Words

There is no Idea(l) in the Platonic sense, adopted and corrupted into Judaism to convert it into Christian dogma.

For Nihilists, Abrahamics, the idea(l) refers to some external absolute - a final end, a perfect, complete, whole, mostly associated with what gives them pleasure, or relief from the experience of existing, as need/suffering.
there is no idea(l) anything...there are only degrees, gradations of effectiveness/efficiency in relation to a goal, motive, objective.
The idea(l) is another word for the absolute, and it always exists in some beyond, or immanent future, to which the apparent, the present is always compared to.
The idea(l), in the Nihilistic context, being a pure noetic construct, with no external references, is always ambiguous, always convoluted, imprecise, vague, based on shifting feelings, emotions, sensations...so whatever a degenerate possesses, or has access to, is, for him/her the idea(l).
The noetic is theoretically "perfect, complete, whole" because it only exists in the mind, as abstraction...and abstractions can be altered to accommodate altering self-interests.

At best the idea(l) refers to a goal, a desirable destination that orients and focuses the mind, to be used to evaluate, to appreciate, to measure, one's progress, one's performance, one's self.
It also refers to what is superior...which is always progressing or regressing and is never final, never static - always up for review, for replacement.

The idea(l) is a noumenon that may or may not refer to something real - something that exists outside the mind as phenomenon.
This differentiate the Nihilistic, Abrahamic Marxist from the Pagan idea(l) - one refers to a non-existent outside the brain idea, the other to the highest experienced, found outside the brain, phenomenon - the superior, not the perfect, the whole, the complete, the one.
The idea(l) is always an abstraction, concept, existing in organic minds.

In the cosmos, outside the mind, there is no such thing as an idea(l) anything....all reality is interacting patterned or non-patterned energies that are constantly being degraded, establishing our experience of linear time, as a movement towards increasing chaos, randomness, and a decrease in order (matter/energy).

From the real the idea(l) emerges, and only in reference to the real does the idea(l) have meaning.
From the phenomenal world, does the possibility of noetic abstraction emerge, in reference to it, relating to it.
The more detached form reality the noetic construct is, the more its potential for continuation decreases.

If in our age this is not so, it is because of sheltering systems that protect minds from their own errors and delusions, because such minds are easier to manipulate, control, and exploit.

When words are freed from appearances they can become anything a man-child fantasizes - all that remains is that it constructs a delusion that is self-consistent with its own delusions, rooted in emotion, desire, need, weakness of every kind.
Abrahamism is self-consistent, its words make sense, if you accept its form of detachment from a limiting world, and accept its starting premises, which it simply declares and cannot prove because they are contradicted by everything experienced.
It's starting phrase..."First there was the word, and the word was God"...already declares a 'first' and then calls it 'word' and the word it give sit is 'god'.
It has already placed you with it irrational rationality when you read the starting phrase.
This holds true of all nihilism...and all fakes messiahs that choose to detach words from world to manipulate them, so as to exploit feebleness, stupidity, desperation.

Words become anything to anyone, and the seductive word-manipulators the one who can put them together, is such a manner that they can attract weakness of any kind.

Words connecting to world, challenges the mind, forces it to adapt, to work, to fight...not declaring himself god, or king, but making all recognize him as one.

Slave morality begin in animals...it is called beta-male strategy, and like alpha-male psychology develops in the master, so does this beta, or omega-male strategy develop into the slave....dreaming of becoming master.
From genes to memes.
All is grounded in what precedes it.
Actions precede words - words describe, represent, actions.
The Big Bang precedes the expansion we call existence....towards increasing chaos, experienced as linear time.
Cause precedes effect.

Inverting this is a nihilistic tactic.
What did the Jews do to compensate for their slavishness, their inferiority....they inverted the wold. and placed their King of kings beyond reality where he could not be challenged or soiled, or questioned.
They declared him into non-existence....outside space/time, and then declares existence an illusion, a test of faith.

Every child can use words to comfort itself, to pretend it is a powerful warrior, a beautiful princess, a god...because he has yet to be corrected in his application by the real world.
Some never grow up....accusing all and everything else for their failures, because the possibility that their methods are useless, incompetent, inept, to deal with reality cannot be accepted.
They never proceed to become camel, then lion and then child...they remain child, pretending that they've gone through the stages.
But their every breathe, their every word, their every choice, exposes their lie.
They never grew-up, under the shadow of some masculine entity, weather it was a fantasy male, God, or their father's presence, or absence, forcing them to idealize his absence, and so never going through the rites of passage from boy to man.

My words are not toys, sparkles on a candelabrum, my words are tools, weapons to cut down my enemies, a flame that illuminates my path, a pick to chisel away, a machete to cut away the underbrush and find my way.
My words are a lover's embrace, my contact with mother-earth, my father's solidity beneath my feet.

My words are potent and useful.
My words mean something more than fantasy play.
When I give my word, it is gold.
When I speak it is weighted.

My words keep me proud, by keeping me humble.
My words give light, and dare others to see.
My words direct, they do not declare.
My words are chosen carefully, not thrown around casually.
My words matter, and energize.

My words ground me and connect me.
My words challenge me and others.
My words were, are, and will forever be, an echo on the deep blue sea.

Creating self-referential, self-consistency is difficult, but easier than connecting words to world, in a consistent manner.
Star Wars creates a self-consistent universe, and so does Star Trek.
Lord of the Rings is a self consistent world.
DC and Marvel offer their own self-consistent realities.

Their self-consistency, their own particular self-referential logic, is what makes them a pleasant escape, a 'realistic' alternative to reality.

But philosophy does not only have to be self-consistent...it must be consistent with what is independent from mind.

As I've mentioned repeatedly, memes emerge from genes.
Language represents the particular adaptation of a particular people within a particular environment.
Its forms, sounds, sequences, reflect the attitude that emerged through this relationship of man with world.
Nevertheless, all languages must refer to the same world, and so whatever symbols, words, sequences, sounds they use, they must correspond to a real phenomenon, because words, no matter what language they are an expression of, are representations of noumena, or abstractions, and abstractions are the product of an interaction of mind with world.

