Know Thyself

Nothing in Excess
 
HomePortalFAQMemberlistSearchRegisterLog in

Share | 
 

 Words

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


Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 12817
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 50
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Words (6) - Definitions - Levels of Cognition - Empathy Fri Jun 17, 2016 11:33 am

Words (6) - Definitions - Levels of Cognition - Empathy


_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν


Last edited by Satyr on Fri Jun 17, 2016 2:15 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Satyr
Daemon


Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 12817
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 50
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Words (7) - Definitions - Nihilism - Humanity Fri Jun 17, 2016 11:58 am

Words (7) - Definitions - Nihilism - Humanity


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



Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 718
Join date : 2012-04-28
Age : 25
Location : Brink

PostSubject: Re: Words Fri Jun 17, 2016 3:46 pm

Words (5), 6:26
I made a similar comment on another video about the difference between the Right and the Left:
"The Right defines itself by what it strives for. The Left defines itself by what is and has been - how it makes them feel taken out of context or put in different contexts - and then by the destruction of it if it is unpleasant. The Left consumes to ease pain (with a lofty religious goal like utopia) and the Right consumes to put toward practical goals (like building solidarity or a business or a means to some end.) The Left tries to make an end come about, the Right tries to make a means to an end come about. The left destroys opportunity until the only one left is the one they want. The Right strives to build more opportunity for their goal to come about."

Admittedly, it is a simplification and not very fleshed out. The idea is that people on the Right tend to concentrate on increasing probabilities for what they build whereas the modern Regressive Left is attempting to destroy any probability that isn't their own - and without moderation or compromise. Admittedly, this is still a fairly vague conception of what I am trying to uncover.

Words(7)

There is a tendency for me to see nihilistic thought and think there is some 'keystone', some 'secret premise' which they all hide, which they depend upon to invert the world. In the case of Jews, I have thought there is one - and specifically with the 'regressive left' I try to search for what it is so I may challenge it. Some secret word/concept which they all hold. However, I now realize that by the very nature of nihilism, their 'secret' may be anything or any concept or any word - anything which they personally interpret as a truth, like having a "safe word" ('rosebud' from the movie Citizen Kane). Appears for a long time I have believed their bullshit that there is some hidden, secret, unseen truth that I just couldn't see.

From your suggestion, it appears that 'keystone' is personal - it is ego. I had said before that each person assumes their ego and then uses an idea(l) by which they depend on for their self-worth. Your own interpretation being that it is a 'shield', a 'wall'. The imagery/approach is different, but I think the behavior may be the same. By its nihilistic nature, though, they can change it at any time. So, in my search for this keystone, I was really looking for a universal aspect of ego - some ultimate mimetic weapon; a mimetic equivalent to a nuclear bomb of which I can set off against those who utilize morality to try and deny reality - by which, if I am to continue experiencing life intersubjectively, viscerally through an 'other' - they deny me my senses. Attempting to use the system against itself.

Your suggested solution to nihilism is to not participate within, but without (which I think is why you separate them as a part of the environment rather than as human or one you identify with. However, that type of either/or thinking implies you think intersubjectively to some degree with those you decide are human; is that so?) - and have them define the words they are using - or you would if it did not inevitably create a violent or aggressive physical altercation as a result of their defensiveness. I've yet to let go of them as 'human', which may be an offense to those of higher quality who associate themselves with me. The only reason I have not chosen is because the choice has not yet been forced upon me. However, the reason I do not engage with them is because of that very same fear. It may, actually, be that probable reaction which defines whether or not they are human, to a significant (but not complete) extent.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Satyr
Daemon


Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 12817
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 50
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Words (8) - Definitions - Love Sun Jun 19, 2016 11:49 pm

Words (8 ) - Definitions - Love


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


Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 12817
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 50
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Words (9) - Definitions - Beauty - Freedom Sun Jun 19, 2016 11:51 pm

Words (9) - Definitions - Beauty - Freedom


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


Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 12817
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 50
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Words (10) - Meme Mon Jun 20, 2016 12:51 pm

Words (10) - Meme


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


Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 12817
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 50
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Words (11) - Nihilism Mon Jun 20, 2016 2:14 pm

Words (11) - Nihilism


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


Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 12817
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 50
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Words (12) - Polemics {1} Tue Jun 21, 2016 8:50 am

Words (12) - Polemics {1}


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


Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 12817
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 50
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Words (13) - Polemics {2} Tue Jun 21, 2016 9:54 am

Words (13) - Polemics {2}


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



Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 718
Join date : 2012-04-28
Age : 25
Location : Brink

PostSubject: Re: Words Tue Jun 21, 2016 11:55 am

Words ( 8 )

Two definitions of love:
The parental (identifying self in other) [also social cooperation] [later abstracted to an idea, so social cohesion around an idea/principle/grander self]
The fight/flight lust sexual love which numbs the fight/flight response, repressing those energies and then releasing them in a spasm/orgasm. Once orgasm follows a fear, it 'releases' the energy acquired from such fear along with the orgasm; this is where you get sexual kinks/fetishes from, the increased fear response going up to the orgasm adds to the 'pent up' energies which are subsequently released - relieving the tension which the fear initially provoked. Flirting/sexual approach is an increasing tension of two people exposing vulnerabilities to each other that the lust response eventually overwhelms one of them into a silence - where only an action remains to express themselves - resulting in kissing, grabbing, copulation, etc. Mutually feeding on the mimetic and genetic morsels of their persons.


Words (10)


Satyr wrote:
Words, sound (memes) do not directly influence the world or nature.


A sound can influence nature as it can cause ripples in water or rupturing eardrums if loud enough. (I think you knew this but for the sake of expediency just didn’t see it as worth mentioning) It just does not directly affect the world as much as a nihilist may think it does or should. The intent behind the sound by a nihilistic speaker may be larger than it is physically capable of within the world. When one shouts at a rock 'Move!' this is a demonstration of how for language to have meaning proportional to the intent behind what is said, there must be a medium by which that intent can transfer to an-other.

Words (11)

'Truth' is no longer about what exists in the world but is considered the ultimate weapon of politics. Acquiring truth does not represent a discovery of what is within the world any longer, but instead a word which will grant power over the motivation/politics of a people - the ability to steer them one way or another.

This is related to the pleasure principle where one seeks in truth a lasting guarantee of their pleasure or satisfaction. The people will choose a 'truth' which best grants them this capability, over another - the costs to be deferred onto future generations (in debt/slavery) or excused as 'worth the cost'.
Because people have been seduced, the bourgeois think they have been granted a special access to the 'truth' that most people cannot handle - the 'truth' that all are equal and peace is the aim, with power at the top.

