Words

(((Wittgenstein))) represents an attempt to degrade western man's ability to think and to relate with world.
His "critique" of language was left with no offering of a improvement of how language is used.
His solution is keep silent.

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

Philosophy is an activity, not a doctrine.
If it build doctrines it is politics.
Philosophy is a constant reaffirmation of what is, and since world is dynamic and fluid, the process is continuous.

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

Paradox is when the abstractions, simplifications/generalizations cannot fully represent what is fluid and dynamic.
This is caused by using language literally, rather than figuratively, artistically.
As representation, that approximates the real.

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

Philosophy is, indeed, intimately connected with language, because language is a linguistic art-form and philosophy is completely reliant on symbols/words.
Symbols/words are to philosophy what colour and brushes and canvas are to a painter.

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

Language should be used frugally and precisely, when engaging in philosophy.
Like the painter who remains disciplined by an order beyond himself, if he wishes to paint the world as it is.
If it does not, he veers off into politics, or psychology, or manipulation.

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

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

Paradoxes can also be the product of a alternate definition coming in conflict with a self-consistent, self-referential dogma, using language.
Paradoxes in relation to world, as symbols relate to a fluid dynamic cosmos, and paradoxes produced in relation to a philosophical doctrine that is detached form reality and has created its own, using presuppositions that create a 'logical framework'.

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

Wittgenstein says something rue.
One must ground language in reality, or say nothing more.....but I do not stop there.
The words grounded must then provide a foundation for further exploration, otherwise one is building no clouds, magical noetic castles: beautiful, fantasy inspiring, but meaningless, childish nonsense.
Metaphysics <> Physics <> Idealism
The Bottom in this bottom<>Up thinking, is Physics - the sensually perceived world, and Up, or outward, is idealism, future, and metaphysics, what is underlying physics.
The three must be in harmony - supporting, adding to, enhancing, the other two.


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

Wittgenstein climbs up on a pedestal, upon the idealistic clouds, and then pushes away the ladder - leaving him floating in theoretics and Abrahamic detachments.
He critiques, sawing away at the ladder of language, and then he leaves himself, and those who are seduced by his message of liberation, stranded.  

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

Ordinary, common sense, has been seduced by idealistic escapism....the delusion that there is some mystical absolute substrate - divine language...as math is presented to mirror god's mind for degenerates.  

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

There is no mirroring....only translating, interpreting.
Language represents abstraction, mental models, that do not mirror reality, they have interpreted it, suing biological, evolved, methods - apriori.
The accuracy of the interpretation can only be evaluated by applying the theory - cost/benefit.
But the consequences, the costs/benefits must also be accurately evaluated, because if they are not adjustment, adaptation fails, and the same mistake, wrongly evaluated, or exaggerated or minimized, will result in the same costs/benefits.

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

Language is about the world, or it is a plaything to pass the time, to exploit other minds, or to manipulate their impressionability, the impact of words/symbols upon their memetically prejudiced minds.

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

Where there are no mutually agreed upon definitions there is no possibility for any communication.
A shared world is what makes one mind coexist with another mind, in a shared reality.
If this shared reality is disagreed upon, then there is no possibility of anything more than frustration.
The only way a mind can exist in its own universe without suffering the costs, for such a beneficial attitude, is when it is sheltered - protected from the consequences, of rejecting world, or replacing it with a private alternate one.

And this is where we are at, today - Modernity.
A world that raised millions in a protective, linguistic, cocoon....producing codependency none of them can ever risk challenging.
Now any language threatening this cocoon, this cognitive bubble, is a threat....and they need "safe spaces" to escape the bubble bursting.

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

In "philosophy", or what passes for it, the practice is one of recycling, repackaging, the same Abrahamic presuppositions - renamed to make them fresh and up-to-date.
Words not attaching mind to world, but detaching it, offering it a new and improved alternate reality.
A linguistic bubble.