World dictates the abstraction, and language is an expression of this, and how the particular organism reacted to it.
Language does not shape world, but world shapes language, and the methods and successful of those who use them to orient and direct their activities.

Post-Modernism survive by detaching its concepts from world, and then demanding that someone protect them from the severity of the consequences that follow.
Postmodernism has its own self-consistent logic, if you accept its starting premises.
But these starting premises are antithetical to everything experienced. They contradict, or nullify what is perceived.
They are nihilistic.
Aside from that, we must admit that if you accept their starting premises as self-evident, then they are self-consistent.
Self-consistency only demands that you remain true to the ideas you begin with, as absolutes, or as a given.
With post-modernity, or Nihilism, there are always detached noetic constructs.

With paganism, the starting premises is world, as it is perceived - nature.
Not world confined to human systems, or only containing living organisms, but world also including human systems, and living organisms.
Our metaphysics are in harmony with physics, and so our ideals are consistent with world - they are more than theoretical, they are pragmatic.
This is also true of our art, our spirituality, and what encompasses them all, our philosophy.

We may disagree on method, and what do do about things, or on minor issues concerning definitions, but how can we disagree on how the world works, when we all live in it?
How can we disagree on what is so obvious that no alternative theory to explain its mechanisms has ever been created?
How can we disagree on what is applicable, and testable by each and every one of us separately?

World is our standard, not words, not symbols, not feelings, or already decided ideals.
The world challenges us, and forces us to use symbols/words precisely.
We adapt to world, not world to us.
When we say 'world' we do not mean humanity, or the last 6000 years of human civilization.
When we say word we mean symbol representing abstraction or noumenon.
When we say noumenon we mean what represents sensual input and thir translation.

When we begin from earth, we mean action, behaviour.
Our words refer to that, not to other ideas in our head, or to feelings, or to nothing.

Everything means something. Every spoken word. It's just that the alternative to believing a lie ("something which means nothing") is believing the person whom told you is either a liar or not as respectable or virtuous as you thought.

Where a path of words lead nowhere, it ends at the source.

@Slaughtz

Words have meaning....and many words refer to observable phenomena.
This is what we call 'down to earth' - connecting abstractions, noumena, through words, to actions, behaviors, activities, phenomena we can all observe and test and validate.
Look how they detached the word 'love' from its earthly meaning.
Instead of trying to connect the word to evolved behaviors, with specific functions that also evolve, in time they detach the concept to make it theoretical, a feeling with no objective meaning, but only a subjective sensation....a theoretical ambiguity that can mean anything, to anyone at any time, and so can also be another word for 'God'.

In Paganism even the concept 'god' is rooted in phenomena, in observable behaviors.
Zeus, for example was the god of lighting, or electromagnetism - a primitive way of representing a mystical, to them, force of nature.
The name Zeus was not theoretical. The ancients saw their gods act - their deities were present, not in some beyond, or immanent realm.

Moderns, infected by Nihilism, have mystified the word 'human', converting it to a sex-less, race-less, noetic construct that has lost its biological foundations, and along with it its meaning.

Then you have cowards like cAnus who sensing this want to slander all words, associated with humanity....so that the lies and the delusions they need to cope, are not taken away.
To hide how empty of meaning the words they used are,and still do, instead of giving them meaning, they attempt to make all words meaningless, to hide their idiocy and their naivete in thinking words could be used to escape reality, or that the subjective can avoid the objective world.

They don't want to connect words to earth, or reality, in other words, they prefer them ambiguous and meaningless.
They resist even the most obvious connections, terrified of where this will lead.
The cAnus pure nihilist type...and then you have the positive nihilists, like Jakoff or James, who prefer words to be detached because they can then construct pleasing, self-consistent, art, with few limitings imposed upon their 'creativity' by any natural order.
Their only criterion being how many they can seduce, how pleasing the art is, how self-gratifying it is.....how it can compensate for a secret lack.
This is why the form it takes exposes an internal need.
With no external standard to direct, the only standard is esoteric....and so their spill out their deepest anxieties, and call it philosophy - like those surreal artists dripping colours, or scribbling no canvas, expressing their internal world, as a reaction to an external one.

Thornhill;Palmer wrote:

When ideology and the naturalistic fallacy rule, the definition of a word
becomes merely a tool used to persuade people to adopt a certain position about how the world ought to be.
Such uses of definitions are sometimes justified on the grounds that definitions are arbitrary and the notion
of a true definition is "a meaningless concept" (Muehlenhar detal.1996,p.124).
The assertion that there are no accurate definitions, however, implies that there are also no inaccurate definitions—an assertion that is obviously false. More fundamentally, there would be no reason to write the statement "there is no such thing as an accurate definition" if the writer did not assume that the reader would share the writer's understanding of the definitions of those words.

A Natural History of Rape

Indeed....and not only is there a proper use of words, given in dictionaries, to make the sharing of abstractions, of thoughts possible, but many words refer to observable phenomena, within a shared world, sop they connect the mind to the world.
that some words are also used artistically, metaphorically, should not confuse us, forgetting what their original, proper, meaning is.

There are, of course, words that remain completely abstract (noumena) that refer to nothing outside the mind, or that refer to combinations of phenomenon, or that mix those that refer to phenomena with those that are purely abstract.

But if we detach those words already attached to reality, then we purposefully wish to create confusion, a completely noetic world, made up of words that may have a dictionary definition, but refer to esoteric, noetic phenomena (emotions, sensations, feelings, abstractions) and have no reference beyond that.
This is what Nihilists thrive on, wanting to make all words meaningless beyond a vague, general dictionary definition; wanting to detach all words from reality, or to slander the very usage of language, as a tool of manipulation, and control, so that they can sue words at whim to live in their own private reality, demanding the protections from such a masturbatory, solipsism, on moral grounds.