The nihilist criteria for being 'intellectual' or 'of value' is the measure by how much suffering one can endure and still exist within the world. This is not a good measure; as one may suffer from a disease and still exist - this does not necessarily advance the genetics or mimetics of the species. Existential suffering means little, as all suffering must become manifested within the world for it to acquire acknowledgement. One cannot say they have or will suffer in the future, because there is no evidence of it having happened yet or it is demanded that evidence for it be extremely high to the point of reality-denial (AutSider's thread)

Further, with the bourgeoisie, the lowly class cannot be trusted with power because they are susceptible to the manipulations of others - even by the 'elite' themselves. They justify their own elitism by continually trying to deceive the other and use that as evidence that the other is incapable of managing themselves - that they fall for dishonesty so easily. When it is not fallen for, the 'elite' beg for mercy that they do not be murdered for their corruption of the youth and twisting of the truth.

---

Males becoming female, feminized. This is a result of the environment selecting for feminine traits instead of male, masculine, traits. Nature selects for a male which is most capable to adapt to a hostile and austere environment. Today, the environment selects for a male which is capable of adapting to superorganic government state, which puts demands upon the individual male to feminize himself or else he is to be jailed. Not only is death threatened, but also the threat of hurting/killing his chances at children.


Words (12)

Satyr wrote:
[By making his nihilism popular,] he converts his illness to a new form of health.

Health, being what is popular. Why popular? Because it assures a triggered response within a human, artificial, environment. What is sought to control is not oneself, but everyone else, as they are a medium which is open to being influenced and their own beliefs have consequences within this environment: they vote, they stage revolutions, they ostracize others. Ironically, to better keep a human honest you have to lower their power - "Whatever doesn't kill me, makes me stronger."

The new fight against "triggering" has become a defense mechanism by the nihilist, who wishes to protect their meme from criticism. The side effect is the infantilizing of people. As the internet threw open the doors to differing perspectives, a safe space environment becomes the real life equivalent/manifestation of social media's "echo chambers", where one only associates and talks with those who share their own values; sometimes resulting in a radicalization.

When it comes to Satyr, I saw him as a challenge to "save" with nihilism. Most would be triggered to such a point that they excuse him as an evil racist or something. That defeats the very purpose of nihilism - which seeks to be popular with everyone. If it cannot stand up to scrutiny, then it is going to fail. One has to improve their seduction methods or else it is doomed to failure or otherwise a showing that it is not healthy enough to seduce the human race, requiring a eugenics program to enforce there being subjects capable of accepting their flavor nihilism: a Brave New World. The projection of 'mental illness' onto the individual may be because one wishes to use it as an excuse for why an-other failed to live up to their nihilistic standard.


Words(13)

Satyr wrote:
[In nihilism] the one who is most hurt is at the top of the totem pole.
This is because simply existing is seen as an act of strength and nobility. So, when one suffers most, they are the most noble for having suffered such injustices and survived them. This is related to Nietzsche's assessment that a Judaic mind chooses "Existence at all costs."


Last edited by Slaughtz on Tue Jun 21, 2016 5:17 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Satyr
Daemon


Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 12817
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 50
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Words Tue Jun 21, 2016 12:10 pm

Thanks for listening Slaughtz...is the sound good?
Can you hear it well?

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



Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 718
Join date : 2012-04-28
Age : 25
Location : Brink

PostSubject: Re: Words Tue Jun 21, 2016 12:14 pm

Satyr wrote:
Thanks for listening Slaughtz...is the sound good?
Can you hear it well?
Yes, though I still use a program to increase its volume/amplify it. It comes through clearly enough. I would be concerned that if you modified the volume upward on your end it might increase distortion.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Satyr
Daemon


Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 12817
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 50
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Words Tue Jun 21, 2016 12:18 pm

That's what it does.
Still, after receiving complaints I've put it to the max.

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


Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 12817
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 50
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Words (14) - Polemics {3} Tue Jun 21, 2016 1:23 pm

Words (14) - Polemics {3}


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



Gender : Male Posts : 271
Join date : 2014-08-28
Location : -

PostSubject: Re: Words Sat Jun 25, 2016 2:02 pm

Slaughtz wrote:

Your suggested solution to nihilism is to not participate within, but without (which I think is why you separate them as a part of the environment rather than as human or one you identify with. However, that type of either/or thinking implies you think intersubjectively to some degree with those you decide are human; is that so?)

I don't understand the difference between being intersubjective with people and seeing them as part of the environment. Supposedly the dichotomy is between seeing a person as one with an inner perspective and seeing one as without. But this idea of having an inner perspective is really just about one having an intimate perspective of himself. One knows himself from an intimate perspective, and other people are similar to him in comparison to animals and objects, so he can see them as he sees himself, and thereby know them better.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Slaughtz



Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 718
Join date : 2012-04-28
Age : 25
Location : Brink

PostSubject: Re: Words Sat Jun 25, 2016 2:39 pm

Stuart wrote:
I don't understand the difference between being intersubjective with people and seeing them as part of the environment. Supposedly the dichotomy is between seeing a person as one with an inner perspective and seeing one as without. But this idea of having an inner perspective is really just about one having an intimate perspective of himself. One knows himself from an intimate perspective, and other people are similar to him in comparison to animals and objects, so he can see them as he sees himself, and thereby know them better.

My understanding is: Intersubjectivity is a herd psychology where one sees or accepts no difference between oneself and the other. Internal interpretations and thought processes which are occurring within oneself are assumed to be also occurring in the other - or atleast, the other is assumed as capable of having the same thoughts. Therefor, whatever you think would hurt you, you think would also hurt the other, the herd. And, whatever would hurt the other, you behave as if it also hurts yourself.

To a degree, we can personify things, as everything we observe passes through ourselves. Personifying nature is not the same as herd psychology, as the personification (such as polytheist Gods) is still seen or experienced as separate from self, but only with familiar characteristics. When one objectifies humans (seeing them as environment), they are using their consciousness as a tool for making predictions about their behavior. This is also empathy, where one can choose to be sympathetic or antipathetic.

Satyr wrote:
Do we not all, as humans, not want someone on 'our side'?
Do we not want someone on our side, for us, because we are who and what we are?
Someone who appreciates, and shares the costs, and the benefits?

Do we not want to be acknowledged as being a member of the 'right', or, at lead, 'our' side?

this should not be confused with herd psychology, and yet it is, primarily by those who identify with the principles of the herds, though they reject the notion that they are pat of it.

I inserted my own simplistic either/or thinking into the question. My only understanding of "identifying with other" was that of belonging to them like one does to a herd. Identification with other can be an empathic behavior where one makes the choice to associate themselves sympathetically to the pattern or antipathetically.