How many wasted hours, how many wasted lives, on desperate little word games..
Some to assume actions, invisible, extraordinary, beyond ordinary experience, to fly above the mundane, to stand out, to flee and be free from a world that cares not, and is the crueler because of it.
Other to dismiss all, "innocently" picking and choosing where to erase, and what to dismiss, to bury under, to hide, to cover and disguise, with clever, and not so, verbal twists and turns.

All to deal with activities to not be fully controlled.

Oh, but only if we could see the hand that strikes, or hear the tongue that damns us to our fate, how much more willing we would be to accept what will come...one way or another.
Trembling souls begs, pleads, for a response to its most human question:
Why?
Dreaming up voices in the night, whispering the answer they cannot fully hear, they read, from the pages of their divine lord, or they answer back, in defiance, with their own question, wanting to be the divine to be pleaded with...Why not?

Why not, indeed.
The 'yay' declaring to the 'nay' begging.
But is this an answer, or an adolescent tantrum?
What kind of 'sovereign' little knowledge of what will befall him, or can only shout into the darkness what he wills, and may or may not come to be?
Who is affected by such bravado, if not only the living, and of those how many of merit can be so simply convinced?
Such statements of power, such energies displayed, have an effect on those that lack their intensity. But what of the rest, those few, those who cannot convince themselves, let alone try to convince others, using these ways?

Would a cloud weep down on a verbal command, a projected force of will?
Would a stone crumble beneath the power of such loud words?
An animal, perhaps, affected by the suddenness, or affected by the energy of the commanding voice, breaking the atmosphere into waves of vibrations.
An animal would head, and flee, or come running, but not to aid...

Skin, membrane, keliphos, exoskeleton...cocoon.....sarcophagus.
A visual extent of our will's possibilities....only to be surpassed using the voice, to throw our our mind's desires, carrying with it its needs, its emotions - calling for help, for attention, as a warning to all those they tremble to meet.
Killers are silent, quiet...discreet. They make no sound, until it is too late.

How much nervous energy can we get rid of using our lungs?
Whatever is left over from our groins.
The dying can barely be heard in their last moments.
How much will can our words carry, and who shall listen, and of those, how many will comprehend?
The misunderstood usually resort to screaming.....like when dealing with an animal that will not care for subtle hints of aggression, or symbolic gestures of intended harm.
Try whispering, gently, a death wish to an ape. It will hear....your air expelled from your sack of bones and flesh, and whether they contain a mystical chant, or a magical spell, they will not be affected, reading only your physical movements, on the minutest level.  

We've now advanced to the envied position of being manimals of language.
Such power words, and symbols have - drawing from centuries of history, imagery, knowledge, experiences; implying actions we cannot or will not convert to actions.  
We exploit the other's surrender, his dependent, his protective linguistic exoskeleton - delicate membrane of air bubbles, tattooed with emblems.

Symbols/words require a mind, like the one that created them, to re-act, to decipher them.
Place a symbol/word before a stone, speak it to a plant, to a worm, or to any animal untrained in their causal effect, and you will receive no reaction.
The spoken word, being an action, producing vibrations of tone, crescendo, volume, may affect; the sequence, the sonar rhythms and melody particular vocalizations produce may have an effect.

The meaning of the words/symbols will not, unless the animal, or the other mind, has been educated, trained to connect the particular sounds, and symbols, with specific outcomes, expectations, actions.
In more sophisticated minds the symbols/words can trigger emotions, feelings, sensations, associated with specific imagery, concepts, ideas.
The mind has to be prepared to replicate a similar reaction to that which the mind that created the symbols/words, in sequence, intended.
Symbols/words have extraordinary effect on minds that have been trained to react to them in extraordinary, exceptional ways.
Their mass determined by the receptive minds own weight, its own trained reactivity.
Words imply an intent, which needs to be converted back to an action - re-action.
A transmission of intent is a transmission of possibility, as probability, when it does not have to relate to reality as the field of possibility/probability.
It can imply the supernatural, the unnatural, the non-existent, beyond the mental synthetic abstractions in the brain. In the mind the absurd can become probable, because it will never be applied, or returned to the outside as activity - tested against an indifferent world.
In the mind the symbols/word can become a nervous reaction,. cascaded through the organism, becoming activity. The organism, through the brain, becomes an agency of the word/symbol's insinuated intent. It will be the application, and suffer the costs, or reap the benefits.


