A Moderns psychology is so tied into his subjectivity, that he cannot imagine affirming a position if it does not flatter or comfort. For example, saying anything honest ab out race is to propose violence, hate, or is due to some personal psychological benefit. To speak about rape, as it emerges in nature, is to defend it, or to be sympathetic to the rapist, who is nothing more than an omega, trying to overcome female sexual dominance.
The Modern has nothing to offer as a counter-argument, besides the emotional or sociopolitical, moral angle. He feels most fortunate when he actually does come across a primitive brute, speaking about race or any other controversial topic, because then he can use this brute as an example of the general type that would even dare speak of such things in that manner openly.
For the devout Christian, coming across a moron atheist who truly denies the christian version of the absolute,, the God, for emotional reasons is a godsend. He can then keep him in mind to dismiss even the other kind of atheist, the one who exposes the idiocy and herd psychology underlying this dogma, as it is for a modern to come across a real redneck speaking of race in that hillbilly way he understands it.
It is ironic that this is the only kind of empiricism the Modern uses; the kind that sample human examples, and never goes outside the species to challenge his selective delusions about evolution, and how natural selection works, producing multiplicity, and specialized traits, like intelligence.
Moderns find an easy disclaimer in their easy acceptance of innocuous probabilities, delivered to them from established authorities, such as the sun will rise, or eating too much will make you fat, but where they have issues is where delusion are shattered, affecting them on a personal level Each Nihilists has their own personal comfort zone - a red line of acceptable and unacceptable probability. Usually divided in humanistic and inhuman categories.
Subjectivity is used selectively to dismiss any perception of a possibility they cannot discredit, without attacking the source first. This makes them selectively objective, and is included in my thesis under compartmentalization, and schizophrenia. The convenient method of arresting judgment to permit some data to enter, and then to vamp it up to the extreme to exclude everything that threatens them is predictable.
Where their method fails is in the outcome, returning us to intelligence as the perception of patterns, by sampling precedent (past/nature) to predict/project probable outcomes. The modern's lack of integrity makes him immune to any such predictions or judgments, because they are easily refute with declarations and word-games, where they cannot escape is in the outcome, after-the-fact. Intelligence uses precedent to project probabilities, but the outcome cannot be ignored with words, nor with any kind of mental strategies. Cost/Benefit is inescapable though in Modern times the mitigation of institutions attempts to manufacture the illusion of parity. Modern man's indirect denial of good and bad judgment, which he comprehends morally as good/evil intent, converting his cowardice into a virtue, cannot save him from the costs of his denied poor judgment. The costs compound until his life is burdened with sacrifices he must them justify and excuse himself from. Finding some scapegoat or some other other to accuse for his own genetic weakness.
In Modern sheltering systems where imbeciles are given the right, or protected form the full repercussions of their judgments, the modern finds refuge, intuitively knowing he is hiding from something he cannot admit, and cannot escape...a conundrum, resulting in increased stress, he must purge by laughing, or by finding a target to relieve himself upon - pissing against the wind.
there are attempts to dismiss causality, by ignoring randomness (chaos), by the usual suspects of decadence. Their conundrum is found in their need to dismiss causality as the manifestation of past/nature as presence, appearance, without letting go of their "God" order, as the underlying force in all phenomena. Unable to integrate chaos into their psychosis, and unwilling to accept causality because of the obvious social repercussions, they are stuck in a dilemma: Hos to keep order and find freedom.
Freedom = independence from causality, or determinism or past/nature. Order = future utopia, a universal motive they must awaken to before they die, and find salvation. A serious conundrum if we understand order as an "authoritarian" limit to possibility, and a reinforcing idea for racial and sexual differences. Nature as determining God, having to be secularized inventing some bullshyte idea(l) such as human free-will, (a verbal self-contradiction) utilizing the typical modern method of including incompatible concepts in the form of words in the same sentence, as if intellectual cohesion was attained. Magic power of words, when they are detached from their original utility as neural representations connecting the noumenon to the phenomenon, or mind to body. detachment form phenomenon makes them entirely noetic devices - abstraction, ideals with no reference beside the noumena injected into other minds (abstracted solipsism, or inter-subjectivity - Matrix).
In the consequence the modern is faced with the indubitable heaven/hell, as a product of his judgments cost/benefit analysis finding or losing the intended.