For example, "burning and torturing ants". One is first curious what the ant is. It moves and has certain behaviors, etc. We then perform some experiments on them, tinkering and exposing - cutting and frying. We do not see ourselves as part of them nor do we experience ourselves as sharing their pain. We think, rationally, how it must be painful for the ant because we would feel pain... Personifying it. But, we do not ourselves at the same time experience that pain as we inflict it upon the ant. In contrast, when one feels guilt after murdering a person, then they are experiencing pain from some intersubjective herd mentality. They hurt themselves by hurting the person, usually in the form of losing social opportunity be a use of one's own behavior being limited or stunted (for example, not being skilled enough at navigating society without feeling guilty). But the nature of guilt is another topic.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Satyr
Daemon


Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 12817
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 50
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Words Sat Jun 25, 2016 6:30 pm

How I use the term (inter)subjective.
all organisms, all consciousness is subjective - it reacts, interprets, and applies this subjective interpretation of the objective within the objective world.
Some subjective minds can share their subjective interpretations of the objective world.

The subjective is an interpretation of the objective, and how close it is to it determines its accuracy, proven by its application, by the choices, judgment made using the subjective interpretation of the objective world.
Modernity, using Nihilism, shelters the subjective mind from the costs of their judgments, choices which are not close to the objective, and in the case of Nihilism may even contradict the objective by positing an idea, and ideal, which is nowhere to be found in the objective world and, more so, it is the reverse of what is found in the objective world.  
The subjective interpretation, the abstraction, the noumenon, as I call it, is contradicted by the real... it stands in relation to it as negation.
The Modern accuses the world of negating his ideals, instead of finding in self the negation of world - this is the Nihilist.

Now, with no external reference for the shared Nihilistic idea(l), the masses of moderns, protected from their own delusions, require an external reference point, to direct their will.
This external reference point becomes the mind of another organism. So, we have one noumenon referring to another noumenon, creating a matrix of relationships where the phenomenon, the real world, is excluded.
In fact the more minds participate in this matrix, creating webs of relationships, the more validated the Nihilistic meme becomes, requiring no phenomena, no world, to validate their delusions, their memes, their ideals.
This is inter-dependence.
The world is taken out of the process, and the connections are made between noumena, or abstractions referring to other abstractions that only exists as ambiguous ideas, ideals, in other minds.
A common language, and interpretation is necessary and this is established through brainwashing, education, peer pressure exploiting weakness, and manipulating human feebleness.
Whereas for all realistic ideas, ideals, the world is the standard validating or negating them, in this case it is only other.
This is why when Moderns use the word "world" they mean this matrix of connecting noumena, and not the world outside of their relating.
This is why popularity is "truth", or quantity is quality.
This is inter-subjectivity.

Millions of minds codependent, because their shared ideals have no external reference points, and so the meme can only survive by integrating more and more minds into its way of thinking, by infecting them with the same ideals, ideas, and methods of interpreting... the same knowledge and the same understanding of this data.
Understanding = patterns in the knowledge... therefore the shared understanding simply means the same patterns given to the masses of codependent minds.

This is the true designation of a cult.
One or more minds may reach an agreement about a phenomenon in the world, as it relates to them, because they share existence - they are in the same world.  
But if there is no phenomenon to refer to, how do one or more minds reach an agreement, a communion, of shared evaluation?
Simple... indoctrination, institutionalization, also known as brainwashing, education.

To use a metaphor... one or more minds may evaluate a phenomenon, such as an elephant, in the same way... this does not mean they are part of a cult.
The pattern(s) called elephant, exists independent of their subjectivity.
They discover it, within the world, and interpret it each in his own way.
Accurate interpretations results in successful (inter)actions with elephant... an erroneous interpretation results in failure, or even death.
Cost/Benefit evaluations.

The delusional moderns are convinced of a unicorn.
They read it in a book, perhaps it was given to them as a holy book.
So, although none of them has ever seen a unicorn they are convinced that iti exists.
they only disagree on its traits, the details... but all are certain, have faith, that one day they will find a Unicorn and settle their disputes.
They have nothing to base their original conviction upon, other than mommy told them, or it feels good to believe in magical creatures in a mundane, for them, world, or some other psychological reason having nothing to do with experience, precedent, in other words reality.
The idea, the ideal, the abstraction Unicorn only exists as a vague noumenon, with no references in The external world, except in pieces - a horn here, a horse there....and so on - the combination called Unicorn has no phenomenal referential.
this group of Unicorn believers, unlike the ones agreeing on the nature of an elephant, is a cult, because either "agreement", their shared conviction, is based on coercion, manipulation, exploitation, psychosis, placed there by some authority figure.

Their Unicorn meme
, if it also develops a morality, a culture, a semiology, is an inter-subjective "world", existing as noumenon shared by multiple minds... and has nothing to do, or little to do, with the actual world where elephants are found.

The Unicorn, if it is idealized, deified, becomes an annulment of the world where only elephants exist... and the world where only elephants exist, is a negative to those sharing a noetic world where unicorns exist.
The elephant believers do not require each other to validate their perception of the patterns, phenomenon, they call elephant. Their subjective relationship to the objective world is direct. they may then choose to share their connection with other subjectivities, but this is not a requirement.
The Unicorn believers, on he other hand, MUST validate their belief using other subjective minds, otherwise it is inconsequential, useless, or it vanishes in time, due to genetic deterioration resulting in memory degradation and death.
The Unicorn can only exist as noumenon.

It is a Nihilistic meme, if it is used to then spread this idea by force, or by exploiting human immaturity, cowardice, and so on.
If the world where Unicorns roam is presented as a more 'real" reality than the actual reality where only elephants exist, then it is a nihilistic meme, infecting many with the same delusion.
This is Modernity....

Believing something existing is more probable, or less probable, does not mean one agrees, likes , or disagrees, dislikes it.
One evaluates objectively....in other words by finding connections between the possible "abstraction", the theoretical noumenon, and the world of phenomena, the apparent, the present, connected to using the senses, or, through memory, to precedent = past/nature.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν


Last edited by Satyr on Sun Jun 26, 2016 10:05 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Satyr
Daemon


Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 12817
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 50
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Words Sat Jun 25, 2016 6:42 pm

To put it another way....whoever wishes to test Satyr's words, and his definitions of words, or anything he has ever said....all he or she must do is look.

For instance....take rape.
Satyr claims rape is natural, as a response to female sexual dominance, and only prohibited in human environments to establish a kind of order.
Other disagree, for no reason other than on moral grounds, or they have been taught rape is bad, and they are unwilling and unable to consider the subject objectively and rationally, but only emotionally, or because some authority figure once told them so, and they canto break free from the impact of this moment.

How, then, does one test this hypothesis?
Simple....veeeeeery simple.
Observe natural behaviour OUTSIDE Modern systems....
Since human tribes no longer exist unsoiled by modern influences, infections, look to organisms that lack the words to be infected by Modern Nihilistic memes...and so, are immune to human influence, memetic viruses, infections.
Does rape occur in nature?
under what circumstances?