Philosophy has become no more than a symbolic/word game, producing mass re-actions. It has become no more than psychological manipulation.
The same concepts are translated into new and improved, updated, symbols/words, expecting a better outcome.
Nietzsche's entire opus is no more than a diagnosis - a psychological evaluation of a post-Abrahamic dominated world, psychosis. This is the only reason he has become so influential in the minds of those who suffer the same dis-ease, and are looking for a cure, or a way to justify, to make the illness a new standard of health.
Everything else is word games, returning to the present what had been, relatively, effective in the past, to cause a similar impact, or a grater one.
The dis-ease mutated, as all viruses do, when it is almost killed by antibodies.
What manages to survive adapts to the resistance, the threat to its power - it integrates the threat, to mask itself, to hide from it, necessitating a new and improved autoimmune adaptation.
If none can be created, a new diagnosis to expose the more viral strain, then the organism will perish.

Satyr is the immune system booster.
You can thank me later.

With every adaptation a new diagnostician must come forth to diagnose the new strain, attempting to reinsert itself into the organism - make it ill.
A diagnostician that understands what a genetic virus is, and how it related to a memetic virus.
A diagnostician that can study the virus' methods, using symbols/words, without becoming infected himself/herself, by its insinuating, implications and psychosomatic neurological effects.

A breath of fresh air, is in order.
Opening up a closed infirmary to the outside world.
Open a window, to let the light and oxygen clear the mind from institutionalized smells and artificial lighting.
The first step, in regards to this particular nihilistic meme, is to re-attach symbols/words to the world, to the real.

World does not only mean Humanity. It is not a womb, an encompassing consciousnesses, a Deus of order and reasoning. It is more.
Symbols/Words do not create reality, they refer to it; they connect the mind to it.
The Subjective is relative to the Objective...and symbols/words are how they relate.
No mind creates the world, but reacts, refers, adapts, to it, representing it, with symbols/words, as its representational understanding of it, and then suffers the costs or reaps the benefits.
Convincing mankind, does not mean you've changed THE world.
The world does not care.

Words/Symbols are how zombies can be created, when they conveniently detach the host's mind, from reality, and manipulate need/suffering, to direct it's activities.
Words/Symbols from connecting mind to world, become a method of parasitical hijacking of the organism's physicality, through the mind.
The brain becomes a conduit of genetic control, using memes.

The definitions which win out, one over another, in a war of words, are the definitions with the most perceived utility. If you get more resources by defining words how a tyrant likes, then you will be nudged into using those definitions. Likewise, if your tribe has no tyrant but only informers, then the words will be defined however best those informers provide utility with said words; such as their accounts of 'water being north 31 miles', if at any time there exists the conditions which the ones being informed are ignorant of directions and the one informing them points south instead of north to indicate his directions northward, the newly 'informed' will believe south is north.

There is no magic which happens that makes the actual northward direction suddenly have water, nor is it the case that the one with the account is magically wrong about the actual direction. If someone knew his mistake and that the informer was impatient and easily offended, they would not correct his mistake until a later date, if at all, content with not inspiring the wrath of the stronger personality which just directed them to water.

A language which is too strict cannot account for new information. A language too loose cannot derive value from previous information.

A words degree of meaning is based on the degree to which it refers to a phenomenon, an interaction, a behaviour.
More precisely to a synthesis of activities, behaviours - a web of interactive connections, because on a human sensual level man can only perceive patterns, or combinations of patterns when they have risen to a level human seen organs can be stimulated by its activity, either directly or via a medium such as light or gaseous atmosphere.

The meaning of the word is given by the phenomenon itself.
The phenomenon is given a sound, at first, and then a symbol/word, beginning the process of memetics - culture founded on a linguistic tradition, expressing a primordial relationship of a particular tribe, genetic group, with a particular environment.
This is why we have so many languages.

Meaning of the words is not arbitrary, not subjective.
The symbol/word is the representation of the nervous system, connecting mind, noumenon, with world, interacting phenomena.