Quote :

ab·so·lute
ˈabsəˌlo͞ot,ˌabsəˈlo͞ot/Submit
adjective
1.
not qualified or diminished in any way; total.
"absolute secrecy"
synonyms: complete, total, utter, out-and-out, outright, entire, perfect, pure, decided; More
2.
viewed or existing independently and not in relation to other things; not relative or comparative.
"absolute moral standards"
synonyms: universal, fixed, independent, nonrelative, nonvariable, absolutist
"absolute moral standards"
noun
1.
PHILOSOPHY
a value or principle that is regarded as universally valid or that may be viewed without relation to other things.

Quote :

truth
tro͞oTH/Submit
noun
the quality or state of being true.
"he had to accept the truth of her accusation"
synonyms: veracity, truthfulness, verity, sincerity, candor, honesty; More
that which is true or in accordance with fact or reality.
noun: the truth
"tell me the truth"
synonyms: what actually happened, the case, so; More
a fact or belief that is accepted as true.
plural noun: truths
"the emergence of scientific truths"
synonyms: fact, verity, certainty, certitude;

The statement "There are absolutely no absolutes" has already assumed absolute into existence.
An absolute can be spoken, not shown, as it only exists in the mind.
In most cases a factual statement denoting a relationship is mistaken for an absolute, when it is used in the place of certainty.

Truth is another word for a perspective that is or is assumed to be, or declared to be, superior to all others.
It is so in relationship to other perspectives.
A perspective is never absolute, therefore it denotes a relationship of superior to inferior - a value judgment based no a juxtaposition.

Change, or Flux cannot be an absolute, unless one noetically exits reality, and perceives universe as a whole, as a one, in other words as an absolute.
Therefore, all is flux, is a matter of fact - a relationship of observer with observed.
consider how one conceptualizes the word "universe" - a a uni, unity of one.
The mind noetically exits reality, into unreality, and imagines all as a whole, from a god-like detached fantastic perspective. From "outside" reality, reality is made into a one.
It's a mind-trick, degenerates, then, accept as literal, as fact, even if the observed parts contradict the abstraction. A degenerate cannot show us a one, a whole, but he can speak of it, or share with us its abstraction of one....which can take any form.

Even when it attempts to justify absolutes by using a factual relationship, such as "There is no elephant in my pocket" it uses words to fabricate an absurd relationship of phenomena, as certain.
But pocket is relative to the garment, and is made of phenomena that are dynamic...and so is elephant. Pocket and elephant are not absolutes, and in theory a pocket to fit a real elephant can be made....but in this case the fact is of a relationship of his pocket, relative to a real organism called elephant, with a particular size.
So, the size of a specific pocket, relative to the size of a specific elephant is presented as an absolute - which implies certainty, given precedent, and conventions.

Because the mind must reduce all to abstractions, it must think in terms of absolutes - noumena are ambiguous, vague representations, mistaken for absolutes outside the mind.
The degenerate mind is stuck within the conundrum of its own making - unable to think to conceive,a artistically, it thinks literally. Its own representations engulf it in literal absolutes, that it cannot prove, because they only exits in its mind.
The multi-utility of words, as metaphors in jargon, further confuses the average, mediocre, degenerate, and the coward, the hypocrite.

Absolutes are always linguistic.
They can never be shown, perceived outside the brain.
The brain's own representations, symbolizing relationships, are projected into world - Nihilism.

Absolute:

Whole, Immutable, Independent, One, God, Perfect, Nil, Indivisible, Complete.

Absolute can be used as a metaphor to accentuate one's sense of certainty.
Absolute can be used to refer to a relationship, a fact.
These applications are not my own.

What is the absent-absolute?
It is the foundation of Nihilism.
It is the projection of a noetic construct, into the phenomenal world of (inter)activity (Flux) and then its presumption as already existing outside the mind, and the naive expectation of its discovery, or as what "exist" in some beyond existence realm, in the above, below, , internal, eternal immanent future.

It is the externalization of an esoteric fabrication, rooted in emotion, in the mind's ability to mix abstractions, to rearrange them at Will.

It is a metaphor for perfect, whole, static, complete, total, one, Being, God, indivisible, immutable, unchanging, omnipotent, omniscient, certain...order, predictability buried in complexity, masked by confusion, hidden by ambiguity, vagueness, insinuation.

It is what is "missing" in the cosmos, for a Nihilist: his needs, desire projected outward, or the inversion of his esoteric private, subjective universe, into an presumed external one.

It is the sensation of need/suffering, of endless change, or interactivity - Flux, producing friction upon order, causing attrition...ergo it is a metaphor for the end of need/suffering, for a final end in Being.
It is an end, a telos...and entirely non-existent - the very definition of non-existence.

When the absolute has been presumed into existence, as the eternal one, then the only way to reject it, to negate it, is with another, equally absurd, fabrication, the nil, where both 1 & 0 are taken literally, and not as symbols - representations of abstractions, in the mind.
This is how Nihilism construct the premises of its own self-referential paradigm.
It is in a constant debate, dialogue, between its two dualistic, binary, poles - one/nil, positive/negative, right/left, good/bad....
The typical Nihilist is debating his opposite, or a variant of itself, within the same paradigm.
This he calls 'free-thinking" - free, as in, liberated by order outside the mind, imposing upon it a limit, a standard.

Absolute Order versus Absolute Chaos, where both absolutes are non-existent and impossible.
Paganism stands outside it as process, as knowing what symbols, words are; as fully within Flux, relating to it using interpretations, finding patterns to symbolize and represent.
It stands outside as understanding what is known by the nihilists, through a simple neurological on/off mechanism.
It stands outside the representations, using them as static tools to relate, to connect to a dynamic cosmos.
The Pagan knows that it is foolish to add to the mystery of existence, by confusing himself using words.
Chaos is mystifying enough.
The world as Flux is, on its own, counter-intuitive, where intuition needs order, static representations of fluid patterns = the snap-shot of a tree, is not a tree, or the tree it is a picture of; a painting of a cloud is not the cloud itself.
both are transition of the phenomenon, using alternate patterns. In the case of a photo, suing plastic, paper, ink. In the case of painting, suing canvas, paint....