Observe, watch, evaluate...do not take Satyr's word on it, or the morons emotional appeals.....look for yourself.
Do the same with every single idea, theory, probability Satyr has ever exposed you to, if you had not in the past.
The world is Satyr's greatest benefactor....in all ways, but in this case when it comes to philosophy.
Not only has Satyr never raped anyone, or advises anyone to rape, but he finds the need to rape as an indication of desperation - the last resort of a needy, base male.
Yet, can satyr become blind to the reality of rape, why it emerges and what function it serves?
No...because then he would be like the morons on ILP and in the Modern world at large, living in a world of unicorns, and bombastic vegetating brains, declaring themselves human, all too human, zombies, half-dead, rotting corpses, animated by their faith in the scripture, their hunger for eternity, for a resolution, for an escape.






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


Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 12817
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 50
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Words Fri Jul 01, 2016 11:41 am

In the icon the "last man" finds the last vestiges of his one god.
A magical talisman, given whatever name is appropriate in the culture the mind exists within.

With it he wants to preserve the abstraction for which there is no external reference, no precedent, no experience of.
The symbol "exists" as a amalgamation of neurological processes, manifesting as emotions, sensations, imagery drawn from the environment, most often a man-made environment inundated with human codes and sheets of semiology.

Obsessed with subjectivty, he explores symbols, seeing in their self-referential harmony, proof of the Divine, of the external absolute yet to be made present; he gives it a name, and this alludes to understanding, an intimacy; he speaks of world when he means the inter-relating of symbols, shared, and compared, by conscious mind, and when he brings it "down to earth" he reduces it to the personal, the individual subjective, determined to destroy all external standards, outside of this theoretical absolute, to save ego from comparisons.
Contained within the shield of code, he surrenders to otherness, to minimize the cost, and hyper-inflate the benefits, reaffirming his own judgment as "just as good as any other".

A community of such minds create a cult of self-referential certainty, humbling themselves before other, while they identify with the greater Self - the chosen awaiting the coming of the yet to be present absent-absolute.



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


Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 12817
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 50
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Words Tue Aug 30, 2016 9:50 pm

Precise usage of words leads to precise thinking - precise thinking is the organism harmonising its congruent patterns with the world as Flux.

Connecting the noumenon (words, symbol) to a phenomenon (apparent, presence) does not demystify existence, it clarifies the already mystifying.
The cosmos is mysterious, not only because it is unknown, and impossible to completely know, but mostly because of randomness (chaos) = increasing energies that lack all pattern, making the unpredictable, imperceptible, unreliable.
To add more confusion in the already counter-intuitive and perplexing, is an attempt to equate the confusion in the mind, with the chaos outside of it, implying a non-existent understanding.

The brain is a harvester of order, and a creator of order because the world is Flux - setting up the objective/subjective, master/slave, antagonism.
Consciousness emerges to deal with this state.

Demystifying a noetic construct, an abstraction represented by a word, does not eradicate appreciation, no more than the roots of a tree do not eradicate the appreciation of a tree.
Bottom<>Up thinking begins with the basic connection of noumenon-phenomenon, with word being the connector = Phenomenon <> Words/Symbol <> Noumenon, mirroring the triad, Mind <> Nervous System/Spirit <> Body ...
Love <> Desire/Need <> Lust

God <> Holy Spirit <> Jesus

Self <> Medium (air/water/light) <> Other

Object <> Interpretation <> Subject

Reason <> Will <> Passion


All reflections of the human mind awakening to its hierarchy of  Mind <> Nervous System/Spirit <> Body = self-awakening to Self, where Self is the sum of all past/nature.

Nobility = the self acting as a conduit to align past with projected idea(l) without disconnecting or rejecting, or forgetting.
To align past, or the parts the individual wishes to identify with, and to cultivate, with a projected idea(l) is to make self a means towards this end.

Idea(l) must be real(istic) = must have external to the mind, references - empirical; must have a phenomenal connection (sensual).
Metaphor may include one or more such references.  
To be in alignment is to not diverge from the past's patterns - balance, nor contradict them (Nihilism).
This implies precedent, which excludes all ideals based on fantasy, romantic hope, flights of fancy etc.
To be in alignment with past/nature is not to copy it, but to select the parts one wishes to accentuate/cultivate, to approach the idea(l) - growth.  

The Idea(l) is the standard against which the act, choice/judgment, is measured.
Good/Bad only have meaning in this context.
The Idea(l)'s quality is determined by the outcome of an approach towards it: what kinds of individuals it produces in relation to world in Flux

For example:
If an individual has intelligence as his idea(l), a concept including more than one pattern (behaviour), the way in which he understands the concept, and defines it, connecting it, or not, to world, will determine the outcome = cost/benefit.
Same applies for words like 'love', 'morality', 'trust', 'friendship' 'sex' and so on.

The more detached this word is from reality, the more the individual will fail to attain its idea(l).  


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


Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 12817
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 50
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Words Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:10 pm

The only limitations for words are its dictionary definition, permitting a sharing of thoughts/concepts/sensations, and the world, determining its meaning and meaninglessness.

Moderns use previous applications as a limit, and abide by the meaning given to a word by a another mind.
This transfers the limit of world to the limit of another man - an authority - so that when they hear the word they immediately associate its meaning with how the necessary dictionary restriction of definition connects with the meaning given to it by this unnecessary intervening authority.
This is how philosophy becomes a debate over abstractions with no reference to reality - meaningless noetic constructs, usually referring to human feelings, internal private delusions, creative combinations etc.

In all cases linguistic, rules making communication possible, establish a shared meaning that may be validated, or contradicted, by world.
The word simply represents a noumenon, or an aggregate of noumena (metaphor), combined into a concept, passed on from mind to mind during communication.
How this abstraction is then connected with the apparent is to be decided by observation.
But this connection is necessary, if the dictionary meaning is to acquire a pragmatic meaning: meaning outside the human mind.    

It is not language which is a poor tool, but it is man's perceptual acuity that sets the limits for his awareness - language is simply a representation of this perceptual limitation.
Confused minds produce confused sentences.
Minds wanting to exploit and manipulate will use exploitative and manipulative words.  
Minds failing to find meaning, use meaningless language.
Words, how they are used, what order they are placed in, their patterns, their application, exposes the mind using them, and how it relates to existence - his/her motive, intent.

As with all that exists.....action precedes interpretation and symbolization - words follow the act, as a reaction to it - subjective mind reacting to objective world of flux.  

Trust: the evaluation of an individual's words, in elation to their deeds, their actions/behaviours.
Consistency (reliability) and harmony, establishes a relationship of trust.  

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


Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 12817
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 50
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Words Wed Aug 31, 2016 1:05 pm

When a tool is placed in the hands of amateurs, or creative "artists" with questionable talents, and motives, it becomes a method of gratifying personal anxieties, and fulfilling private ambitions.
An artist interested in representing reality as accurately as possible, will direct his tool, using his limb, as an extension of his will, according to the limitations the world imposes upon him.
If he wishes to express his subjective relationship and reaction to what appears before us all, then his hand will shape using internal sources to guide it.