Much later they become more complex, referring to combinations of said relationships, and then becoming disconnected, or looping back upon self and referring to internal phenomena, such as emotions, sensations, fantasies, concepts etc.
This must have occurred when self-consciousness emerged.
The internal cannot be perceived directly, other than through behaviour, so symbols/words became more mysterious, projecting an internal sensation, emotion, or combinations of them, as well as noetic construct that had no reference outside the mind.

Meanings are not arbitrary, they are not subjective, unless they are placed inside the mind where they cannot be tested, evaluated, or judged, but only transmitted as emotion, sensation, or vague concepts that acquire a different nuance.

Meme establishes a tradition - culture with particular sonar, linguistic, symbolic, convention, and these words refer to a shared world, not to arbitrary things, to real phenomena all can perceive, and judge and appreciate.
If the appreciation is wrong, or to the degree that it does not agree with the phenomenon itself, determines the degree of its failure, its cost, rather than its beneficial consequences, based on the mind's intentions.
The degree to which the subjective interpretation of the objective, indifferent, phenomenon, is in tune, in agreement, in harmony, with the phenomenon itself, is the degree to which it has validity.

Meaning can be disconnected from reality, when ti fabricated abstractions of phenomena that do not exist beyond the skull.
This is not entirely harmless.
In a sheltered environment it may have on immediate cost, but it is an error that accumulates and compounds, when it is not corrected, until the mind has manufactured a complex system of concepts that refer to nothing outside the mind. No amount of sheltering can mitigate and save the individual from this compounding effect of error.

What breaks free of this mountain of words and symbols, is reality itself.
Anyone who refuses to connect words to reality is refusing to break free from words.

Solipsism is broken when the mind dares to connect to reality.
The self-referential mind, having constructed a wonderful, self-consistent alternate reality, is reluctant to give it up, when ti is protected from the severity of the consequences.
The mind afraid of where the connections will lead it, refuses to accept these connections, no matter how his senses justify them. He wants to slander all words, so that words can no longer hurt him, so that words can no longer trick him and lead him astray. He's expressing a distrust of his own judgment, expressed as a distrust of other...all others.

The positive nihilists cannot give-up his kingdom of words. his little clique of minds that support his construct, or he reinterprets and selectively samples to make them support it.
He surrounds himself of sycophants, who he flatters and humours, because without them his kingdom of symbols/words crumbles into nonsensical fantasies - boyish dreams, games ot hide form the bogey man.

Saying that nothing is certain, that there is no absolute, including absolute certainty, is simply admitting that nobody has, or can ever have, all the data - is not omnipotent, omniscient.
This does not mean all is equally valid.
It means some theories, some opinions are superior to others....they are more probably closer to a fluctuating reality, than other opinions, judgments.
In all things degrees.
No absolutes.
More, or less.
Superior, inferior...not absolute omniscient.
All judgments are juxtapositions.

This memetic dis-ease has been festering for so long that some now require an amputation to rid themselves of its accumulated brain-rot.
For most this is impossible, because the rot has infected some crucial to survival organs....so only death will rid the world of the illness.

The young still have a chance, if they intervene early enough, and with seriousness equal to the severity of their condition.

Christian scripture states it openly:

Bible wrote:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Word being the English translation of the original word 'logos'.
ΛΟΓΟΣ - From the word ΛΕΓΩ - to speak, later generalized to mean to reason, to explain, to think...
ΛΕΓΩ - to gather, collect and to centralize, to give a centre to.

In Greek it has no insinuation other than to give a word to what the mind does - gathers, stimulation, collects them and then gives them speech, acoustic resonance representing these mental collections.
As with the word ΑΛΕΤΗΕΙΑ - un-forget, the Romans took it and translated it into Latin, losing its original connotation and imprisoning generations of Latin based tribes in a linguistic error.
Word became a representation of the noumenon that was now placed before the phenomenal world, as pre-existing the apparent.
Since then words/symbols have been used to try to escape reality.
Artistic minds immersing themselves in the power of symbols and words, feeling liberated, saved, free to remake reality by recombining words/symbols in a pleasing, invigorating, inspiring synthesis. One that can trigger an emotional psychosomatic effect.