The intelligent mind, such as has evolved in humans, gathers data to find patterns that will predict the coming cost/benefit of any particular judgment. The imbecile, once reliant on the supreme authority of God, and now reducing himself to the secular surrender to experts and human authorities, finds comfort in the fact that some ideas are never voiced by those wanting to keep their jobs. Excluding the uncomfortable, impacting him personally, he settles for the recitation of harmless data, also based no precedent and value judgments....but who can of that deeply into it with such imbeciles? Other than the parroting of harmless data from 'trusted" sources,a s is determined by popularity, for one, the modern can conveniently dismiss the socially unacceptable, renaming social conventions as the exclusion of social fabrications. The protective shield is not enough to protect a poor judgment form the repercussions of its own feeble mind's perspectives. There's only so much stupidity that can be absorbed by a system, as there is only so many bankruptcies the economic system can excuse and remain viable. Cost/benefit slaps him in the face, forcing him to pretend the outcome was intentional, or accuse another of its negative burden.
The system is idiot friendly but not idiot proof....decadence comes like a door knock in the night. In the meantime let us sleep in our own individual beds, dreaming our own subjective realities, safe and sound in our home....there is no objective world that can be applied to humans.... There the walls are built around a stringent line of socioeconomic and political demarcation - I from other, mind from body, ideal from real. We own our private property only as long as there is an institution there to guarantee it.
Do not, so called anarchists, also fall into this nihilistic paradigm? Their ideology of "freedom", meaning freedom from past/nature, must be enforced by an institution they deny. It's the same delusion communists accepted as self-evident fact, founded no a romantic conception of human - noble savage only made vicious by the evil system, and its contrived classes of bourgeois and capitalist. The anarchist as a natural child of Marxism, believes in the good intentions of men, who will preserve anarchy after the system collapses. that is what they tell themselves on bad days. on days they are feeling all confident and shit, they snicker cunningly when they imagine a dytopia they can take advantage of, given their superiority....again genetics as past/nature is denied or romanticized.
How did they define insanity: "to repeat the same action expecting a different outcome." The Modern "anarchist" actually believes he can reintroduce the same genes, his own, into the same world, populated by the same creatures, and a different, a more pleasing outcome will come about.
In what other way could a modern have understood good/bad if not in the echo of his Abramic nihilism, making it good/evil? How else than within the humanistic cocoon, mitigating between judgment and action, to intervene upon cause/effect, and the costs/benefits, could he even consider curbing his ego, transfiguring ego into selflessness; a humble submission to the protective group?
Morality, expressed through words, is the inter-subjective glue binding the members of a group together. Some groups to face reality together, others to deny reality together. Difference is integrity, and strategy. When lies are the only "truths" keeping the group united, contradicting them to deal with a world that does not care for such human methods, is the only way to remain alive and forever selectively delusional - fragmented. Titter tottering between sanity and insanity - schizoid.
How does this genetic virus relate to its memetic variant/extension?
A virus is alive in a very rudimentary, base level.... It exists in a crystalline form....words mimic this form, as being both transparent and rigid. It is only active when replicating through a host. It is information delivered into a living organism's cell.
Memetic virus... Symbols, arranged into concepts...words arranged into sentences with a meaning, data directing behavior. The meaning directs the mind, the organism, to act in particular ways. A virus needs an organism to reproduce. In the case of nihilistic viruses it has no organic component, and is pure virus, - a parasitical relationship. A memetic virus is carried in every living organism as a reaction to world. In this case the reaction is one of negation, then directing the organism to manufacture what virus negates. A virus hijacks the processes of a organism to replicate, eventually killing the organism.
Memetic viruses are encoded as words in particular sequences. when the hijack an organisms thinking the words direct the mind away from world, not towards it - they detach the mind, using symbols, from world, detaching noumena from phenomena where words function as attachments, and construct an alternate reality.
A mental virus, like the one affecting body, can lie dormant for centuries, awaiting a hist. Memetic virus in the form of words in a book, or on film. it, like its genetic form, evolves, in time....for example Judaism morphed into Christianity, then Islam, then Marxism, and now into Humanism. A variant, on a tiny scale is VO where we can observe how memetic viruses are born, and how they spread.