The desire to want to add to confusion is one rooted in a desire to forget, a desire to blind one's self to the external so that the mind is completely taken over by the internal, the dream - a need to not see what has been already seen, to escape the exoteric, uncertain, unyielding, indifferent cosmos, internally, in an esoteric willed uni-verse...a mental womb.

Order is the revolutionary act, not change.
Change happens, constantly.
Zero effort required.
Order is the truly rebellious.
Ordering is an act of will, countering chaos, and constant interactive Flux.

Meaning = how patterns relate.
The recognition and appreciation (judgment) of how phenomena relate to each other.
Meaning is not arbitrary.
A misinterpretation results in costs, no subjective hoping, or redefining of words, can protect you from, but only an external entity, such as an institution, or another individual who correctly judges and evaluates can intervene, if it so chooses, and with its own motives, to protect the mistake from being experiences as cost, or as negative consequences.

Meaning is how the noumenon, the abstraction harmonizes, agrees with, the interacting patterns.
Meaning is about relationships between external, to the mind, phenomena, patterns, and how the mind can translate them into internal mental models, or abstractions.

Therefore, the arbitrary use of symbols/words referring only to internal constructs with no external references, are meaningless to all but those sharing the same arbitrary constructs.
In such cases one must understand the meaning only if and when he or she buys into the esoteric arbitrary connections, corresponding to nothing external.
They are totally subjective, and based on fabrications, emotion, shares needs and desires, common weaknesses and insecurities.

Realists require no arbitrary meanings, because whatever names you give the same observable phenomena, how they relate is not based on the whims and preferences.

Meaning is found, out in the world, not constructed in the mind, without considering the world.
Meaning is world interpreted, not world created.
World is, and mind emerges as a connection of body, the physical, to its dynamism.
Mind is the point where the fluid is converted to static abstraction (image) or into sensation, emotion, and then given a symbol, given a word/number to represent it.
Mind is the point of contact of past, manifesting as presence/appearance, with an ongoing interactivity (flux).
The nervous system, with the brain as its hub, is the dynamic point of conversion, from body (physical) to mind (abstraction), with the symbols are the nervous system's representation of the dynamic fluid interactive.

Organism is in continuous dialogue, interactions interpreted continuously, between otherness and self - presence/appearance, and past/nature.
The idea(l) is the meaning projected forward as prediction, offering choices, options, of probability to the organism.

Idea refers to mental abstractions combined into more sophisticated mental models corresponding to external interactive phenomena.
Ideal refers to the judgment, evaluation of ideas, projected as desirable, or good, in relation to other ideas considered undesirable, bad, or evil in the Abrahamic Nihilistic paradigm.

Exposing their relationship to symbols and words, degenerates either selectively discredit them, use them as toys to justify their already established, in their mind, conclusions, or they relate to them as magical powers that can erase or create simply by being mentioned.

Degeneracy has reached a low, but not the bottom.
We are now living in an age where declarative statements, constitute "arguments", or even evidence, because words are expected to only trigger emotional reactions, and if they achieve that then their effect is assured.
Emotions being esoteric, or subjective.
One has to simply report them, or state them, trigger them, or assume and presume them, and this suffices.
And once words are detached form an external standard their only value is measured by popularity, and how much emotional reactivity they can produce: a communal inter-subjective frenzy of mutually supportive emotionalism.

Many a time I've come across degenerates who declare a theory 'debunked', and then process to mention some obscure or infamous "intellectual", if they bother to mention one by name and do not simply allude to one.
What precedes this is a declarative orgy, of statements, labeled "arguments", because the scientific method of empiricism has fallen to ruin, or presumably 'debunked' by some charlatan.
If this is the case, then all anyone needs to do is declare a truth, offer his/her perspective, and it is no better or worse than any other, and the only reference outside a private conviction, is either some officially sanctioned expert, or a assumed popularity that immediately makes Creationism a fact in the US.
We have declined to a point in time where words no longer matter, but only how they make us feel, or how they validate our desired conclusions.
When a theory is declared 'wrong' no alternate is expected, but the feeling of joy and pleasure this produces is enough to support the validity of the claim.
The only defensive excuse left is to accuse all who threaten this of doing exactly the same thing, entering into a war of he-said, she-said.

Recently the entire field of Evolutionary Psychology was dismissed, and replaced by happiness, and a vague reference to social justice and fairness.
An entire field explaining everything from rape, to self handicapping, dismissed with a declaration, insisting on being taken seriously and to be respected.
This was called an "argument" as it has also been called a "point", as if it deserves to be considered and dealt with using reasoning, when it offers none.

if we are to fully appreciate Nihilism, we must understand it as a memetic virus based entirely on symbols/words.
Symbols with no external references, allowing them to be used and abused, expecting only emotional feedback, validation in popularity or an attempt to impress by alluding to "experts".
As long as it makes us feel good, validates our desired conclusion, already made, the only justification we require is some expert to dismiss what we see, and to includes us in a trend to comfort us that we belong to a Modern current, always improving man, progressing him towards Utopia.