In the west we live in a world of symbols and no substance....words with no accompanying deeds.
we live in this world of words we were given - an idealized world where language does not discipline itself to world, but plays, fabricating fantastic new alternative worlds.

God = word...and word is still God for Moderns.
They worship it.
They surrender to its power, as they do to all forms of art - judging it by how it affects them emotionally and through mind how it affects them physically.
They do not worship nature, world, through symbols/words but stop at the symbol itself....like hedonists stop at the effect, at pleasure.
Moderns stop short.
They remain fixed on the symbol, or pleasure, or the effect, not daring to go further into the cause.
They stop at noetic abstractions and interpretations given a name, a symbol, and do not proceed towards the phenomenon, the apparent.

Symbols/words are like toys for infants.
Magical....bedazzling, bewildering, mysterious.
In them they can become anything they dream of, and if they can gather their friends to play they can create a game that can become a universe on its own.

What is language?
A sophistication of grooming, among primates.
When we speak, we gather and groom, establishing alliances, positing ourselves within a group.
What is a word, written or spoken?
A projection outward of an internal construct; the externalization of an abstraction constructed by gathering, collecting, stimuli from interactive phenomena; an externalization of an interpretation.

Verbal language has great space effect.
One can gather at a distance.
It shrinks spatial distances.
Written language shrinks temporal ones.
Now you can gather and groom, across greater expanses, long after your death.
Your words remain effective, potent, as long as there are minds trained to decipher them, and be triggered by them.
Word = God.
He's not dead....he's Word - code.  
And how magnificently Moderns are affected by words, and symbols...because God, the Abrahamic one, did not die.
He changed his names.

More than intent, words can now insinuate and through their ambiguous insinuations of intent, of ideals, they can trigger imaginative, emotional, reactions to them, as if they were divine.
Have we not all experienced their power in movie theatres where they, in combination with fantasy imagery and music, can transport us into alternate realities we then refuse to leave?

The ancients used narration to gather the children and paint fantastic world using words - myths, full of metaphors.
In our time we have music, movies....fArt.  
We enter the 'cave' to watch shadows on the wall, and be transported - ΜΕΤΑΦΈΡΩ - out of our bodies, out of our minds.

Language has the multiplying power of musical soundtracks....the myth takes on a life of its own.
A simpleton does not need an imagination, because it is provided for him.
Mythology is not connected to experience, but experience to mythology.

Symbols/Words have such a profound effect on immature, undeveloped minds, on feeble, needy, inexperienced psychologies, on psychotics....and on the effect they want to stop and stay.
They want to live in the mythology - in an idealized reality.

Daemon.
Δαίμων = divides, separates. distribute - originally meant the deity that distributes fate.
Δαημον = He who is knowledgeable and experienced.

Many believe the Daemon to be cold, indifferent, harsh, and uncaring, and he might even present himself as such, but all you have to do is look at his eye and see that it glances at what he cares for and loves most.

Knowing and experience would produce a calmer demeanour before what has already been experienced and understood.
Its behaviour, cycles, pattern re-cognized.
As Anfang [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] fear opens mouth and eyes to receive more data from what it did not expect, or has no knowledge, or experience with.
Moderns use 'fear' to accuse others of phobias they feel in themselves, because they cannot empathize but only sympathize and antipathize, as an inversion of the first.

Disgust is the proper automatic reaction of discrimination.
To perceive and organically, genetically, and intellectually, memetically, disapprove.
A psychosomatic reaction accompanied by heaving, closing tight of mouth and eyes - all the signs of keeping out and away, of wanting to expel.

