner wrote:
"The preoccupation and indeed perverse enjoyment of the uncertainty of one’s knowledge of others, similar to that found in Remembrance of Things Past, is also found for instance in an excellent recent novel by M.R.Margerit, Le Dieu Nu. The hero of this work vacillates between three women: his morally rather dubious sister; secondly, a married woman elusive and intriguing only because, as it turns out in the end, she is vacuous and indecisive; and, finally, a forthright, attractive, and intelligible young woman. Despite the obvious superiority of the last, at one stage the hero expresses his rejection of her by exclaiming that, unfortunately, he is no Cartesian: clarity and straightforwardness, however combined with attractive qualities, appeal to him far less than moral mists and ambiguities.

A more elaborate use of the awareness and, in this case, unwillingness to accept precariousness occurs in Anouilh’s Euridice, produced in London as Point of Departure. The author’s use of the Eurydice legend is this: the suggestion is that love actually entails desire for death, this being so because it involves convictions about the relationship which are too ambitious not to be falsified sooner or later, if by surviving one gives the future an opportunity of falsifying them. At the same time, for one in love, the thought of their falsification is hardly bearable. Indeed, even if one did not expect them to be falsified, they might seem tainted by the very possibility. Death is the only means of depriving the uncertain future of its power of tainting the present relationship. For Sartre, on the other hand, death in Huis Clos does not lead to certainty-at-last concerning personality. The ending of the accretion of evidence merely prevents further testing. Death thus ends inquiry without answering the question. This difference between Anouilh and Sartre is probably due to the fact that Sartre’s characters tend to be concerned with qualities such as courage, rather than with fidelity." [The Devil in modern Philosophy]

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

"ἐδιζησάμην ἐμεωυτόν." [Heraclitus]

"All that exists is just and unjust and equally justified in both." [Aeschylus, Prometheus]

"The history of everyday is constituted by our habits. ... How have you lived today?" [N.]

*Become clean, my friends.*
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://ow.ly/RLQvm
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 14431
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Objective <> Subjective Fri Jun 10, 2016 9:35 pm

Philoosphy



1-Objective: all is process – phenomena.
Study of (inter)active patterned (order) and non-patterned (random - chaos) energies/dynamism.
Ontology, Existence, Cosmos.
Body

2-Subjective: Study of how an organism relates to the objective/world – noumena.
Psychology, Politics, Morality, Spirituality.
Mind

Philosophy, if it is honest and courageous, begins from the first and then proceeds to the second, placing the latter within the former's contexts, implications.

3- Semiology: the study of the mode/method/medium of relating/coping/adapting.
Metaphors, Language/Words, Symbols, Art.
How Subjective, relates/connects to Objective - interpretation.      
Nervous System


_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Impulso Oscuro

avatar

Gender : Male Aries Posts : 232
Join date : 2013-12-10
Age : 26
Location : Praxis

PostSubject: Re: Objective <> Subjective Mon Jun 13, 2016 2:27 am

Lyssa wrote:
Satyr wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Hellenic balance between the two.
Let us become a bridge.


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



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

Back to top Go down
View user profile
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 14431
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Objective <> Subjective Mon Jun 13, 2016 2:50 pm

Emotional "reasoning" of the subjective mind that rejects any standard outside its own choices, and preferences, is that with no objective world all concessions must be the product of a shared ideal, interest, or a product of coercion.
Why agree when each mind can believe in whatever it chooses?

The idea that the objective world limits subjective choices, with cost/benefit disciplining the mind, is alien to it in its sheltered existence, where all costs are reduced, or selectively so, and all benefits inflated, selectively so.
The idea that two, or more mind, existing in the same world will reach a common judgment, is alien to a mind that lives in inter-subjectivity, and all choices have minimal costs and infinite possible benefits.
Sheltering reinforces stupidity - like a child protected from the worse consequences of its actions, in time becoming convinced it is invincible and that no matter what it does it does not matter much.
only when the protective umbrella is lifted does a stunted mind realize it is raining, and that the rain may lead to its death.