A philosopher is a hybrid, part artist & part scientist - it is the art of describing reality as accurately and honestly as possible, with no other motives and ambitions.
The world restricts the usage of his words, which are for him the tools he directs, suing hand or tongue, to shape the representations he considers most accurate, offering them to others for appreciation and critique.
His talent will be found in the accuracy of his representations as these are verified by everyone who shares in the same reality.
It is before world that his art is measured, and not the tastes of men with their own ambitions and motives, some of them unconscious and/or hidden.

Every other philosophical category will relate to this primary one - psychology, politics, metaphysics, morality, all extensions of focusing on a part of the primary reference of world.
A world within which man is but a small part of.

A word's application is not decided by the individual arbitrarily, with no justification.
it is applied in accordance to the dictionary definite, restricting usage so as to allow communication, and then it is directed by world, which it is attempting to connect to.
Even if it is used metaphorically, it is done so with the primary connection as the standard - the usage of metaphor, narrative, synonyms, is meant to approach a concept  from a different direction, using one pattern among many, which is included in the concept the words represent.
If this is not the case, then any motive can find words to trigger emotion, to seduce desire, to feed need, in the minds of those easily taken by such redirection, desperate to find a way to cope with a world that does not care for their personal subjective judgments.

It is not the world that adapts to human will, it is the will that adapts to world, or it suffers the consequences.        


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


Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 12817
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 50
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Words Wed Aug 31, 2016 4:32 pm

Word confusion underlies the confusion regarding objectivity.


Dictionary Definition wrote:
ob·jec·tive
əbˈjektiv/Submit
adjective
1.
(of a person or their judgment) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.
"historians try to be objective and impartial"
synonyms: impartial, unbiased, unprejudiced, nonpartisan, disinterested, neutral, uninvolved, even-handed, equitable, fair, fair-minded, just, open-minded, dispassionate, detached, neutral
"I was hoping to get an objective and pragmatic report"
2.
GRAMMAR
of, relating to, or denoting a case of nouns and pronouns used as the object of a transitive verb or a preposition.
noun
1.
a thing aimed at or sought; a goal.
"the system has achieved its objective"
synonyms: aim, intention, purpose, target, goal, intent, object, end; More
2.
GRAMMAR
the objective case.


Also...

Dictionary Definition wrote:
ob·jec·tiv·i·ty
ˌäbjekˈtivədē/
noun
the quality of being objective.
"the piece lacked any objectivity"
synonyms: impartiality, absence/lack of bias, absence/lack of prejudice, fairness, fair-mindedness, neutrality, evenhandedness, justice, open-mindedness, disinterest, detachment, dispassion, neutrality
"the quest for total objectivity is unrealistic"


Objectivity becomes crucial when it decides your fate, and you are not protected from the full effect of the costs of a mistake, a subjective error.
Only in modern western systems can a debate such as this over subjective/objective be taken seriously - in times of decadence and decline.
Using the above definition of objectivity there IS a superior and an inferior subjective judgment...with pragmatic real life consequences, if there is no mitigating protective force, such as state, parent, institution etc.
Consequences are costs/benefits to the interesting mind, the minds evaluating choosing, judging to the best of its mental abilities, and based on the quality of its perceptions and mental processing.  

#1 is the manner in which I apply it when explaining my metaphysical positions.
The majority choose to understand it as "perfect", "complete", "universal", and so fail to follow my reasoning.
They understand 'objectivity' in the way I understand 'absolute'.


Dictionary Definition wrote:
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.
"good and evil are presented as absolutes"


Dictionary definition offers a starting point for communication to ensue....or for the connection of the definition, made by referring to world,and established as a linguistic meaning, with the world around us.
We reaffirm the meaning of the word that has been defined, by connecting it to its reference point, in mind, or in world.
The words Cyclops also has a dictionary definition, which we refer to the world, where it is absent, or to other minds, forming a cultural space, we have defined as memetic/culture.
The word 'cyclops' has no reference outside human brains, and only brains raised in the same culture, sharing the same memes.  
 
Absolute is what I call the absent-absolute, because it is nowhere to be found, has never been found, in any context, outside language, and will never be found.
The confusion of the mental abstraction for the real phenomenon, the representation for the present, is what has become a nihilistic symbol of liberation from the coldness of existence...and those who correct them are accused of evil motives.

Absolute = perfect, singularity, one, god, complete, end, whole...

The argument "a bachelor is absolutely not married," fails because marriage is a human construct, meaningless outside human brains.
All absolutes, including mathematical symbols, like 1/0 are mental constructs, used to represent reality, but with no reference outside brains.
The sarcastic retort "there are absolutely no absolutes" or "truth is there is not truth" fails, because the premises starts with the presumption of an absolute, and requiring absolute negation.
The only proposing an absolute is burdened with providing proof, and not the one rejecting the concept as more than a human mental fabrication..otherwise every absurdity would demand an equally absurd negation.    

The 'absolute' is a word describing a mental abstraction, what I call noumenon, to differentiate it from phenomenon.
The mind constructs ambiguous wholes, by simplifying/generalizing phenomenon (dimensional cutting away), using sensual stimulation - via a medium such as light, atmosphere etc. - which are converted into neural pulses, to be transmitted and processed in the brain.
But this does not mean the world is subjective, but only that consciousnesses is limited by its subjectivity.
The world does not alter to accommodate any and all interpretations of it - it remain indifferent to all interpretations, all subjective perspectives of it.
Subjectivity is another way of describing this interpretation process - the process of collecting data, via a medium, and its processing as representation - abstracting.  
Using the interpretations the organism makes a choice, it judges, it evaluates the alien other.

Objectivity now assumes its rightful place as assessment of all (inter)actions (flux), being interpreted.
Objectivity is this perception of the phenomena interacting, now abstracted as representation, and finding connections between them - the MEANING.
In other words, it is the perception and evaluation of patterns.

Objective reality means, the sum total of all (inter)actions, perceived or not, understood or not, correctly evaluated, or not...which affect the organism whether it likes it or not.

For example, if the Modern brainwashing has had an effect, then a women may choose to believe that races are social constructs, and she may then choose to marry a negro...but nature does not accommodate wishes. If her judgment is correct, having bought into Modern myths, then she will not require additional provisions to accommodate her choice.
If she has confidence in her judgment, then she ought not to demand social rules to produce artificial parity for her offspring.
We are still waiting for the Negro Einstein, the female Turin....like we are still waiting for the 'second coming' or the first coming of the 'true' messiah, until then the evidence stands as it is.    

Let time determine whose judgment was superior.