Moderns are slaves to anxiety/fear.
They either pretend they do not feel it, or are not controlled by it, or they accuse others of it so as to hide it in themselves.
They unload its negativity on the other, leaving them in the idealized pristine state of possession only the 'positive' emotions.  
This is also called projecting.
You will notice that when the Modern is confronted with what he has no response to, and has no counter-argument, he will accuse others of the anxiety beginning to form inside of him as an automatic reaction to what he is confronted by.
The only response to description of homosexuality and females, and to the arguments supporting race is to accuse others of fear...because they feel it when thinking of the repercussions if this were so.
Anxiety/Fear is what makes them sacrifice reason to need and adopt the popular narratives. Love is how this anxiety is calmed before it becomes hate.
Hate is the natural reaction to what we fear, or that makes us anxious, because it threatens our well-being.  
 
Utopian state for Moderns is a state of perpetual infancy....the more daring want to exist in perpetual adolescence = exploring, playing with words, fornicating, self-medicating, not needing anything, being watched over and cared for, unconditionally loved and appreciated by a parental entity, like the State, if not God.
A game where nobody is excluded, because for kids the 'more the merrier'. It's about quantities, popularity, because appreciation of quality is undeveloped - naivete.

What does it matter what symbol/word one uses when what it refers to is part of the same experienced world?
Well, at first we might think that it does not.
Whether you call  the biological organism, the aggregate of patterns/behaviours we call 'cat' a cow, or a door would not affect the cat itself.
A cat will remain a cat, no matter what name we give it.
As would a cloud, a stone, lightning...anything.

The problem is convention, represented by the dictionary definition, which establishes a norm, based on historical processes, facilitating communication.
The second problem is the motive.
Why would one change the name, the symbol/word being used?
Because it does not satisfy his/her motive; his/her pre-existing goal, objective.
Top<>Down Thinking.
What would be easier than to simply declare language inadequate and use it in a manner that validates an already established outcome?
What is the issue is the world, not language referring to it.
World contradicts the desired outcome, therefore the degenerate does not change the goal, but attempts to modify the world, but not through action, because he would pay a high price, but using the modification of symbols/words referring to it.

Consider how the word 'love' has been hijacked and manipulated by the Abrahamic branch called Christianity.
Consider how at this time Moderns are attempting to do the same with all language - corrupting the meaning of 'human', 'race', 'male/female', 'sex', 'self', 'morality', 'god', 'one', 'absolute'...

They are detaching these terms, these symbols, from their worldly references so as to manipulate and exploit stupidity, lostness, forgetfulness.
Their target audience is desperate for such convenient escapes, that would not shame their self-ascribe integrity - Abrahamism is far too childish to not embarrass the average, more literate, Modern.
They need something more esoteric, complex, convincing.
Literacy necessitates linguistic manipulation on a scale that was not necessary in the more illiterate past.
In the past narratives were passed on to the masses via parables, mythological stories.
Information overload requires the cutting of the path.....at the source.
Language, symbols/words, are the expressions of neurological connectivity of mind/body, ideal/real....a perfect point to twist the mind into paradoxical, self-referential, sacrifices of integrity that will remain hidden enough, obscure enough to not distress the mind.
Same superstitions are manufactured by altering the verbiage - making it sound profound, more rational, even a bit scientific.

How they try to exploit language to gratify their goals.
Gender and sex are corrupted.

What does gender mean, if not the social application of a sexual reproductive, heterosexual, specialized role?
But, because gender is socially modified, given symbols, words, behavioural standards, they try to use this to imply that sexual roles are no different, and that what appears male/female is truly only, superficially different......the esoteric, the inside, is all the same.

And what is this 'inside"?
Where is it?
Entirely subjective....meaning it exists in the brain, is a vague mental construct. An ambiguous, insinuating idea(l), used to support any desire, any delusion, any hope.

Esoteric = hidden....occult.
Another word to imply 'subjective'.    
We can place anything there.
Anything we cannot validate externally.
We can keep it so vague that any external phenomenon can be declared to validate this esoteric concept.
It's malleable...so ambiguous that any self-contradictions can pass on as mist in the mind - magical smoke and mirrors.