Sloterdijk, Peter wrote:

ON THE CHARISMA  OF SYMBOLS

In the process of  world modernity the symbols that are known throughout humanity inexorably grow in importance. Whereas linguists and politicians continue to puzzle inconclusively over whether a general universal language would be desirable or achievable, certain individual symbols have long since become established in something like a new world order. Even the world of signs and symbols has a star system. A kind of Platonic heaven of  ideas arose in the course of the twentieth century above the turmoil of languages, codes and messages fighting for their share of  the market of comprehensibility,  and an elite of  neo-universal symbols has entered this realm. The present text offers a brief  selection from this semiological heaven of ideas that hovers above the modern world.  For our contemporaries in the new millennium, particularly the inhabitants of  the First World,  what is presented here constitutes the seventh heaven of the global symbols that embody fixed elements of  their vocabulary,  indeed, of their world picture.  In a dozen images of  various kinds – trademarks,  original symbols, insignias, pictograms – a constellation of sign lamps shines out; its comprehensibility has transcended the boundaries of  every regional culture and the barriers of  every language.
These megastars of  the signs and symbols stand out from the mass through an almost ‘planetary’ visibility, like satellites that orbit the earth as artificial stars. These semiotic stars of  the first magnitude stand above the mobilized earth as codes of their own monstrous epoch. Looking at them, we realize clearly that the talk of One Earth is more than an Americanism or an empty phrase of  the history of  philosophy. The appearance of these signs offers a chance to reflect on the state of  the world as revealed in the global distribution and readability of  the present examples. The picture seems to define, as it were, the age of  globalization in its radiant icons, its universal trademarks,  its imperial messages. Indeed,  by the power of  their forceful penetration and visibility worldwide, the super-successful symbols in this collection always point – at least from an evolutionary perspective – to the basic process of modernity to which they owe their wide dissemination: the expansion of  the world or,  we could say, the drama of real globalization or unification. By dint of  having been able to hold their own in reputation and validity,  wherever they appear they spread the good news of modern times as the age in which each news item and each product can potentially be made anywhere and be made available at the same time. The function of the star system in the global synthesis is no different,  and what is right for personal superstars is only fair for semiotic ones.

This highly abstract perspective is the only way to clarify something these freely associated symbols have in common.  How else could the Apple trademark appear next to the Taoist ying/yang world disc,  Mickey Mouse beside the Christian cross,  the Coca-Cola bottle next to the swastika and the Levi’ s label beside the Star of  David without a caption to link them all together? It is as if we were walking around in a semiotic laboratory in which the universal applicability of world symbols was being tested. The martial law of the market and the divine judgement of  success always decide on the good or bad luck or the symbol candidates. Understandably also, in the laboratory environment, the differences tend to be overshadowed by the common elements, and even a heavily compromised symbol like the swastika can be lined up and tested here in the vehicle park of transportation fit for global use. All the better if no one today can still find a positive meaning for it.

Wherever the world itself  is seen as a theatre for globalization tests, theology and economy have common concerns. As members of a fundamentally missionizing culture we must expect the Christian cross to shine out behind every great symbol of success and advertising – as the model for every kind of  propaganda.  The cross is undeniably the prototype and path-breaker of  a semiotic world politics that had no reason for existence except to give universality to a message and a symbol of salvation. In other words, the missionary precedes the marketing experts – and the advertiser is a paid prophet. Because capitalism is also a religion – in other words, a way of  life of  a supreme guiding force –, its main emblems,  both names and products,  are necessarily imbued with moderate messianic energy. They transport joyful messages from the life of  ease into the consciousness of  stressed people all over the world, who strive for relief  like insects moving towards the light.  
Part of  the game rules of the new world religion, however, is that it should be able to present itself as anti-religion. Any modern person defines himself or herself  as a member of  the non-faith Consumers’  International, which pretends to have renounced all forms of  absolutism and fundamentalism. The great symbols, however, know better than their users – they speak the language of glory and longing which points to something beyond the sphere of  consumer benefits. Who could have illusions about the messages that accompany the Mercedes Benz star? Isn’ t this the guiding symbol of a kinetic world religion that promises its followers release through mobilization? Who can fail to see bright hopes of  pleasure and performance shining out from the advertising symbols of  this collection – as if messianic products were the mediators of a happy and successful life?

It seems as if  human beings are consciously and increasingly resisting the attempt to trace very great successes back to pure chance. To maintain our emotional and logical balance we want anything at the peak to be certified by something deeper than manipulation and dice games. In everything very successful, logic suspects something of its own basic forms and archetypes – as if  the structures that push their way to the very top were stamped with an agreement of  a higher kind,  let’ s call it predestination or a guarantee that comes from the original image. Even if  it is not a question of  openly archaic signs and symbols and basic structures, as in the versions of  the circle, cross and star discussed here, but only a matter of arbitrary brand names and emblems, taken together the megastars of  the world of  consumer symbols constitute an archetypal batch.

It will probably always be difficult in such cases to say whether the chance success created the lustre or the archetypal lustre created the success. The hit and the original image feed on each other, and something of the charisma of  the famous name and the influential form floats over both of  them. The profane successful brand has something in common with the dignity,  however illusory,  of  the species,  which seems to have emerged initially from a creative intelligence.

The Aesthetic Imperative

Ideas/Ideals may be converted to brand names in crypto-Marxist post-modernistic Nihilism.
The judgment changes from one of reason to one of emotional appeal.
A brand name can be refurbished, recycled, repackaged and resold, as if it were something new.
It can be connected to specific imagery or feelings - sexuality, pleasure, ego etc.
Marketing repeats the message, the connections, to embed them in the psyche of the masses.

The idea is no longer judged on merit, but on its emotional triggers.
How good or bad the individual feels when confronted with the symbol/word - hedonism as the most primal judgment of value, and in this case an immediate and intuitive judgment of its 'truth'.  

The masses do not want to think beyond the primal, which they then interpreted to have risen above.
What feels good, is true, and what feels bad, is wrong.  
Brand identity is constantly promoted and reaffirmed,a associating the brand, represented by the symbol and the name it is recognized by, with specific marketed emotions, sensations, imagery.
Then you can recombine the product, mix in enhancing ingredients, and resell it using different packaging and a new title...which is exactly what post-modernism did, when it repackaged Marxism, and what Abrahamism is doing, when it is attempting to repackage itself using different names.
Repackaging Judaism, by mixing in a bit of Hellenism, or Platonism as the end stage of its decline, was resold as Christianity....and currently some are attempting to repackage Christianity, by mixing in a bit of Nietzsche, to make it more resistant to his critique.
Marxism is a repacked Christianity. Abrahamism minus the God component, and substituted by the State or the Idea.  
This slight adjustment makes it more attractive to a wider potential client base.