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


Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 12817
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 50
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Words Wed Aug 31, 2016 7:50 pm

I've given up discussing anything of importance with the majority of minds, calling themselves "philosophers", and claiming to be interested in understanding, and applying this understanding.
Some refuse to define the very words they use, opting, instead, to evade, or to defer to some famous figure, as if by doing so a argument has been given - the name alone constituting proof of veracity, without getting into their understanding of the very icons they defer judgment to.
Most cannot define the words they use, having adopted them, they repeat them , only wishing to imitate the "positive" feelings they experienced when they first came across the particular application of the word.
A tiny minority use words to exploit the first two, having discovered the visceral power such representations can have upon such minds. Their interest in words does not enter the interest of philosophy, but lingers on the periphery, in political discourse, rhetoric, the art of convincing and verbal manipulation - they will be all-inclusive, "positive" on a superficial level, always polite and forgiving if the possibility exploitation remains a probability - liars adore the minds taken by the lie, but they also dismiss them as a necessary means to a private end: the art of the performance.

Using words to confuse, to remain incomprehensible, for fear that your motives and your true quality may not be revealed; using words to complicate, and redirect, and conceal.
Such are the words of a politician, and any man that is selling something, not a philosopher.

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


Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 12817
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 50
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Words Thu Sep 01, 2016 5:16 pm

The quality of an idea(l) is not found in who said it, but in what degree the world validates it.
The speaker is appreciated only as the one who uncovered what was already present.


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


Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 12817
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 50
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Words Thu Sep 01, 2016 5:25 pm

Man is not born into mankind, he is born out of mankind into world, and then immersed in human symbolisms - meme - sometimes not to emerge from it.

All memes, all cultures (symbols, morals, traditions, language) are measured in relation to world, making it possible for an individual to reject the culture he was enveloped by, soon after he was thrown into world, and select a new one, closer to the real, more in line with his own ideals.
An ideal is a projection of an individual's highest aspirations, not representations of the prefect.
The world determines the individual's, in relation to his ideals, and the ideal's in relation to world, costs/benefits - consequences.


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


Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 12817
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 50
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Words Fri Sep 02, 2016 11:42 am

The practice of slightly changing the source material so as to claim that it is a unique, and different, creation, is typical f plagiarism, and the dishonest spirit, motivated not by clarity but by a desire to self-promote, climbing upon the shoulders of others to appear taller than he is.
When it comes to matters of theory, where only words, transmitting abstractions, are in play, this practice becomes more effective and insidious.
The element of appearance/presence is substituted by the element of emotion/passion, making it more difficult to discern where the plagiarist has altered the original to create something "new".

If such a mind were to attempt to make his creation tangible, apparent, pragmatic, the evidence of his tinkering would expose him and his motives, because other than self-aggrandizement an additional motive might be discovered as the emotion/passion motivating such transparent methods.
Such a motive could be found in material gain, sexual promise, ego inflation, political, or, as I've described in my proposition of a "[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]", where a slight modification in the word, changing, ever so slightly the nuanced meaning, implies a concept that clouds the intent with a metaphor that can then be used to connect to it concepts that are questionable, irrational, or, at least, unproven.

A metaphor not applied to clarify but to confuse the topic, purposefully, so as to then insert into it a proposition that would be laughed at, or would expose an ulterior motive having nothing to do with the concept represented by the word replaced.

As I have said a metaphor is a way of representing multiple concepts s a unified whole - an association of noumena under a single name (word).  
Integrity dictates that each concept will be able to be extricated from the unity of the metaphor and not lose its meaning - in the way it represents relationships of phenomena, and not noetic constructs existing only in the minds of men.
This is why it is such a useful tool for charlatans and politicians.
When integrity is absent, the metaphor can be used to associate the rational with the absurd, and then defend it as always being so with no justification and no connection to anything outside the mind of men where this metaphor exists.
It is a disingenuous way of relating incompatible concepts, using the malleable method of language, referring to noetic abstractions not restricted by phenomena and their relationships, or the order of world.  
It convinces the already initiated into this type of chicanery, having made of themselves willing victims of a lie, found in such Nihilistic religions as Abrahamism.
The liar exploits a weakness in his victims, who want to be lied to, because the truth is unbearable, or too mundane for them to accept as defining and determining them.  
To put it into the context of art, a plagiarist will alter a painting, so as to imitate its quality, and lay claim to its value, and the motivation to attempt such a disgraceful thing will be revealed in the slight differences chosen to appropriate the original and claim it as an original work.
The modification, other than masking the imitation, exposes the psychology behind the motive - it exposes the reason(ing) in the mind that plagiarizes.
The modification is the only part of the copy which is original.

To put it in yet a more tangible way....when an individual chooses a garment to place over his/her naked form, its style, its cut, the designer's name and style, reveals more than it conceals.
The colors, the way it falls over the body, the label, the price, all expose the reasoning behind the choice, and the application, the way the wearer has altered the original, the changes that were made, the accessories and so on.
In the desire to appropriate the creativity of the designer, to make the garment his/her own, the wearer, the purchaser, may do a disservice to the original's intent, and in that modification his/her own intent becomes clear.



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


Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 12817
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 50
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Words Sat Sep 03, 2016 2:28 pm

In times of decay, the old is forgotten, opens the door to miners and liars, to re-dis-cover it, change it a bit, and then sell it as something new.
The Renaissance was the rediscovery of ancient wisdom stored in the libraries of the Muslims.
Only it was combined with Judaism to produce Christianity , choosing what parts could be harmonized because they were contradicting world-views, doing a disservice to both.

With Christianity in decline a novel, post-Modern, recombination is due - a new Abrahamic twist.



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


Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 12817
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 50
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Words Sat Sep 03, 2016 3:34 pm

Words are weighted down by centuries of use and misuse.
They carry with them the fingerprints of all those that spoke them and wrote them down.

A good cleansing will have to precede the proper application, before we begin to improperly apply them, as metaphor simile, insinuation.

We begin with the Bible of Languages, a dictionary as the starting point.
Then we connect the definition to a reference point in space/time, in the world - in phenomenon or noumenon.
Then we explore and sample from the many usages, the needs, the words satisfied.

Then we choose, according to our motive, our own application.

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


Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 12817
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 50
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Words Sat Sep 03, 2016 5:52 pm

As with all words the modern finds disturbing, or has been trained to automatically react to in a negative way, the words "race" as it refer to the concept of divergence, manifesting as appearance/presence, is purposefully ill-defined, or its is misunderstood due to simplicity of mind.

The Modern begins with the desired outcome, given a symbol, named, and then has to invent clever ways to justify the outcome in a world that does not bend to his human tricks, nor to his will.
I cal this 'crazy creativity, or creatively crazy'.

In the case of race, it signifies a genetic divergence due to genetic isolation.
In other species we might use different words, like 'breed", 'type'.
The concept does not imply a different species, if we properly understand and define species as a reproduction category - all species describe a population that can cooperate to pass on their genes.
This cooperation, l over time, distributes common attributes, and these are easily perceived sensually. The shared traits are a product not only of reproductive codependency, but also an evolved survival strategy, which becomes part of the essence of the species - its nature.
A testament to all the environmental and historical conditioning that were then distributed, unevenly, within the population due to their reproductive codependency.