We can keep the absurd safe from exoteric ridicule, the indifferent real.
A feeling....a sensation.....nobody can shame, nobody can challenge...nobody can expose.
It can't be exposed....it is eternally inside - a secret nobody can ever know, can never tell, but only insinuate....passed on from mouth to mouth, each not knowing what is being referred to, but only through indirect descriptions.
Each finding a secret in himself to relate to it.
It is 'power'.....it is 'love'...it is 'wonderful', 'fantastic', inspiring, invigorating...use any triggering word, any 'positive' moniker.
It is the eternal hope....rooted in need/desire.

We know what 'inside' means.
It means mind. A thought, a noumenon. An abstraction, that need not be clearly defined, because it has psychosomatic effects.
The more vague it is, the more powerful the effect.
To clarify is to demystify....to strip it of its psychosomatic, placebo, potentials; disarm it.

The untested idea is forever perfect....the un-testable idea(l) is forever sublime.
Its failure can be blamed on the individual, keeping the theory unblemished, and therefore not to be rejected, or replaced.

dictionary wrote:

es·o·ter·ic
ˌesəˈterik/Submit
adjective
intended for or likely to be understood by only a small number of people with a specialized knowledge or interest.
"esoteric philosophical debates"
synonyms: abstruse, obscure, arcane, recherché, rarefied, recondite, abstract; enigmatic, inscrutable, cryptic, Delphic; complex, complicated, incomprehensible, opaque, impenetrable, mysterious

We begin with the common conventional definition connecting us to a linguistic past - meme.

Is 'esoteric' validation?
No, it is insinuation of validation.
To know, is to hold data...first or second hand experiences.
This does not prove that said experiences are referring to anything real. The knowledge, data, can refer to an idea, an ideal, a theory.
It can be a synthesis that is arbitrary and meaningless outside the mind of its creator, unless it has been shared and becomes part of a occult movement; secret society, suing cryptic, specialized lingo to imply profound insights when there is no substance there to be found.
It being 'secret' is not validation of its quality, but only a display of the mind's appreciation, evaluation, judgment of it.

A non-applied judgment is always untested theoretical, and therefore forever potentially useful.
The 'esoteric' can have an indirect effect, via the mind(s) that hold it in high esteem.
The effect is upon the bodies within which the minds participates.
A collectivism multiplies the effect through mirroring.
Shared delusions are stronger.

Consider the psychology of the masses.
Reason is swept away in emotion and madness - erotic frenzy.

Words used to be about a balanced relationship with the real/ideal, for example to be Strong in the past was about having a balanced amalgamation of traits which were effective at resisting entropy.

Now they have been reduced to be either meaningless or to ABSOLUTELY mean one singular trait, akin to Negative and Positive Nihilism.

A muscular moron, is now described as "strong", despite being weak in all other areas.

An modern intellectual, is described as "intelligent", despite his inability to think outside the confines of his civilization.

The modern demand for strict definitions with regards to everything illustrates their lack of creative will to interpret words through the context and situation that they are used.

Moderns have a hyper-Apollonian/Dionysian attitude towards words despite the essential balanced leaning Dionysian nature of words.

Impulso Oscuro wrote:

Words used to be about a balanced relationship with the real/ideal, for example to be Strong in the past was about having a balanced amalgamation of traits which were effective at resisting entropy.

Now they have been reduced to be either meaningless or to ABSOLUTELY mean one singular trait, akin to Negative and Positive Nihilism.

A muscular moron, is now described as "strong", despite being weak in all other areas.

An modern intellectual, is described as "intelligent", despite his inability to think outside the confines of his civilization.

The modern demand for strict definitions with regards to everything illustrates their lack of creative will to interpret words through the context and situation that they are used.

Moderns have a hyper-Apollonian/Dionysian attitude towards words despite the essential balanced leaning Dionysian nature of words.

Dionysian would refer to existence as Fluctuating chaos/order, and Apollonian refers only to order.

Moderns either simplify/generalize words to the point of making them inflexible, or disconnect them from their utility as a connector of mind to world, or noumenon to phenomenon...converting them to a ideas with no external references that only have a specific meaning in their heads.
This meaning can then be connected to emotions, dreams, imagery, anything really, since the world no longer is used as a reference.
With no real to limit the application of the ideal, through language, the modern feels 'liberated' because he can synthesize words and combine them in any way imaginable.
The only criterion is convention, and popularity, making the product appealing to as many other minds as possible.
It becomes a psychological tool....political.