The main trait is its anti-world, nature. A Nihilistic virus contradicts the world, as process, using words. It begins by detaching mind from world, redirecting ti to attach, to relate to, the virus in another host, creating a web. I've also described this as inter-subjectivity, when the objective world is ignored. It presents itself as words with no references to world, or in a sequence that cannot be justified using empiricism. For instance a novel application of words, where their original utility, as connector of noumenon to phenomenon, is stripped, and replaced by a new one. This begins the proves of illness, as gradually more words are detached from their utility and converted into pure noetic, self-referential symbols - mind connecting back to itself or to another's mind, with no external to this relationship relationship i.e, to experienced world. An example is the word 'equality', which has no meaning outside the human mind where it refers back to itself, as A = A, or 1=1, then developing into 1+1=2, which ceases to be a metaphor and becomes a literal non-existent entity, only "living" in the mind as idea. The concept of symbolic tautology is now externalized as an idea which applies to organisms as in: "all men are created equal" and here we also notice how from one falsehood a new falsehood can be attached...and "created" is this word, referring to men. The idea that men are created is thought to be, with repetition, literally so, combined with "equally" to produce a crystalline modular, web of symbols taken literally rather than figuratively, as representations. The relationship of "equal", "created", and "men" become the virus' infection - its hijacking of concepts such as "men", and "created", referring to a sexual type and a process of willful intervention combining phenomena into unities. the meaning passed on as literally so, is that there are men, who are all equal, and they are created....making the ideal of "all is a social construct" the evolution of "God as creator". Man takes the place of God., making reality his construct. Subjectivity, and words his tools of creation. words now meant to adapt man to world become the illusion that man creates world using words - by simply changing your attitude, your perspective, your definitions, and the sequence the words are placed in a sentence.
Madness....the fever of being infected, of suffering a dis-ease.
Modern approaches history as a hungry lactose intolerant approaches a buffet....with salivating caution. He delves into the details of nutritional components, hoping to avoid the ones containing the undesirable, the ingredient his delicate digested system cannot process, producing copious amounts of gas, that embarrass him in inappropriate circumstances. Interest in the food is only to deconstruct them to the point where the undesirable can be detected in minute amounts, surgically removed, leaving the rest untouched.
Dates and places, memorized, all to gauge which direction his narrative will take, towards the desired outcome. But why should we call them historians, or history buffs, when they call themselves "philosophers"? Philosophical history, with scholarly focus, is dissected, looking for a definition, a word given the appropriate flavour, scented and shaped in the right process, to fit into their dish, and eat it too. Have not these cooks, these word foragers become historical to select which definition satisfies their needs? Do they not insist on renaming nutrients to insert a tasteful possibility?
Oh, my brothers and sisters, I have made myself a historian of historians, not bothering to use their labels and self-definitions, and what I've discovered is a netherworld of cornucopian divergence: how to cook up the desired ingredients, excluding digestion irritants, in fantastically innovative and pleasing ways - proper presentation, a must, for the eyes taste before the lips and tongue. A bit from here, and a bit from there, time and space do not matter for the appetites of the mind, each narrative judged by its final taste.
Are not these self-declared "thinkers" what is commonly known as spin-doctors, politicians, salesmen; linguistic performers sampling definitions from different periods of time, and from different places on earth, seeking that magical combination, that final solution, that rare spice to make their dish unforgettable? Recipes rewritten, to get rid of the milk, and, perhaps, the sticky honey.
Common practice among the feeble minded, who cannot follow an argument, no matter how clearly it is stated, or how often it is repeated, is to retreat into their minds, afraid of what lends a judgment quality, and what deprives it of all worth. No amount of words will suffice in explaining it to them, for they are not concerned with world, and are lost to it, but only care about how to remain alive within it. The only judgment they would accept, is of the obvious and the harmless, to this main concern, and are deaf to all reason and blind to all evidence presented. Parity of mind, beneath a God, or some other benevolent authority, preferably just as abstract and obscure to not bruise their tender ego, is more to their liking. They hear a demeaning command in every superior judgment, though they often fall prey to flattering ones, intending to deceive.
Why speak, of such things, when life will do the work, and when no amount of protection can maintain a distance long enough from reality. Cause/Effect, as past manifested in presence.
You learn by doing, or by finding patterns to reach probability conclusions, minus the risks involved. One places hand over flame to feel the pain, storing it in memory's vaults for future consideration, or one watches another do so, and forgoes pain's indubitable rewards.
In the course of a life a man sharpens his judgment on the hardness of existence, directed toward a destination; cuts into flesh reminders of lessons learned and patterns experienced and not yet understood. Such are the costs towards his desired benefit, oftentimes overestimated in their presumed value - disappointment being but another wound. If he proves to be clever and wise, learning deeper lessons from shallower cuts, the wounds will not drain him of the energy to continue his journey toward his objective. If not, he will lay blame upon others, or claim that all choices are equal, and choose to go no further. Each man has his depth of endurance. What for one will flay, and maim, for other will fade from memory. But no man can escape the price of existence. An existence he is awoken to without being asked. In the awakening, and in all subsequent levels of it, lies the first cost.
The only interest a Nihilist has in other is as a supporter of his own idea(l).