A breed may not signify a different species, but ti does signify a step towards it... just as species divergence, such as polar bears and grizzlies, or dogs and wolves, may be considered different species, but can still inter-breed due to the short period of time the divergence occurred.
Nevertheless, the divergence has either advanced to a point where intermixing may produce unfit offspring, or the members of the species may choose to not mix with this different species.  
A breed, or race, is this divergence from the perspective preceding divergence, whereas these cousin species are examples of it from the perspective of following the divergence.

Race, in humans, and breeds, in other organisms, is the evolution of species, the splintering off of a species, which has not had sufficient time to finalize.
Appearance indicates this clearly.
Every trait is a change in potential.
A physical change, indicated by appearance, expresses the evolved change in potential - in probability.
Every thing else, concerning motives, hatred, and things moderns throw around to pretend they are intelligent, and that their motives are "good" are just more examples of Modern obfuscation.
They can do no more than confuse concepts by manipulating words.      

Organic Patterns = Life - Species - Breeds/Races.
Each sub-division is included in a category, a preceding division.  

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


Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 12817
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 50
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Words Sun Sep 04, 2016 7:24 pm

Words like 'here' and 'now' indicating locality, only exist in the mind as indications of source which has already shifted.
Expanding space/time, and the speed of gathering and processing sense data, implies a temporal distance between noetic construct and phenomenon, producing the stimulation, via a medium, such as light/atmosphere.
local is also a simplification/generalisation, of interacting patterns - their interactions given meaning.

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


Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 12817
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 50
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Words Mon Sep 05, 2016 12:06 pm

Let us consider the word “race” as the Moderns use it, reducing it to an insubstantial word, a word with no meaning other than as a dictionary term describing emotional reactions.
For the average, typical Modern, the word “race” has now been connected to the word “image’, by detaching it from appearance/presence.
Appearance implies uncovering of something real, image implies a construct, an intentional appearance; appearance with motive, fabricated to facilitate the motive’s realization.
For the Modern race is a matter of image, a social construct, and those using it in a manner contrary to the popular are motivated by hatred, or by esoteric needs.
Although this might be so for the majority of race mongers, the so called rednecks and skinheads, this is more so for these bleeding heart Moderns who are like the aforementioned only their mongering consists in evading the meaning the term “race” originally referred to: a perceptible divergence requiring an explanation in past/nature.
Reducing a concept to a word, and then connecting it to a noumenon, because that is what moderns do.
They detach the word ‘race”, representing a noumenon that relates to a phenomenon, and then they reattach it to a hypothetical noetic fabrication, in another’s mind.
By doing so they convert the word from one noting a difference, as is obvious from appearance/presence, into an abstraction a theory, a feeling, which can be fabricated, stimulated, changed.
From appearance to image, implying a shallow social construct. In this they agree with those rednecks and skinheads who also use it to fabricate a personal image.
This is what I’ve called the duality, the binary logic of the nihilistic paradigm, where good/bad, good/evil, Republican/Democrat are dominated by the same delusions – absolute one/absolute nil; polarity of the Modern’s cognitive box.
This reduction is a reduction in time/space dimensions – a dumbing-down.
Whereas race, for a realist, means an appearance which reflects the organism’s entire past/nature, for the modern’s redefined image, it is malleable, alterable, meaningless other than it is a choice, a form of expression.
An image is selected, therefore that these, so called, “racists” select it in the way they do must be explained using psychobabble.
For a realists the appearance of a Negro, or an Asian, is no more a selection than it is for a chimpanzee, or a dog, to look as they do. The selection of social artifices, like words, clothes, make-up, to cover this appearance does imply a motive of concealing.
The social construct is the covering-up of what is apparent/present.

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


Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 12817
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 50
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Words Tue Sep 06, 2016 12:39 pm

Academic Pretenses
Academic minds seek acknowledgment from other academic minds.
They use the “proper jargon” academics will appreciate, even if they cannot define, or place in the world.
Sole criterion for an idea is that it has been given a name; it exists as a noumenon they can all refer and defer to.
Proper jargon places the academic into the class he seeks to be defined by.
The word may be nonsense, and have no meaning outside minds, but what counts is that it exists, as a specialized form of distinguishing the class of academics, form the laymen, who cannot trace back the word to its origins in the mind of another academic, or some famous figure academics are forces to acknowledge as being a contributing force into the fields of their interest.
An academic is primarily one who studies the history and symbols and relationships of the contributors in the field of his study – he has no other contribution. He answers questions about his specialty by referring and deferring, to those who practiced the discipline he studied theoretically.
When he is forced to answer a question he has no personal answer to he uses the methods, adopts the linguistics, of the field of his expertise, insinuating an understanding by association.
When asked to explain his, personal, positions about world, he cannot, without deferring and referring, using the jargon that distinguishes his expertise, and pretends to be deep and unapproachable, too complex for the laymen to grasp, if he does not make himself intimate with the appropriate jargon.

For example, when asked to explain the concept of “self”, the academic spirit, fearing that his personal ignorance will taint his institutional value, risking further advancement, will use terms like “uncanny”, because the term has been used by another intellectual, or pseudo-intellectual.  
He hopes that the listener will be so intimidated by the word that he will not look into the dictionary to read the conventional definition:

Dictionary wrote:
un·can·ny
ˌənˈkanē/
adjective
Strange or mysterious, especially in an unsettling way.
‘An uncanny feeling that she was being watched’
Synonyms: eerie, unnatural, unearthly, preternatural, supernatural, otherworldly, ghostly, mysterious, strange, unsettling, abnormal, weird, bizarre, surreal, eldritch;

He is admitting he cannot define a word which is a part of his expertise, implying that he is using it as another “thinker” used it, and this alone makes it a proper explanation.
If the academic is a pseudo-intellectual, and only adopts an academic spirit to insinuate that he is the equal of the career types, he will use this method to “explain” without explaining – to evade, pretending that if you reject his non-explanation you are actually contradicting all those “thinkers” who used the same word.
This is really an admission of ignorance, without dropping the pretence of gnosis.
A non-explanation explanation.
The other motive might be found in the conventional definition of the word, which in this case uses words like “supernatural”, ”unearthly” and so on, to indirectly imply what he cannot bring himself to admit openly: that his “rational” positions, are founded on irrational premises.  
His "genius" being nothing more than a convolution of concepts to imply an understanding of what he, himself, admits he does not, offering no more than indefinite definitions.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν


Last edited by Satyr on Tue Sep 06, 2016 1:16 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Slaughtz



Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 718
Join date : 2012-04-28
Age : 25
Location : Brink

PostSubject: Re: Words Tue Sep 06, 2016 1:01 pm

I had said that I want nothing more than an honest death. It made no sense to me in the modern conception of honesty being one who tells only truths in an absolutist sense. Claiming someone is dishonest is much more insulting than calling them incorrect. What I had said - I want an honorable death.