Feminism is a repackaged remixed Marxism.
Marxism focused on sexual indemnities. Post-Modern sexuality - Feminization of Mankind.

This constant remixing, adjusting, repackaging is the 'strength' or the advantage of Nihilism.
It can recombine and create anything, selling it as new, because it is not restricted by natural order, or the experience world.
It's only restriction is linguistic, and emotional.
Linguistic because it needs to be communicated from mind to mind, otherwise it dies...as a parasite dies outside a host. Emotional, because with no external references it must refer to something, and so it inverts back into the mind, where it links to mental abstractions and emotions.
This is how the positivist and negativity of the emotion determines the validity of the Nihilistic idea.

Wisdom
Peterson defines Wisdom in this video at 2:31

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

To paraphrase: be a friend of the thing which disrupts your plan, then you can take on (tolerate and cope with) the consequences of error. This allows you to look at what went wrong and determine what can be learned from the defeat. To inquire this (about what mistakes were made), fundamentally, is what wisdom is.
---

This is a solid definition of wisdom in my view. It may fundamentally conflict with the J.Xt. view of wisdom. Wisdom is derived from revelation by God and His word, in Xt. One could argue that the idea of hell must be countenanced and that countenancing hell* means that following God's word is necessary to the fulfillment of having wisdom.

*(And what is hell, but a burnt offering up to Yahweh, by Satan itself? Closing the loop. One who goes to hell is utilized for God's purpose anyway.)

Words can be easily corrupted, even by good intentions.
Language, like all art forms, are representations of reality, and therefore can be manipulated and exploited in a way that reality cannot.
When a well-meaning mind uses a metaphor to more perfectly represent what he perceives, he unintentionally introduces a nuance into the represented, and then it is taken for granted, as if it was always part of the represented.

How else could 'love' have become another name for the Abrahamic God?
A word, referring to a behavior meant to facilitate reproduction and survival, becomes a metaphor for a theoretical Being, embracing all into a single unity, with his "love".
Survival made into a universal imperative, and reproduction made into Creation.

Furthermore, such abstract symbols as 1/0, reflecting neurological, brain processes, are then confused for the represented itself.
For example, they imply an absolute thing, in time/space, and its nullification, when it has been already assumed into existence, and projected as being a quality of what is being represented.
In fact there is no 'one' outside our brains. The one is a simplification/generalization constructed using sensual stimulation, converted to neurological pulses and then reconfigured into an ambiguous idea.
The quality of the processing, determined by the quality of the brain, determines the accuracy of the representation, in relation to the represented, which has already changed.

The mind conveniently forgets it's an abstraction, a representation, and begins to think of the representation as the represented, as a singular, thing, it can reconfigure and manipulate and combine with other abstractions in whichever way it fancies.

Human logic is built around this presumption.
It takes for granted a one/nil and then considers it "logical" to remain true to this assumption.
It is "logical' when the judgment does not contradict the original presumption.

So 1+1=2 is logical if and only you've already accepted 1 as a starting premise.
Given that 1/0 refer to neurological processes of on/off, the presumption is self-referential.
There is, in fact, no one in reality, and therefore no need for a nil.

One is the representation of the abstraction....which in mathematics has acquired the height of pure noumenon, pure abstractions, that can apply to all and any phenomenon.
One, and consequently nil, are the purest noetic constructs.
There is no one or nil phenomenon, outside the brain - the 1/0 are ideas/ideals....linguistic, and therefore, artistic re-presentations.
Taking the representations literally is how we come to nihilism.

All is process which is abstracted as one and then negated as nil.

Mathematical logic is useful as all languages and symbols are.
It externalizes noetic constructs and can easy convert them using any matter/energy into an external re-creation of internal processes.
All technologies are the externalization, suing mathematics, and geometry, of our understanding of our internal processes.
We are essentially rebuilding what we comprehend of our own organic processes.

One is the implosion of a phenomenon, into a noumenon, a thing, an idea/ideal.
This implosion translates the phenomenon into a noumenon, which can then be manipulated and returned externally as another phenomenon....like money in relation to resources or services.
Logical laws are laws that correct the paradoxes this conversion from dynamic to static, from dynamic phenomenon to static noumenon, result in.

In nature no two energies can occupy the same time/space, because there would be conflict: repulsion.
But noumenon are not restricted by any natural laws, because ideas can occupy the same time/space in theory...in the mind.
Logic attempts to impose rules on thinking, to limit the mind's ability to do things that cannot occur in reality, so that thinking and world can harmonize....or noumena can more accurately represent phenomena.

The law of noncontradiction is such a restriction on the mind's ability to contradict itself.
In the mind A can be B and A simultaneously, because A and B are representations of any phenomenon, as they refer to nothing outside mind.
In world there is no thing A and thing B, but processes that are always changing and interacting and never as static as the symbols A & B.
Synthesis of opposites is itself a manmade concept, as there are no opposites outside the human brain - opposites are juxtapositions in relation to the human judging, interpreting mind.
Hot/Cold, for instance are variations of interactivity (energy) in relation to the human body's mean body temperature.
Existent/non-Existent, is based on the assumption of a nonsensical concept - non-existence, which is nothing.
Black/White, refers to interpretations of vibrations interacting with light and then the eye and the human nervous system.
A phenomenon cannot be both a dog and not a dog, at the same time, but only in the mind, where natural order can be escaped and denied relevance.

All value judgments refer to comparisons between phenomena in relation to the observer, or in relation to an idea(l).
Phenomena interact, relating to each other as repulsion/attraction, which is converted noetically to comparisons, of greater/smaller, stronger/weaker, faster/slower, hotter/colder, using ourselves, or what we know are aware, of as self, as the standard.

Heraclitus wrote:

We step and do not step into the same rivers; we are and we are not.