_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 14431
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Objective <> Subjective Mon Jun 13, 2016 2:53 pm

A stunted, retarded psychology will judge an opinion as wise, as good, when it reveals something "positive" it had not considered - it will judge an opinion the product of evil, when it exposes it to a "negative" it prefers not to think about.

It has no other way to distinguish good from bad.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 14431
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Objective <> Subjective Tue Jun 14, 2016 1:44 pm

Natural Overrule
"Fascist" natural selection is self-correcting.
It imposes itself upon poor humans.
No words, no symbols, no argument, no duplicitous victimology, or verbal acrobatics, can fool the "forces that be", and have been responsible for life since before morons were born to cry "foul", trying to hide in word-games, to self-flatter or to reduce the other, when they have no argument to counter.
In nature there is no debate over subjective/objective, because all live by the full consequences of their own value judgments.
No system there to protect them from their mistakes, saving them from their own stupidity, and cultivating the delusion that there is no "wrong" judgment-call.

In nature each lives by the repercussions of his/hr own choices.
Cost/Benefit suffices.
If you are willing to pay the price, to risk it, then you ought to expect the fullness of the benefit, or the disappointment of a wrong assessment - be careful what you wish for.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 14431
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Objective <> Subjective Tue Jun 21, 2016 7:23 pm

Objectivity, for a realist does not mean the same thing as it does for Moderns
For the realist, the pagan, it means world, reality....
Nothing to do with morality, meaning, purpose, telos, God, or any absolute.
Objectivity is the seeking of patterns in world to adjust the subjective mind to its challenges, to direct himself within it.
Objectivity means clarity - a judgment free of emotion, ego, passion.

Objectivity means meaning, as in connection of phenomena.
Objectivity means seeing the relationship between patterns - meaning.

Though cosmos is flux, it does not change at a rate where life, and consciousness are irrelevant, impossible.
Certain ordering, certain patterns hold true for huge periods of time/space.... in relation to human lifespans they can be thought as eternal.

Pattern is the perception of behaviour that goes beyond the particular phenomenon, the particular pattern, the immediate apparent - it spans patterns, creating a web of causality across time/space - a sequence of temporality.
To be Objective is to perceive these time/pace spanning webs of (inter)activity.
Meaning is seeing this web...and it holds true for all...it is not affected by the individual's subjective, personal tastes.
You either see the patterns or you do not.
You cannot evade the consequences of not seeing the patterns - not seeing the patterns, does not make you immune to them.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 14431
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Objective <> Subjective Tue Jun 21, 2016 7:46 pm

The Modern, trapped in his nihilistic paradigm of absolutes, cannot think of anything without reducing them to the vague abstraction of an absolute.
So, when thinking of morality, or meaning, he must reduce the world to a thing, a whole, and then claim that because it is "infinite", his way of describing what he cannot understand as fluctuating, as lacking absolutes, conceives of morality and meaning as something that applies throughout time/space, which is contained and infinite at the same time.

But that is not hos a pagan thinks of time/space, and subsequently of meaning, morality, and all concepts symbolized by these words.
Meaning means relationship between patterns, which is independent no the subjective mind, and so It is not up to the subjective mind's choice.
The subjective mind wither sees it or does not - but it, most certainly, suffers the consequences of seeing or not seeing.

The "meaning" of lightning, and the connected to thunder by a chain of causality is not up to the subjective mind's tastes and whims.
The subjective mind whether makes the connections or does not, but the rain that follows in the sequence, will get him wet whether he sees or does not - he may even drown unaware of the meaning.

Relationships between patterns, placed in a temporal/spatial sequence, is what we call meaning.
This is not subjectively determined...but is independent of all consciousness.
It is consciousness which is burdened with finding these connections.
It either finds them or suffers the downpour, in total oblivion.