When he dares face a challenge it is to develop a stronger defence of his already given idea(l)... his preference. Nihilism remaining, as always, a noumenon, with no references, and no relevance, outside human minds, an abstraction using language to construct and to defend itself, makes the modern, as the most up-to-date, Nihilist, a passionate defender of the institutions that mitigate between his errors and the costs/benefits. When he is counter-cultural, or anti-institutions, he does so only from withing the institutionalized framework, or he surrenders to fantasy and imagines a coming "better world" where "free humans" remain innately institutionalized - that last is a romantic, idealized and naive understanding of human nature, which is typical of nihilists, in general, due to their anti-reality, anti-empirical, anti-past/nature mindset, at least when it comes to them and their fellow humans.
Humanity, being the secularized version of their Abrahamic just, and benevolent God. Moderns are recovering addicts of Abrahamic spirituality. Commonalities between Judaism and her daughter Christianity, and son Islam, are profound - and you cannot miss the similarities in her grandchildren, Marxism, Liberalism and Humanism, with Transhumanism being a newborn.
Abraham's justly cruel one God, who "loves mankind" has mutated, like viruses tend to do, into its secular Modern forms, wearing the host's DNA as a cover to bypass its autoimmunity. Integrating Nietzsche into a new viral strain is a way of dealing with this thinkers transfusion of pre-Socratic, Hellenic antibodies - a resurgence the virus had to adapt to.
Unfortunately minds, like Satyr, remain alert doctors studying the virus and its many transmutations, over the centuries.
With no other reference point, outside the mind, the Nihilist finds a reference in another mind – either as a lover, validating his delusions, or as a hater, validating them, by opposing them, as something worthy of the effort. Nihilism is trapped within the emotional poles of positive/negative = love/hate. Judaism, and its masculine offspring Islam, finding identity in being hated, and of hating those that deny it, and Christianity, the sinful daughter, finding it in love, and this love being denied fulfilment. Without this noetic reaction to them, they cease to exist.
The left, political branch of Nihilism, cannot produce wealth, it can only spend it, disseminate it, waste it.
Nihilists cannot produce insights, they cannot create, they can only copy, share, adopt and render it useless.
In the nihilistic paradigm, both poles are taken over by nihilism. Left and Right.
Right can only identify itself in relation to the detached from reality Left; realistic in comparison to the romantic idealism of the Left; pragmatic only in comparison to the delusional naivete of the Left.
Nihilistic Mania The mind of the nihilist is so contained by its own paradigm, that not only does it mean "humanity" when it uses the word "world", not only does he man "politics" when he sues the word "philosophy", but when he uses the words "freedom/independence" he means it in relation to other organisms - finding mastery by dominating inferior humans, or declaring himself this or that, to convince simpletons.
Nihilism is a memetic virus which can only exist within human brains. Contact with the world beyond human brains, negates it. The negative is negated...with the positive of existence: phenomena, the (inter)activity of Flux. He limits his understanding to within the context where he hopes to gain some control, power, liberty, and this is reflected in his application and usage of words/symbols. Where else can he systematically ignore causality, linear time, and juggle words, placing them in whatever sequence promises to have the best effect on the psychology of those he wishes to exploit and manipulate?
Insecurity before world, forces him to seek shelter in the human herd. There his insignificance can be spin-doctored into significance; his lack of value can find marketing value; his dependence can claim independence from humanity, primarily through the accumulation and manipulation of abstractions, such as money; his stupidity can declare itself genius, through simple manipulation; his cowardice can claim courage, within the sheltering consistency of the herd; his confused delusions can declare themselves deeper "truth", and find ears among his own kind.
Within human psychology anything is possible, if you know what emotional buttons to push, what words to manipulate. Outside the clique of believers, of desperation, willing to sacrifice anything for the sake of survival and pleasure, the charlatan is feeble, of no worth above the average, of no significance, not claimed by any organism. Beyond the choir, the sermon has no power to convince; beyond their need words echo harmlessly, like a braying bovine calling out for its own kind, warning potential predators, begging for leniency from unseen gods.
I can't repeat this often enough, because it is the biggest intellectual fraud being attempted by a small number of Modern pseudo-intellectuals...
When the graft of Christianity failed to take on the original tree of paganism, when Christianity was exposed to the world's elements, along with Islam as being a branch growing out of the same roots, a new graft had to be attempted. A new "Christianity", whose god was declared dead, and whose brain-dead followers have yet to receive the news, had to be reinvented. This reminds me of the definition of insanity from a member of the root system...
What is being repeated is a new recipe, with a slight modification, combining Hellenism and Judaism, that failed when Jesus was used as its icon. A new twist on an old recipe, deserving of a new half-breed Messiah. This time, the icon that deflated the older souffle, had to be ground down, into a spice, selecting small parts, as Christianity selected small parts from Hellenism, to be added to the volatile mixture. Judaism attempted to integrate its greatest foe, Hellenism, to create a less threatening, to it, dogma. In a post-Christianity era, Nietzsche has been identified as the reincarnation of the parts of Hellenism that could not be assimilated into Christianity - left to the side, hoping they would be forgotten. But Frank did not. He re-remembered, and brought to mind, and updated those ancient pagan beliefs Christianity could not absorb because they simply contradicted its fundamental principles, its basic delusions, its Nihilism.
It's what happens after every war. The victor rewrites the history books. Today there is are segments of Nihilism desperate to distance itself from Judaism, as Jesus was, so as to recreate a new Christianity, but this time with the addition of its greatest foe, in Modern times - the icon Nietzsche. Text has to be reinterpreted, of course, as they did with the Greeks, a new name will baptize this rebirth, a new Messianic figure, and new apostles, to seduce Modern secular humanists, atheists and the disillusioned by Abrahamism and its of-shoots Marxism and Humanism. The product proved to be poison, so it must be renamed, repackaged, spiced up and resold as a new healthy treat.
Where do you find such lost souls - mostly males because females are content to surrender to the status quo indefinitely, desiring only peace and stability, as their reproduction role demands - where else but around a father figure. Lost boys congregated around the words of Nietzsche, who spoke of things they had never heard, in a way they thought nobody would dare. They compete over who is closest the the idol. A pool of ready and willing conscripts - easily impressed, easily seduced, easily dominated. Nietzsche through Kabbalah, or a new age Masonic lodge incorporating all symbols under worldly power. The words had to be altered, of course. Instead of "love" a more macho word, yet with the same connotations. New occult symbols, new lingo, new priests, for a new Bible - a reborn cult ambitiously striving to become a religion.
Minds that cannot survive for long with no God, with no leader, no guiding authority, born followers, betas, that are lost with no unifying Church, are given what they crave. Will this graft take?
Patterns repeat. If we study the methods of the Christian dogma, we will find it repeated in these upstarts. Mystification of words, being but one aspect of the new lie, feeding upon weakness, illness, misery, stupidity, desperation, offering joy, eternity, power through association and so on... Scripture, like in the Bible, has no meaning, it is allegory, pretending to be more. It can be interpreted in any way the reader desires. It claims depth to hide how shallow it is; it claims wisdom to hide how base it is; it claims originality to hide how old and weathered it is; it claims complexity, to hide how simple it is.
To have faith is to believe in the irrational Jesus becomes comprehensible, when you've sacrificed your reason to him, when you've surrendered to emotions. Not Jesus the man, Jesus the icon. The sacred symbol.
Nietzsche bless us all.
_________________ γνῶθι σεαυτόν μηδέν άγαν
Last edited by Satyr on Tue Sep 27, 2016 2:53 pm; edited 1 time in total
Moderns don't give a shit about truth, about principles, about reality. all they care for is effect. The only reason they paid attention to me was because of the small effect I had. They did not care to read anything I wrote, or did not compare what I said about reality to their own experiences of world, most still have no clue what I am all about, only skimming through my posts. What they see is influence, affect, power. Their ambitions reach beyond this small part of reality, and no longer care to read at all.
They do not care about world, reality, or anything. They only care for power, affect. They will lie, cheat, dance, suck cock, bend over and take it up their arse, anything, for that which they lack in themselves. No pride, no shame, no integrity, nothing will prevent them from attaining that....affect. They feel special, powerful, valuable, loved, when they make others do and think something.
World-hating, reality-denouncing Nihilism had to be formalized in a world of illiteracy and despair. It's numbing effect delivered in metaphorical imagery so that the average mind, of that time, could relate to it, and comprehend it literally, finding in the extraordinary insinuations a comforting alternative to his own condition, and suffering. It liberated the believer from his primordial 'sin", that of his father, which is a liberation from past, or sum of all causality, all nurturing - nature. Faithful could enjoy equality beneath the heavenly absolute power, and earn his right to salvation by remaining loyal and devoted to it.
Marxism denounced the placing of the Nihilistic idea(l) beyond the reach of the common man, that made them dependent upon "expert" intermediates, priests, that exploited their status. They liberated the common man from their status, and claimed it as a product of community. It declared that if there were to be an alternative to nature, then the collective should fabricate it, and enjoy its numbing effects. But this did not suffice, for it may have broken down the remaining limit of God, as the divisive ideal, but it replaced it with the State, the institution, that still permitted nature to seep through when it could be dominated by genetically clever minds, that became Priests under a new name and uniform. This last stage was decided during the Cold War. Capitalism proposed the elimination of this factor, and a creation of a sheltering environment within which each individual could fabricate a comforting delusion of his/her liking, if it did not disturb that of his neighbour and did not threaten the system that provided the protection from an inhibiting nature/past. The only permitted debate, within this framework is how much sheltering will inhibit the citizens private delusions, or the personal methods used to cope with a hated world, and what he will replace rejected past/nature, when it was discovered that apathy was not harmless, and escapism was not without a cost.
In the East it was Buddhism and its rejection of ego, that freed its followers from the caste systems of Hinduism. By denouncing self, one rid it of past/nature, opening the possibility of its ascent, if it followed the right path towards absolute salvation. Marxism was an easy alternative when the population had already been prepared by Buddhism to accept a self-deprecating alternative to world.
Social instinct of the Modern prevents him from speaking of things with no sociopolitical, or socioeconomic motive. To speak of disturbing things, or socially unacceptable things, is therefore considered an act of disturbing social peace, which can only be explained as hiding a motive other than speaking honestly about the world. Physical lasciviousness compensates for mental prudishness, repressed energies demanding a way of expressing themselves - vulgar physicality belonging to a mind easily shocked and insulted, when safely buried in social blankets for years.
"The left becomes unnerving as time goes on not only because all of their plans have failed, but because the mask comes off and we see what is beneath the victimhood and passive aggression: raw hatred.
For people to advocate policies that they know will fail, and will in turn destroy society, requires an egoism that surpasses any concern for consequences. That kind of reckless disregard in turn requires a fundamental dislike and desire to destroy that which lives around them.
Nietzsche referred to this viewpoint as nihilism, or a belief in nothing but the self, and he was almost correct. A better way to view it as fatalism, or a belief that no matter what one does, life will remain bad. To have the kind of hatred that these people do, which uses ideology to justify its hateful acts instead of being motivated by the hatred itself, a person must believe life itself should be destroyed.
This pattern appears most clearly in the “Me generation” and its inheritors who adopted leftist viewpoints in order to stab back at their parents and in doing so appear iconoclastic, individualistic, different and unique. What motivates someone to want their highest statement in life to be “I was different”? This requires a fundamental lack of belief in the efficacy of their acts or those of anyone else, which in turn requires the presumption that life itself is pointless and hopeless.
Many factors contribute to this viewpoint. The first and foremost is population density. When surrounded by anonymous people who constantly intrude on space and peace of mind, the temptation is to hate them all as a group and do whatever you can to sabotage them and take everything for yourself. However, hatred can arise other ways, and intertwines closely with a psychology of victimhood.
Those at the bottom of a society, either in wealth or in natural attributes, hate the others for having what they do not. This defines them as those who belong at the bottom because instead of working on self-improvement or making the best of the situation, their response is to pull others down in order to equalize the gap in potential. The ugly trap here is that as societies succeed, they expand, and those who follow the r-strategy of reproduction tend to expand fastest. Since r-strategies correlate with lower IQ, this means the lowest grow the fastest. As a result, the “bell curve” of intelligence shifts to the left and the smarter are marginalized.
As we see across the third world, populations use these r-strategies to dominate other groups including any leadership caste that might emerge. The third world defines itself by its anarchistic, egoistic and non-collaborative approach to life. Only a step further down the chain, we can see how these third-world societies — much as Europe delivered itself to liberalism — have arrived at their third-world status by pursuing this strategy. Their behavior requires a target, and they used their reproduction to obliterate their leaders and incarnate a new We The People/People’s Republic.
What emerges from people power over time is an unwillingness to say no to anyone, lest the assembled Crowd retaliate using a theory of victimhood. Thus common standards get thrown out the window, chaos increases, and so does hatred, and with it, liberalism.
Our religious texts and historical authors tend to agree that the decline in civilization and in personal moral health begins with the “have it your way” method. Reality becomes optional and only what humans want becomes primary. As there are as many wants as there are people, the result is a failure to collaborate on the institutions and process of civilization, which then get taken over by cynical and power hungry people who use them to maximize their own wealth.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Civilization itself creates hatred and its own destruction. To escape this process, humans install culture and wise leaders. But they must also install something else: a hatred of those who were born to be hateful and thus to destroy society. Natural selection suppresses the dumber, pointless and hateful; civilization interrupts this. As yet another human civilization collapses, those who want persistence of the human species in the future must think on how to avoid this consequence next time."
This is a display of nihilism and how it has to lie to survive. Those accusing others of hatred when an honest judgment was offered about races, women, and homosexuality, because they had no other reply, now show how they were projecting fear and hatred on the ones who made them feel it.
Emotion is the only argument Moderns have either to support their own naive ideals, or to attack those who threaten them.
Empathy fully engrossed in sympathy can only accuse other of what it feels in itself.
Placing the behaviour within feminization contexts, the moderns go into fits of hysterics - the temper tantrums of a child who has been denied something it wanted and has no way to attain it.
Another way to think of Nihilism is by first understanding what words, or symbols are. Word = representation, or symbol referring to a noetic construct, called an abstraction. The abstraction could be as simple, as primal, as a sensation, a feeling, an image, or more advanced such as a combination of the previous producing an automatic reaction we call an emotion, or it may be more sophisticated and be a concept, an amalgamation/combination of all the previous given an all encompassing, singular, symbol/word, we call an idea, the synthetic complexity of which we call a theory, or an idea(l). The last may manifest in the form of a word referring to a combination of feelings, images, ideas given an abstract symbol, such as an numerical, or a linguistic symbol, or an image to represent it.
The degree to which these abstractions refer to something experienced, something perceived, determined the utility of the abstraction, and if it is applied it determines success and/or failure, measured by cost/benefit. Expected cost, versus expected benefit, juxtaposed against actual cost/benefit impacting the organism directly. It does not matter if the organism acknowledges, or is aware, of this. The cost/benefit requires no validation, no acceptance. It is incumbent upon the mind to perceive this and adjust itself. It is the organism that will suffer or enjoy the outcome.
Given this, we can now understand that symbols, which is what words/numbers are, connects the mind to the world, or to use my own favourite terms, the symbol connects the noumenon to the phenomenon. This is the pragmatic application of words - words as tools, used in science, philosophy etc.
In Nihilism everything is inverted. This inversion is based on its primary inversion of expecting, no demanding, human concepts, human abstractions, such as God, Meaning, Purpose, Morality in the universal sense, be already in existence awaiting discovery. It's the expectation of a child, raised to expect a parent to come running every time it cries. Nihilism is rooted in the primal, stage, in mammalian development - a form of stagnation of regression back to that infantile stage.
Now, the utility of symbols/words is also inverted. Instead of connecting mind to world, or noumenon to phenomenon, it attempts to connect world to mind, or phenomenon to noumenon. this slight alteration creates the delusion that everything is subjective, or the psychosis of retardation, that expects the world to adjust to human abstractions, to obey human symbols/words/numbers. This is why the Bible begins by stating, using words, that 'first came the world', rather than the act, given a word/symbol. All paradoxes are the product of this confusion, mistaking words, and their application, for the actual phenomenon, the apparent. The misuse of language is the foundation of Nihilistic delusion - a very seductive and comforting delusion.
Nihilism, the concept, is itself a Nihilistic inversion.
This inversion makes Nihilists vulnerable to a world they deny, or reject, or misunderstand, and this, in turn, makes obsessed with dependencies, and always pro State, or pro any authority mitigating between them and the world that does not care what they think of it. Institutions that adjust the cost/benefits so they can continue living in their inverted delusions. It also forces Nihilists to be liars and hypocrites, or schizophrenics, because they cannot actually live in accordance with their own inverted delusions. They must, lies to themselves, compartmentalize, making certain their principles do not hinder their reasoning, from doing what must be done to survive, which inevitably means contradiction their own nihilistic inverted ideals. They enjoy this as paradox, the mystification of whatever they wish to cloud in a haze of ignorance, so their duplicity is not discovered, not only by others but, more importantly, by themselves. To discover this would break them psychologically, mentally, risking their survival, so the brain enforces strong defensive measures to prevent this form happening. This is why you cannot reason with a Nihilist.
We are all familiar with the tale of the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] presented to Alexander the Great as a means of avoiding bloodshed and violence, to prove himself worthy o a city's capitulation.
The knot is presented to Alexander as a conundrum, a physical paradox, a self-referential, complexity, fabricated not to be undone, but to perplex. Implied, but not directly stated is the knot's unraveling - it must be untied, implies that it has been tied in that complex manner, which is a lie. The knot has not been tied in a complicated way, it has been purposefully fabricated to be deny revelation, to deny being undone. A noetic paradox founded on an implied lie, and on a mistake. Alexander's solution points to the relationship of self-referential, self-perpetuating linguistic, noetic paradoxes and the cutting violence of reality, of the phenomenon, he applies as sword upon rope. Human mistakes and lies can be revealed and cut through by reality - the noumenon is destroyed by the phenomenon, even if it lies or has constructed a self-referential, looping fabrication. The knot is complex if you become entangled in its human twines, and you are convinced by the lie that it can be undone.
Nihilism has also based its self-referential, noetic conundrums on lies, refusing reality, the violence of cutting through human fabrications, on moral grounds. It presents itself as a complexity of self-referential fabrications that are meant to perplex and tie the mind down, enslaving him in their implied lies. Contradiction exposes a concealed error, or a hypocrisy. For Nihilists it serves the purpose of placing the lie in knots, so that it is never exposed. world cannot lie, only a mind can do so. The mind deals with the contradiction exposing a mistake in its own reasoning, or a intentional lie by accusing the world of being complex, or un-ravelable. Its own error it cannot acknowledge, for then it would be forced to look into its own motives and investments in time and energy, into the heart of its own self-referential lies. Instead it revels in the paradox it has manufactured, or adopted, as a comforting complexity, hiding a secret, unrevealed intentional error.
Nihilists do not want to untie the noetic knot in their own psychosis, they enjoy it as the mysterious, the mystical paradoxical lie, that enables them to escape detection, to be un-tied, and their city surrendered. Paradox is how the error is converted to a 'truth', and the lie into an honest test of worthiness. If you cannot untie the knot of their noetic conundrum, then you are unworthy of their surrender. The lie is pleased by its own ruse. It is purposefully made to not be undone, because it has not been tied in an intricate manner, but purposefully fabricated to never be tied or untied. This is the Nihilist's Paradox, concealing the mistake in their own judgments, and the underlying lie that binds it. We are now speaking of the Gordian Knot in a metaphorical sense. The knot, in question, is noetic, or ideological, abstract. What is purposefully complicates is what is concealed as a lie, which is presented as a paradox. Contradiction is no longer an indication of a mistake, but now becomes part of the lie. It supports the lie with its mystification. By accepting the lie's first premise, that it is complex and can be undone, you've made the first step towards being trapped by it. Subjectivity pulls you into its self-referential, encompassing entanglements, offering you only one option, and that one option implies a lie. What can unravel it all but an external force? The noetic paradox, the mental conundrum is contradicted by the phenomenon, the (inter)active world, that cuts through its fabrications like a knife. The knot need not be unraveled for the city to surrender, it has already surrendered in the form of the knot, and now seeks to postpone the inevitable, like humans believe that with words they can trick reality, and that by changing attitudes, they can alter the cosmos rather than themselves in relation to it.
Paradox, conundrum, linguistically fabricated complexity is how the cowardly, surrendering, Nihilist postpones the inevitability of world; how he entangles his self-referential linguistic motives with a starting lie, meant to mesmerize, to settle for a stalemate, to procrastinate and reserve the 'right' for a later date that will never come. Alexander is presented a paradox with one option...a moral one. The non-violent one - the reasonable one. But this option is presented to him with an implied and not stated, lie, in the form of a challenge.
Is this not what Nihilists do with their linguistically based theologies and ideologies? Do they not also present their self-referential fabrication in the form of a challenge, requiring a strong mind to unravel? But it cannot, because the constructs, their mental fabrications, rely on a lie, which they entangle to hide it.
Consider the paradox of a benevolent, loving Christian God, and how he, such a caring deity, permits evil, and suffering? A paradox. Consider his monist singularity before the paradox of multiplicity. A mysterious paradox. Consider the lie that appearances do not matter delivered from the mouth of those who judge in that way daily. A sin, a paradox. Why does not the women declaring love as the solution to all evil, that all deserve, refuse to pick-up a bum, from the streets, and heal him with her loving lips, as he deserves to be? Paradox. Consider the modern myth concerning the mystery of the female psyche, and her confusing, to most, changes of heart, her words constantly contradicted by her deeds. Paradox. Feminine mystique. Consider the paradox of refusing to judge by appearances then judging by appearances in all cases, except a few unsettling ones. Paradox, the 'complexity' of the human mind. Why are humans exempt from the rules we use to understand everything else, including other life? Complexity, paradox of the human condition. The lie is tied into a conveniently self-referential knot.
How can a Nihilist evade accountability, the error in his own thinking but to allude to some unraveling complexity he can encompass with the convenient Paradox? He need not reconsider, or find the error in his own thinking, but he can remain tied up in his convenient knot, justifying his enslavement to his ideals with the paradoxical.
Any philosophy can be made reasonable by strategically applying paradox to cover up its mistakes, and its lies. Nihilism does not reveal but it conceals. It does not want to make things clear, but to retain them all in confusion and complexity, they complicate they do not simplify because only in human confusion and fabricated complexity is the lie conceals by a noetic knot. The cosmos is complicated enough, and this produces anxiety in this who add to it a man-made complexity to hide within it their motives; their hopes, dreams, desires all meant to deal with this anxiety, this unresolved fear. Nihilists rely on mental Gordian Knots, on mental word-games, on linguistically produced paradoxes to remain safe within their city. But can they keep the world out forever?