Because we live in a nihilistic world we confuse noumena for phenomena, and then claim that phenomena do not exist, and all is noumenon.
We do so to comfort ourselves and to claim to be masters of our own destiny, because in our mind the world can have no claim on us, until it does, and then we can accuse something and someone else for our presumptuous mistakes, and confusions.

The dis-ease has warped everything.
Every word, referring to concepts about the human condition; every symbol evoking an image, a sensation, an emotion.
All have been corrupted.

You cannot use words properly, without one of these degenerates claiming ownership of it.
The word overman has bee made into some poster for a Nazi overlord - a dominating master of men and beasts.
Their greatest fears, controverted to their greatest ambitions, projected as a threat and an accusation upon those who dare to use the word.

The word 'self' represents a concept that has been misused and abused throughout time, and has been 'raped' by degenerates. 

The concept self, ego in Greek, is a concept referring to a continuum, held together, by memory.
Where there is no accumulation, and storage of memory (experience, knowledge, understanding) there is no self.
Any other use of the word is nonsensical, and motivated by something other than clarity, lucidity.

Conspiracy...
History is a series of conspiracies documented, after-the-fact.
Yet, the degenerate uses conspiracy as ridicule, by associating all theories of what is yet to be revealed with absurdity. 

Conspiracies are not about controlling situations, but about manipulating, exploiting them.
Though a secret group planning and promoting a particular outcome is always part of a conspiracy, this group need not be large and omnipotent.
It only needs to be well-placed, conspicuous, and subtle. 

A conspiracy does not construct/create events, it manipulates events as they arise spontaneously from inter-activities. 
A conspiracy's supports a particular consequence, and may do so with minimal intervention or, sometimes, by snot intervening at all. 

A conspiracy need not be lucid.
Not all participants in it have to know what is going on, and why it is occurring. 
A meme can promote a particular way of relating to life and existence, without engaging the mind consciously. 
By shaping one's perception, or evaluation of reality, one ensures a particular behavior, or a specific way of relating to world. 
A meme is a way of relating to reality that may be rooted in genetic dispositions, or in ideals that contradict them.

Pattern...
A repeating design.
Adornment.
κόσμημα - cosmos. 
Another word for it is, order, or order-ing.

Matter/Energy are two divisions of pattern, in relation to the observer, which in this case is the human mind.
The standard is the organism, with a particular metabolism, or unity of patterns - a median rate of vibration. 
Attraction/Repulsion is how patterns interact with other patterns, and non-patterned energies.
Another word for order is probability. 

Non-patterned energy = chaos, randomness.

Events do not repeat exactly, because of chaos,w which is increasing with every interaction.
Expansion of cosmos is another way of saying increase in possibility, and a decrease in probability.  
Increasing chaos means increasing possibilities and a decrease in order, or probability - tending towards absolute chaos which would be infinite possibility - absolute chaos.
Absolute order, would be its opposite = absolute probability, or singularity.

Chaos can be imagined, conceptualized, as a fragmentation, explosion, of dimensions, whereas order would be an implosion or reduction of dimensions. 

Attraction/Repulsion, in other words (inter)activity, occurs simultaneously, and it indicates how own pattern, relates, interact, with another. There is no perfect harmony between different patterned energies, and more so between non-patterned energies. 
A pattern can be categorized as type - eidos {είδος}, or element: kind of matter/energy means kind of pattern....frequency of vibration.   

Repulsion, or disharmony produces attrition. 
Attrition either adds to complexity, by reducing to a lower frequency/vibration, or it loses all consistency and becomes random - chaotic, adding to randomness which is how we experience linear time. 

Where attraction/harmony exceeds repulsion/disharmony, a congruity is produced, which may be called a unity.
Unities are temporary, or only as temporally resistant as the difference between their internal harmony, counteracting repulsion, and the external patterned and non-patterned energies it comes in contact with, it interacts with.  
This congruity may develop into what we call life...as a iterating, or self-maintaining congruity (organization, organism)...or unity to differentiate it from other congruities. 
This is what we call Will, or willing. 
The interactivity directed along the path-of-least-resistance following its attraction to patterns participating in its unity. 
This ascends to an ability to follow a path-of-more-resistance, as a method of outperforming, or competing with other unities. 
The unity can now retain memories as the by-product of every interaction, which evolves into an ability to use memories to increase its effectiveness and efficiency.
Memory accumulates with every successful interaction, using trial and error mechanisms.
At this point we can speak of Self.
Self being a continuum held together, or connected, by a string of memories.

Memory is also what we call identity.
DNA is memory. 
Experience is first-hand memory.
Knowledge is second hand memories - adopted, learned, memories.

Pattern implies a repetition, a consistency = order.
Space = possibility...so the vibration (energy) oscillates consistently or not, it's range indicating its possibility range.
If it is ordered, has a consistent pattern in its vibration, its possibility range is qualified as probability.  
The frequency of its oscillation (wavelength) indicates its type - matter/energy.

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

The size of its arc is indicates its power, or its range of effect, its dimensional interactivity (tone) - attraction/repulsion field of effect in time/space. 
The phenomenon remains the same...what word one chooses to refer to it indicates the individual's intentions; his relationship with the phenomenon.
Choice of symbols/words slightly modifies the relationship of noumenon to phenomenon, and is either more or less precise, more or less accurate....as the symbol/word does not alter the phenomenon itself but only the noetic nuance, which only affects the individual's success/failure, measured as cost/benefit. 

Whether you call the concept 'pattern' or choose another word/symbol (metaphor), like 'order', 'vibration', 'probability' has no effect no the phenomenon itself, but it does affect one's approach and one's understanding of it, which, in turn, determines success/failure if the theory is applied, or is converted to action.

Our philosophies are not word-centered.
They refer to the same, observable, phenomena, and are connected to, related to, through symbols/words.
Our symbols/words are more or less precise, each revealing the mind's relationship to the phenomenon.