So, either they have no talent with words, and are easily impressed by those that do have a talent to construct metaphors, to seduce or trigger them, or they have a talent and use it to convince themselves that their abilities with words extends to actions....that if they can manipulate words, and through them those imbeciles who have no talent with them, then this means they are gods, manipulating reality with symbols/words.  
This is where the 'hyper', you mentioned, enters the scene.
With no objective reality to restrict them, they hyper or hypo inflate their abstractions.
This is a defensive mechanism.

The confusion of world with humanity is at the root of the Biblical 'word came first..."
Through other humans (simpletons) you can manipulate world indirectly.
The word becomes magical.

Nihilism can construct its inverted alternate realities, and then resell them to Moderns, by changing the symbols/words.
Each generation is more modern than the previous one.
That's what being a modern means: up-to-date with the latest fashions, trends, beliefs; being in agreement with what is most popular or most cutting-edge.
The same ideas can be remade, renamed and resold as new, as Modern.
change the symbol, rename the product, recombine it to make it look different, new and improved, and you can sell the same cRAP, the same fART, the same philosophies over and over again.
With the proper marketing and a famous icon, you have a product to be sold.

Example Tolkien's Lord of the Rings.
Tolkien wanted to create a modern myth in a world where myths had been lost.
He was also a devout Christian.

He took the basic framework of Christian dogma, and changed the words and symbols.
Lord of the Rings is a Biblical story with absolute good fighting absolute evil.
If you accept the starting premises it is entirely self-consistent.
If you buy into its 'logic', it is reasonable.
If you take it literally then you are insane. You cannot function if you apply its metaphors literally.
If you take it as a mythology with messages about the real world, it can be emotionally inspiring, wise, and insightful, in a very simplistic way - dualistic.
It is in tune with Abrahamism so it appeals to minds born and raised in Abrahamic spiritual nihilism.
Abrahamic binary thinking repackaged and presented as a new story for a new generation.
If you sell it as a story you can inspire kids for years, but if you sell ti as a philosophy you can make them debate over the meanings of the metaphors, each kid finding in it what it needs to cope with the world.

All a myth can do it present the human condition in a manner that is not as direct and obvious.

Supremacy, as is colloquially referred, is the worst attitude one could ever have toward existence. Whenever one hears today that someone is a "supremacist", they interpret it as an unfounded conviction and entitlement. This sort of 'supremacy', is one no deeper than a child's spoiled obsession. Immature and infantile.
When you think of this very concept of supremacy but done in a way that is no longer 'infantile', but done by a nation of people who have evolved to behave such a way even into their adulthood, then you get a different picture: something dark and repulsive. Horrifying, especially, if you have never been cognizant of these kinds of 'monsters' being possible.
In fact, it is this very type of person, or 'people', I talk about when they purposely confuse different meanings of the very word as a way to hide themselves from exposure. When they accuse another of 'supremacy' and the target says they are not defined in such a monstrous way as they accuse today, they conflate two definitions of the word for the sake of condemnation and that they are not exposed for projecting their own behavior, asking "Do you not believe that you/your group is superior to this other group?" If it is true, such as in the case that your group was victorious - and civility limits your behavior to the newly contextualized (by the question they ask) offensive remark towards you, then you are now caught having to either lie about your own pride in your group by saying they were not superior, or accept the frame of the question which is essentially asking something equivalent to "Are you retarded?" and affirming it. Another particular aspect of this question, which is defaulted to by the accuser, is an appeal to essentialism. What is obvious becomes a sort of religious belief, as they purposely confuse the idea of essentialism. A worldly concept of essentiality is connected viscerally to its embodiment: an essence of a person dies when they do, or changes when they reproduce themselves with another that doesn't hold the same potentiality. The, in the same vein as 'supremacy', definition of essentialism always on the back foot of the one accusing is that of their own religious and unjustified conception, the entitlement, which is infantile at its root but insidious from its maturity.