Honest - Honor

Dictionary wrote:
honest (adj.)
c. 1300, "respectable, decent, of neat appearance," also "free from fraud," from Old French oneste, honeste "virtuous, honorable; decent, respectable" (12c.; Modern French honnête), from Latin honestus "honorable, respected, regarded with honor," figuratively "deserving honor, honorable, respectable," from honos (see honor (n.)) + suffix -tus. Main modern sense of "dealing fairly, truthful, free from deceit" is c. 1400, as is sense of "virtuous, having the virtue of chastity" (of women). Phrase to make an honest woman of "marry (a woman) after seduction" is from 1620s.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Satyr
Daemon


Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 12817
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 50
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Words Tue Sep 06, 2016 1:08 pm

Word Definitions
The meaning of a word has two limits, making the word/symbol, a conduit between noumenon and phenomenon.
Its two limits are the language’s formal definition, found in the dictionary, and then the word’s representation of a noumenon, or a phenomenon.
If it only refers to a noumenon, it is an idea(l), a representation of a theoretical concept, an abstraction; if it refers to an observable, sensually experienced, apprent/presence, a phenomenon, it is pragmatic, realistic.
 

Φ

The meaning of the word is not arbitrary, although it can be used metaphorically, to insert into its conventional definition an insinuation, a nuance.
A word’s meaning is determined by how the phenomena, noumena, relate, in the world, empirically, and/or theoretically, how they relate noetically.
Some metaphorical application combine the two into a theoretical unity. The problem with this is that one can insert nonsensical meanings alongside sensible ones, and then claim the unity as rational or mystical, depending on the meaning desired to be dominant in particular circumstances.
This method allows the association of nonsense with reason, relying on ambiguity to claim a meaning that exists only ni the minds of the users as a motive.

Most often emotion is inserted alongside reason, tainting reason, and giving emotion a rationality, through the compound unity of the rational and the irrational, the sensible and the mystical.

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


Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 12817
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 50
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Words Tue Sep 06, 2016 1:23 pm

Meaning...

Formal Definition, according to a linguistic convention, tradition, evolved within specific environments (noumenon) -> Word/Symbol -> an appearance, presence, outside the organism's congruity (phenomenon)

The (->) represents the medium - green for bio-energy (neural pulse) and the red for light/atmosphere, electromagnetism etc.

Noumenon <>Word<>Phenomenon

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


Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 12817
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 50
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Words Fri Sep 09, 2016 5:09 pm

The advantage and disadvantage of Nihilism is its detachment from reality.
With no external standard to discipline to, the mind can run wild, or seek in other minds, validation.
I've described this as the noumenon, detached from phenomenon, via the word/symbol, now acting as a tool of detachment.

The psychological benefits of this, are easy to understand, and I've gone through many of them.

Words, for Moderns, wishing to remain detached from a world that they cannot adapt to, or accept, because of the personal implications, must find validation in other, as I said, or from language itself.
A word is supported by using other words, because there is no external, to mind, reference to lend support and validation from.
From the very structure of code, its "inherent logic" does it attempt to ground its fantastically creative constructs.  

This is a form of self-referential logic, and we realize this when we become aware of the emotional, metaphorical imagery, being used as validation, in lieu of anything objective - external to minds.
Advantage of not being limited by anything outside self, or a collective Self, which is also its disadvantage, because outside of a collective in agreement, sharing the same needs, memes, the construct is useless - nonsensical... impotent.



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


Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 12817
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 50
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Words Sat Sep 10, 2016 1:15 pm

An objective definition of a word cannot use other words as support - this is a linguistic loop, pretending to be speaking when nothing is being said.
Nor can it be based on the "I say so" command, for this is coercion, not conviction.

The word must be defined by returning it to its primary and original place, as symbol, as representation, as connecting neurological conduit between mind/body and between noumenon and phenomenon.
The phenomenon, its patterns, its place in meaning as a product of how it relates with other phenomena, will limit the word's definitions.
Only then can we dare use it artistically, creating metaphors to illuminate aspects of the phenomenon the word failed to thoroughly bring forward.
A metaphor is a transference of consciousnesses; shifting of consciousness, approaching the phenomenon from a different direction.

In modern times, too often, the metaphor is used in lieu of a focus on a phenomenon - as an airy chimera, floating in some vague time/space, in our mind.
lacking all substance, and so all usefulness, other than as a psychological comfort, and/or a mental toy, used to masturbate.

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


Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 12817
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 50
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Words Wed Sep 14, 2016 8:07 am

Modern simple minds cannot conceptualize fluidity, returning to the either/or of truth/false, absolutes.
Fluidity demands a higher/lower probability understanding, where particular patterns produce a consistent, repeating, predictability, making life and consciousness possible.
These patterns - behaviors in the contexts of organisms - manifest as appearance, not to be confused with image, and are interpreted by the subjective mind (perspective).
The results, the expression of this judgment this choice, based on interpretation, are costs/benefits.
Cost/Benefit, if not mitigated by a protective other, are what measures the judgment and the interpretations of (inter)acting patterns.

Not philosophical word-playing, not political spin-doctoring, not personal taste, not declarations of conviction.

An ideal is the projection of a desirable cost/benefit outcome.
Some rooted in reality, in precedent, and others detached from it, existing as theoretical, naive idealism.
Past is a good indicator of future behavior, because this is the essence of pattern.
Where and when they do slightly diverge it is due to the (inter)action with a variety of other patterns, and more significantly with non-patterned, random, energies, with a final source of diverge being a willful diversion from the path-of-least-resistance, towards a path-of-more-resistance that only organic entities can achieve - free-will.

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


Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 12817
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 50
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Words Wed Sep 14, 2016 8:14 am

Mysticism, the occult, can be placed within the realm of complexity, and of randomness.
Complexity offers the possibility of a secret, hidden order (patterns interacting) the average mind is not privy to, but randomness (chaos) offers no such possibility and so is looked upon with anxiety/fear - the forever unknowable, manifesting in unpredictable events.

Occultism, sometimes, attempts to unify complexity and randomness, so as to imply that in randomness there is a hidden order only initiated, talented few can grasp.
Reason is dominant because it is man's constant ordering of what is increasing in randomness, going through the state of increasing complexity.
We need not add to mysticism, because it is already present and expanding, leaving us with the work of finding patterns in complexity, or finding ways to accept randomness as necessary.    

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




PostSubject: Re: Words Today at 10:06 pm

Back to top Go down
 
Words
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 2 of 3Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 Similar topics
-
» 'verrassinkies' and other south african words..
» Words fail me . . .
» Some Definitions of Psychological Words
» BID form without the price in words
» Links to Lists of Old-Fashioned, Archaic, and Slang Words

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