Nihilism, conversely, is entirely word/symbol dependent, to the degree that the mind has detached from reality and immersed itself in its own noetic constructs.
For this mental dis-ease, words are the point of detachment.
Words are where the mind attempts to turn away, and back into mind, or escape in the mind of another.

For us realists/pagans, the phenomenon directs our choice and application of words/symbols. 
Each choice of symbol/word indicating a particular attitude, offering a specific nuance that characterizes the mind using it, not the phenomenon.

Time - not a thing, a force, existing in the world, part of the world.
time is a human concept, referring to a relationship of man with world, using human biological processes as a standard for evaluating interactivity or change.
If no life is present, no consciousness, there is no time, but only interactivity.

Space - does require a consciousness.
It is the projection of possibilities in relation to interacting energies.
Without a conscious mind space would be a field of niter)acting patterned and non-patterned energies.

The beginning of levelling all down to a non-distinct uniformity, is found in linguistics.
The reduction of words to a meaningless symbol that can apply to anything, in any context, on the grounds that one is driven by the liberties of artistic licence is its start.
Because then any talent-less degenerate can use the same argument to avoid natural order.
Anything he paints is valuable, and profound, because he painted it, just because of his implied intention.
If we liberate words form their references to phenomena, then we can construct any implied meaning, of great profundity, by rearranging the words in ways that can inspire some dolt. or trigger an emotion in a dullard.

A true artist proves his merit by being limited by a reality he does not create but only represents.
It is through this discipline, to an external order, where his talent is revealed to everyone.

Not only the forms but the hues.

If language, applying words, does not serve the motive to discriminate, to bring into focus, to clarify, to distinguish, and blurs lines of difference, merges the contrary, obfuscates, uses metaphor to insinuate what it cannot define or describe, then it serves confusion, and its motive is something other than philosophical pursuits of the real, of truth.

Then, one must wonder what this alternate motive is, and one can find it by seeking the pattern in the word choices.
The words chosen, instead of other more precise ones, and the justifications given for their usage, is what exposes the alternate motive.

How did Christianity reinvent itself?
It became Marxism, after a ongoing conflict.
It re-placed God, with State, and sinner with bourgeoisie, and sanctity with working class.

How did Marxism reinvent itself?
It became post-modernism, after an ongoing conflict.
It replaced State with Humanity, and working class with race, and sex.
A common practice among the more "clever" degenerates.
They replace terminology but imply the same thing.
Like changing Christian 'love' as another name for God, with 'value', another name for the Divine, Deus.  
With every reinvention they attempt to integrate the aspects of the opposition that defeated them.
So, Christianity assimilates Platonism as an aspect of Hellenism, and Marxism integrates cosmopolitanism, as an aspect of Christianity...both selectively.
And some are not trying to integrate Nietzsche, as an aspect of Paganism, to produce a more durable Abrahamic variant.
This is how the same memetic virus mutates, and goes on.

The antidote to this virus, this memetic dis-ease?
A reconnection of words to their original utility as connectors of mind to world, or noumena to phenomena.
The world, as experience as perceived sensually, limits our application of words, and their sequence, as this relates to the particularities of a linguistic traditions with its own grammar., and nuanced definitions of symbols/words, placing them on a scale of more sophisticated and more base.
For example, perception perspective, cannot preceded or emerge simultaneously with existence, (inter)activity, Flux, because life emerges in the process of existing, and existence just is and does not emerge, or disappear.
Consciousness emerges within reality, and in relation to it.

Symbols/words emerge in world and in relation, in reference to it.
They do not exist outside existence.
They do not create what they are created from.

Russell, Betrand wrote:

The later Wittgenstein...seems to have grow tired of serious thinking and to have invented a doctrine which would make such an activity unnecessary. I do not for one moment believe that the doctrine that has these lazy consequences is true.
The desire to understand the world, they think, an outdated folly.

Who "they" are can be speculated upon, but for the moment let us accept the they as being those who are lazy, and who want to discredit language so that philosophy which is entirely dependent upon it, is slandered.

What infects the human spirit is the presupposition that there is still a god, though under a new name.
We may call the concept Order and assume that it lurks behind everything, in everything.
Order is one of those words used to insinuate god back into existence, under a moniker that sounds more scientific, less Abrahamic, less mystifying.

That some believe they have overcome Christianity's herd psychology while still holding onto its fundamental principles that all is ordered, and that all is conscious, is a testament to the human mind's ability to protect itself, and to then convert this cowardice into a pride.
It is remarkable how the same minds that do not believe in race and sex, will admit that they believe in a deterministic universe.

The concept of God, having been renamed order, makes of chaos a metaphor for the Devil, who is also god's creation.
All is ordered, means all is knowable, rational, can be reasoned with, is determined, making free will a empty metaphor, used only to describe a choice made, as if it were independent from God's Will.

While language has its limitations it is not entirely with no utility.
Language, like math which is a language, is order, dealing with order.
To represents disorder, or chaos properly understood, it must be artistic, or become aware of its artistic essence even when it is describing order.

There are two variants of Deists, or moderns who having lost respect for Abrhamism, and finding Humanism and Marxism insufficient, they turn to mysticism for support in their new conceptions of the prematurely declared dead ONE GOD.
It's a redefinition of the word.
One variant believes God is, or Universe is God, Order, one...and that they have seen into the mind of god, and found a mathematical formula to legitimize their mysticism.
They want to merge science with Religion, the Abrahamic kind, and to do so they must understand words/symbols literally, and not representationally.
The second variant denounces Christianity, as a simple Abrahamic religion, and declares world a creation of the mind. God is mind, or humanity is god.
and god creates reality, the world, from his mind.
Then it becomes a matter of convincing as many other minds that their mind is the one true god, or that all are god, but some are more aware of their divine essence.
Another priests.

For both chaos is anathema.
so they must think of it as a hidden, mystical, order, only they have access to.
Complexity and order are tautologies, separated only by acuity.
One, sees into the mind of God, jotting down the language/mathematics of creation....the other is the mind of god, using words/mathematics to construct reality.