_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 14431
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Objective <> Subjective Tue Jun 21, 2016 10:27 pm

The [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] is the symbol referring to the connection of noumenon to phenomenon or, to put it yet another way, it is the symbol connecting subject to object (subjective representation of objective apparent/present).
This is why you cannot just use any word.
The world and the dictionary limits your options.

The sequence you place the words within a sentence structure, is dictated by the particular language's grammar in relation to reality's causal chain.

None of it is arbitrary, unless you are a Modern imbecile not really interested in seeing world but rather more obsessed with jerking-off.



_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 14431
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Objective <> Subjective Wed Jun 22, 2016 8:34 am

Objective is the goal, the idea(l), inspiring a movement towards it - motivating the organism.
There are realistic idea(l)s, and Nihilistic idea(l)s or ideals rooted in world and ideals completely or partially detached from world.
The former are realizable, possible, the latter because they are detached and to the degree that they are so, are improbable, unrealistic.

If two realists share the same objective, this does not mean they are part of some spiritual movement. It means they share an appreciation for the same realistic ideals, and are motivated by the same goals.


A religion, having advanced from the stage of cult, is only possible among Nihilists, because here the ideal is non-existent, it is in their minds: an abstraction, a noumenon, with no external reference points, and so it is totally dependent on words, or symbols to exist, and to persist, and to spread.
With no external support, it is completely dependent on internal sources of validation.
What Nihilists share is anxiety, reaching the level of fear for a world that is indifferent to their needs, uncertain, and, to them, incomprehensible, beyond some simple abstractions.
they seek in one another what they cannot fin in the world, describing this absence as a "nil".
This makes them codependent, herding minds, even if their Nihilism may wear different symbols, call itself by different names.
This is a cult, which may be made, with popularity, into a religion, such as the three Abrahamic ones: Judaism, Christianity, Islam.
This may also become a secular cult, such as Marxism, and our present day Humanism, Liberalism., but under the protective umbrella of Modernity (Socialism, Democracy, Egalitarianism) it may splinter off into a multiplicity of variations, all rooted in the same noetic roots system, but expressing itself in different ways, corresponding to the different internal hierarchies (personae, personality).


_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 14431
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 51
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Objective <> Subjective Sun Jun 26, 2016 10:18 am

The inter-subjective reaction to the objective world, as it has evolved over generations of sheltering, indoctrination, exposes itself as incapable of offering a response to an objective world, as it is described by multiple sources, forcing it to resort to emotional appeals.

The typical modern cannot offer an alternative to a world described as it is, other than established mythologies, triggering automated emotional responses.
It sees no other alternative other than "suicide", to a discretion of world it cannot contradict, and when it tries it further exposes the inter-subjective foundations of its "world view".
Vilification of the source is all that is left to them, and to the "what does not kill me only serves..." it responds with a turning away back into the fold, within which all weakness, ignorance, cowardice is dissolved in multiplicity.
With no respond that will preserve the pretense of being aware, and open-minded, all that is left to it is cynicism.

It's ignorance, like the Christian God, must be proven, otherwise assumed to be present - try proving a negative, in a world where knowledge is confused for understanding, and ridicule is the preferred defence.

All is whatever they declare themselves to be... because all is subjective.This includes understanding what is then contradicted by behaviour.
Esoteric "reality" has to be "proven" wrong, or exposed as a lie, otherwise it remains a possibility, among infinite possibilities.
The external world slandered, makes of the esoteric a self-contained reality, it can only find support in other, and if no support is offered it can be accused of an ulterior motive, of hating, or a trauma preventing it from supporting the delusion of all - love thy neighbour.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Objective <> Subjective

Back to top Go down
 
Objective <> Subjective
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 4 of 6Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 Similar topics
-
» OBJECTIVE QUESTIONS & ITS ANSWERS OF Co. A/C & COST ACCOUTING
» Purpose of Retention Money
» COMPANY LAW ALL OBJECTIVES
» To Strike or...to Strike: Objective News reports

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Know Thyself :: AGORA-
Jump to: