Satyrnalium

Fortunately, for me, most people do not understand what I am saying, or do not understand the implications of what I am saying, and of the rest most do not agree with what i am saying, and do not understand the implications of this disagreement.

No extended families. No generational representation, where great-grand parents, live close, or in the same house, with grandparents, and parents and their children, giving them a sense of continuity, of identity as tangible memories, narrative, genes as flesh and blood.

Modernism has fragmented man, into tiny little insignificant piece, looking for an identity, and finding it in ideologies, in materialism, in hedonism, in fantasies, in wealth, abstractions with no substance, and when these prove to be insufficient, seeking relief in narcotics, in entertainment, in distractions of any kind.
A world of urbanized disillusionment, and cynical self-comforting.
A world of insanity, looking for self in words, in symbols, in icons, in the intangible, the ideology, the noetic construct.

Common sense?
How can there be sense, common, or not, that denies its own senses. A sense the simplest organism accepts as self-evident.
A psychotic species is emerging.
Groundless, with no anchoring, with no past, denying all attempts to come down from the noetic, fantastic skies of mental creativity.
Minds addicted to imagination unhindered by an indifferent, challenging reality.

God being pronounced dead, was shocking to many family structures that had placed the male as god's representative on earth - a male by proxy, when god was the only true alpha and omega.
Then the family became nuclear and slowly disintegrated, reinventing itself as homosexual political unions, or pets in a household considered family buy their detached and disillusioned 'owners"...no companions,. caretakers.
God became State, the only true alpha and omega. He morphed, took on a new substantiality.
For those who could not make the leap form one submission to the next, there was a void, an absence.
No father figure to overcome, to surpass, and become a man, no mother to emulate and surpass to become a mother, a woman, what was left but a new transfiguration of God, into pure idea(l) - number, word, symbol, the concept of order, whole, one.
Before the idea(l) boys could feel less shamed for submitting to a incorporeal institution, usually represented by inferior, effete, males and increasingly by women.
Boys so lost and arrogant, that any deference to any living, corporeal entity felt embarrassing, demeaning, especially when there was no blood shared, no common identity.
To worship the idea(l), or a dead icon, representing the idea(l) masculine entity, absolute order, absolute masculinity, is easier on the ego.
It's hard-enough on a growing boy to challenge and overcome his own flesh and blood father, so you can imagine how difficult it would be to accept another man, as a figure to surpass.
If it were an abstraction, an idea(l) then there's no mind to feel submissive to.
Male ego is saved, but the rites of ascension are never finalized.
The boy remains stuck in a perpetual state of adolescence, under the shadow of an absolute idea(l), representing masculinity: order, authority, creativity, cruel...hard.

The point is the product of binocular triangulation.
Two eyes focusing into the endless distance, meeting at some shifting point in space/time.
This is the point, from which lines of shifting distances, due to fluctuating existence – all is dynamic - are drawn, creating the geometric shapes.
The point is also the root of the concept of 'one' and its later negation 'nil' producing the abstract language of mathematics.
These shapes are "perfect" in theory... in the mind, as noetic ideals. Outside the brain there is no perfect shape.
Its theoretical perfection is due to sensual limitations, and distance from the theoretical shape... as one comes closer the shape dissipates into further shapes... fragmentation.
Like the numerical idea of 'one' the shape is a human abstraction, that cannot be found outside the mind.
Useful interpretations, projection, but if taken literally it can result in the psychosis many moderns suffer from.
All language is art – representational.
Misunderstanding it as being literal, is psychotic – narcissistic, egotistic arrogance, trying to deal with an innate anxiety/fear.
Language is an externalization of mental abstractions, the nervous system projected outward, which helps the organism orient itself within a fluctuating world.
Later it develops into a code, a method of externalizing man's understanding of himself, and the world he awakens to – techniques/technologies.
This projection of internal constructs is then confused for a world being conscious, or the esoteric becomes the exoteric, in a classic inversion of psychosis.
Man's internal world, becomes externalized - all is conscious, alive, thinking, judging, feeling....in whatever manner the individual desires - desire expressing a private need.
Man sees himself, as he understand himself, in everything, everywhere.

Nihilism = inversion.
Man's internal abstractions, hopes, feelings, processes made external, negating the external, covering it up in projected symbols/words.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Memetic parasitical virus - dis-ease.
Modernity as sickness - madness.

Logic is the study of language and its consistency with math/geometry.
It is the method of establishing a semiotic self-consistency, once the point/one is taken for granted.
The arc is not a straight line because of fluctuating distances in a fluid environment.

If we look at the diagram and the extending distance between the two lines, we see the beginning of a circle.
Every point on the arc an ambiguous point of equal distance form the projected point, itself a product of triangulation.

There is no point in space/time as there is no one, no absolute.
It is a projection of a theoretical ambiguous, shifting noetic projection, being constantly reaffirmed, adjusted, recalculated.
Geometry is the theoretical static point, in a theoretical unchanging plane, of a theoretical perfect point in a three-dimensional plane.
It is noetic. So abstract as to refer to anything, at any time, that meets the theoretical criteria.
As is the number one, and its negation the nil - setting up binary logic 1/0, and then dualism of either/or which Nihilism is trapped in, willfully (Hypocrisy, cowardice) and often not willfully but due to a genetic limitation (idiocy).

Randomness/chaos does not mean there is no causality, but only that the effect is never consistent, never predictable.
Energies - patterned/non-patterned, (inter)act.
The patterned, ordered, with consistent, predictability, and the random with inconsistent unpredictability.

Energies = Order/Chaos, or pattern/non-pattern (inter)acting.
Interacting means - attraction/repulsion, producing friction - fragmentation, adding to space/time and to chaos.
Attraction/Repulsion are measurements of harmony between patterns and non-patterns, which in the latter case are always disharmonious - so attraction/repulsion is am measure of patterns and how in harmony they are - how their vibrations relate.
No will, no intent, no consciousness required.

Why does everything appear ordered to an organic brain?
Because the brain, being an organ within an organism, is a forager of patterns.
It finds patterns attractive, because it is dependent no them....life eats life.
This is old news. Ancient, in fact.

Second factor...brain processes data, often entering it via the nervous system and via a medium, such as air or light.
This means that the phenomenon is processed after-the-fact...there's a lag between the phenomenon agitating the medium, and the medium agitating the sensory cells, and the data being translated and transmitted to the brain, and the data being processed there.
so we are experienced reality in the past - looking back.
This experience is subjective...it is in our brains.
Therefore, randomness is assimilated into the final outcome, as appearance.
We can only perceive order of a certain level, degree, where it manifests as phenomenon, but not only that but the phenomenon is translated twice, by the time it reached the brain, so randomness is excluded or not processed, or it is integrated in the final result.

Randomness is a very distressing thing for an organism dependent on order.
It is terrifying.
The mind would rather believe in an evil order, than to believe in randomness, because randomness cannot be dealt with, cannot be reasoned with, tricked, rationalized, bartered with...it is entirely non-correctable.
That is why nihilistic spirituality begins...and in the west this is where Judaism starts, and then becomes Christianity and Islam, and then forms into secular Marxism, Humanism and so on.
It is this existential angst it exploits, and the weaker ones covet. This is salvation, from the woes of an indifferent, somewhat unpredictable reality.
No matter how strong, smart, you are, you remain vulnerable to randomness.
You can only increase your odds, to be in your favour, you cannot guarantee anything.

This is the resentiment Nietzsche spoke of in relation to the overman.
A future man that has overcome the bitterness towards existence that both concerns him to the unforeseeable, and also makes him possible.
Chaos making order possible...giving it value, if and when it becomes conscious.

For lifeless Energies there is only attraction/repulsion based on their patterns.

Mythologies, the occult are ways of comforting the human mind.
Mostly they are a way to dumb-down reality for the mediocre, average mind.
It integrates complexity and randomness in narratives the average mind can relate to, and by relating to it feel it to be more intimate and therefore less distressing.

The occult insinuates order, known order, that it does not have. It exploit idiocy, by claiming something the average mind wants to be so.
The more mystifying it is, the more comforted it feels...as if it were being exposed to a certainty that higher mind comprehend, even if it does not, but can only feel its truth.
it is always delivered in convoluting language, and pseudo-intellectual rhetoric, pretending to be specialized and deep secret codes, because it is in fact clueless, and only interested in self-medication and mass exploitation of mediocrity, to make existence pleasing until the end.
The more obscure the lingo, the more full of shit it is.
This is why it usually rearranges words, to imply something profound.

Two basic types of words, other than the ones used for grammar, syntax, sentence structure, linguistic conventions.  

Brain, Noumenon <> Word <> Phenomenon
Here dictionary definitions connect the mind via the symbol/word, to the apparent, the observable, phenomenon.
Most meaningful words.
The usage of the word may not give pleasure to the user, but this is not its utility.

Brain, Noumenon <> Word <> Back to Brain, connecting to another abstraction.
Self-referential
The word may connect to an abstraction in another brain, giving the impression that it has an external reference.
Nihilistic words, Self-Referential
Another way to make a word self-referential is to detach it from its reference to reality, its proper use, and then place it within a sequence of words, in an an entirely arbitrary place.
Mystery, Mysticism.

Chaos and Order are not opposites.
They are both Energies, vibrations, dynamic possibility, exiting and (inter)active.
they differ only in that one has a order,, a pattern of repeating, predictable sequences, different tones, rhythms to be interpreted as different kinds of matter, energy...and the other has an inconsistent, unpredictable, erratic vibration, that still (inter)acts, and may become apparent for a short time/space distance, and so can never be categorize not form into more complex, intricate balanced unities, to make them perceptible to an organism like man.
Chaos remains minuscule, and it is continuously fragmenting, expanding time/space and increasing entropy.

There is no consistency to form a balance of attraction/repulsion, no stable harmonics to harmonize with other vibrations, Energies.
It can only be found on what man calls the quantum level.

Chaos/Order are opposites for an organism dependent on order, and evaluating all in relation to itself.

Three general types of abstractions, represented by symbols/words, or by a combination of them.

1-Concepts referring to observable phenomena: behaviors, interactions.

2-Concept that refer to other concepts, or combination of abstractions referring to other abstractions, existing in the mind - (solipsism, self-referential), or referring to minds other than the one thinking them (adopted and shared).

3- Concepts that are a synthesis of 1 & 2.
These are the most hypocritical and confusing.
an observable concept can be combined with a purely noetic abstraction, so that the two are considered inseparable by the mind.
I called this piggy-backing, or Trojan horse method, to describe a strategy of inserting into a mind an absurd concept, that seems logical because it is associated with an observable phenomenon.

Some things to keep in mind in relation to Satyr's metaphysical positions as these have been laid-out in brief in [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.].

1- Random Energies (vibrations = ocsillations of possibility/space) can only remain on the quantum level, because randomness cannot harmonize, therefore it cannot create ephemeral balanced unities, like particles, and then cells and larger perceptible phenomena.  
On the level where man can perceive phenomena chaos never reaches.
The smallest quanta is fragmenting constantly as time/space expands, and dimensions multiply.
So, chaos is shrinking within the four-dimensional plane while expanding its effect into multiplicity of dimensions.

2- Lag time of processing.
The human brain requires a certain length of time/space to collect and process data from (inter)activity. Even using light, there is a time period required for the medium to (inter)act with phenomenon, and then the sensory cell, the eye, be translated, converted into neural pulse, transmitted to the brain and then processed as abstraction.
We are always perceiving the world in the past.
Now, this lag is tiny, making brain speed crucial to survival, but it is inescapable.
What does this mean in relation to patterned and non-patterned Energies, or order/chaos.
It means we can only perceive the consequences of (inter)actions, not the (inter)actions as they occur. Because we can only perceive order, patterns, we can only witness the effects of chaos-randomness upon order - patterns.  We can only witness chaos indirectly.
Randomness is integrated into pattern, in other words, when the stimuli is translated into a neural pulse, which is a type of order, a type of pattern.
Out interpretations of phenomena assimilate patterns and randomness into a different pattern - codified.
So, of course the mind believes it exists within order, or some mind are convinced that they create reality, or that reality is knowable, and understandable.

3- The shift from brain to mind is what is partially represented allegorically by Plato's cave.
Think of brain (matter, body) as the movie reel, with representations, frozen space/time, placed in sequence, and , after projecting light through this sequence the image on the movie screen as the mind (energy - representational).
We experience reality as abstractions (pictures on a reel), placed in temporal sequence, projected as mind, imitating, translating existence into a form we can comprehend and has proven effective, useful.
The theater is the allegorical cave. The firelight is the will, and the light outside, sunlight is reality, the world.
We can only experience reality in our subjective cranium, the proverbial cave.
For many the outside the cave is too hurtful, too distressing, too blinding.
So, we only perceive an interpretation of stimuli which is validated by application, or by techniques, called reasoning, logic, which have developed to avoid the costs of a trial/error approach, a primitive basic methodology.
The third-logical-principle of the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] is an imposition of a restriction upon the mind, where absurdity is infinitely possible.
In nature such a law need not be articulated. Natural order needs no such human law to impose a limit on its interactivity, but the human mind does, because in the human mind no natural order applies. In the mind frozen fire, and the absolute, can be contemplated, imagined, verbally stated, because there stimuli are translated into a simplified/generalized form (abstraction), so vague that they can be combined in any way imaginable. The mind is not restricted by natural order - it has no space/time restrictions, and so can place sequences in any way it pleases....it can rearrange the pictures to run backwards or in a strange surreal combination, just as we can edit a movie reel, splice the pictures into any sequence, projecting upon the screen a mess we can then declare to be profound insight.
We can mix pictures from different sequences, sample different movies, we can isolate a sequence and alter it with graphics....there is no end to what we can do in the mind.
Taking the end product seriously, literally, is where modernity goes mad.
The mind, if it is protected from the consequences, then begins to believe it can create its own world, its own experiences, by manipulated abstractions.
Movie editing is a god-like process where an entire world, a reality, can be altered with subtle changes in the reels sequences.

Man had to devise a law, principles, to limit what combinations were to be considered seriously, to restrict the minds creative imagination, its fluidity, so that the thought adjusts to natural order, or reflects it accurately.
The mind can easily be taken over by absurdity, especially if the body it is a manifestation of, is protected from the real world - from the risks and costs. Culling is a limit, which weeds out errors in judgments and delusions taken seriously and acted upon...but in modern systems this is not the case.
In Modern systems error, absurdity, is protected from the consequences...and we get ILP, or the everyday world of insanity.

Using the human body, the nervous, skeletal system, wrapped in a membrane/skin,as a metaphor for human ideas, we can see that where spinal column meets cranium is where body becomes mind - exoteric becomes esoteric.
The skeleton is the core of a theory that requires fleshing out.
If reality contradicts it, this fleshing out is impossible when exposed to real natural forces, and can only grow if placed in a quarantined, controlled, sheltering environments, where the conditioned can be adjusted to accommodate it.

If exposed to reality the flesh hangs in a haphazard decaying way, like a Zombie.

Only life, living organisms, have will, because only living organisms can feel flux, or interactivity producing need/suffering; only living organism have choice because only life has memory, intuitive, instinctive, or conscious.
Ergo only life can be described as having an ego, a self.
Ego being the same as self, in Greek, but used here, by me, to differentiate consciousness of self, from unconscious, unknown, self, as the connection of memories, DNA, to past.
Memories can be lucid or stored as code, DNA, but they are necessary to differentiate life from non-living phenomena.
Memory is the binding mechanism creating the continuum of self, of identity.

All else functions on patterns and non-patterns interacting in the only way they can interact: as the pattern, with a particular rhythm, tone, range of effect, that they are relative to other.
Their patterns relating to other patterns as attractive, in harmony, or repulsive, not in harmony.
Since random Energies are what they are, they are always repulsive, making the expansion of time/space, we call Big Bang, possible.

The clearest indication of understanding is the ability to simplify what is complex, so that individuals with a lower IQ can understand.
Understanding is expressed in an ability to describe what is understand in multiple ways, clearly and honestly.

Understanding itself, is the discovery of a pattern governing all patterns involved in a unity, or in an interactivity.
Knowing is the reduction of phenomenon to an abstraction = simplification/generalization.
Understanding is the reduction of said abstractions to a unifying concept.

This simplification/generalization is not a loss but a gain.
By simplifying/generalizing one can connect multiple such simplification/generalizations into larger mental models.

Such abstractions can be tested, against the world using the three methods I described elsewhere.

One can only admire the tenacity and resilience of the feminine mind, using the same psychological manipulation we first experienced in high-school, the years of painful awakening to the social restrictions upon our natural drives.
Females never advance beyond this stage, having progressed faster towards it, compared to males.
Feminization stops boys there, forcing them to remain immature men-children, stunted males....feminine.
They use the same methods, the same adolescent tactics, expecting the same results.

Think of philosophy, as it is approached by degenerate moderns, like a return to teenage angst and like you're back in high-school.
Who is more popular, who is more cool, who has the best drugs, has the best image; who knows people that know people, who gets the most pussy, who has the nicest car, who has the best rep, who goes to the best and most parties, and has street cred; who uses slang or invented a new cool word that went viral; who's a nerd, a loner with no friends, or belongs to the cool clique....
That's all it is.

If you think about it most of these psychotics did not come to philosophy because they were interested in reality, they came to it because they were looking for solutions, for direction, for meaning, for something they could not pinpoint but felt like an ache; they were looking for a way to stand-out form the same ideals they promoted.
They all had a motive other than seeing the world as it is.
So, they assume that because this is so for them, that this is so for everyone.  

Going to forums, especially the popular ones, is like visiting a medical institution, or a penitentiary for troubled teens.
All presumably 'adults' that think and act like teenagers. All stunted, by something or other, and stuck in a perpetual state of puberty.
Know what that's called?
Feminization.

The issue is not why individuals existing in the same world, raised in generally similar cultures, with generally the same level of intelligence agree on the common sense fundamentals, but why, given the similarities, they do not agree.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] offers my explanation.

Are we go further into the past we will find a fundamental agreement in basic things, like appearances means something, males and females are not the same, and they are not the same both in physical and in mental potentials, that race is a fundamental part of evolution, about what is sex..and so on.
Peoples isolated geographically came to similar conclusions, using different metaphors, symbols, but agreeing on the basics...but as we come forward into Modernity this agreement is not a given, other than the agreement to disagree.
We are now at a point of disagreeing with our own body, our own past....we claim to be other than what we appear, or females trapped in male bodies, and are confused about the meaning of words like 'value', 'sex', 'human', and so on.

Degenerates, taking it for granted that there is no shared, objective reality, assume that all agreement is a result of some kind of force, to validate their starting position.
But the opposite is the case, in a inverted realism, called nihilism.

How can it be that individuals of the same species, existing in the same world, fail to agree on basic facts?
You will not find other species debating the validity of their sensual perceptions.
You will not find them questioning their sex, or the differences between breeds within the same species.

Only man is a psychotic.
Only man can look into world and dismiss his own senses as superficial, his own symbols as insufficient, reality as insufficient or far too much to bear, choosing an alternate one.

The only explanation is self-domestication.
Domestication of man, Feminization.
Domestication involves.
1- Quarantine - separation of environment from nature, from the wild - ignorance and/or denial of objective world - reality beyond the walls/fences.
2- Selection according to specific production value, not genetic qualities - rearranging values and judging standards.
3- Cultivation of docility, amicability, tolerance within confined controlled environments - taming.
4- An inability to return to the wild - dependence on the quarantined environment.
5- Regimentation - Specific periods and places for eating, defecating, playing, working, copulating, waking/sleeping; not following circadian rhythms, or planetary cycles - detachment from natural cycles - training.

The reason for this intellectual confusion is man's immersion within symbolic linguistic worlds,. constructing alternate, internal realities.
Only man by willfully making words meaningless can create issues where there are none, making once self-evident common sense facts debatable concepts, and only man by misusing language, by manipulating symbols for their emotional triggering powers, can claim that some philosophical problem has been resolved, by simply altering the meaning of a word, to accommodate a mystification that permits the illusion, the feeling, that real intellectual problems are solved.

How easy it is to solve the mind/body issue by changing the meaning of words, or using them in a way that implies a solution, without doing so?
How easy to produce an issue where none exists, as in the case with mind/body, where the mind can reject the appearance of the body, by using the ambiguity of the term spirit/soul.
How easy to resolve naturally produced inequality, a product of natural selection, by altering the definition of the term 'human'.

Word juggling is what clowns are good at.
Children love clowns.
A natural symbiotic relationship between clowns, pretending to be serious by painting frowns on their faces, and men-children, wanting to feel happy, to laugh, to feel joy, to surrender to fantasy, to make the world more fascinating.  
 Clowns attract men-children by the dozen.
Men-Children love clowns, and secretly fear them. They love how clowns make them feel, with their antics, their extraordinary talents with word-juggling, their acrobatics, their participation in a circus atmosphere, full of all kinds of wonders - bizarre freaks, manimals doing tricks, performers spreading joy, and of course clowns.

Clowns take their clown-craft seriously. It's hard work making men-children jump for joy.
You have to learn all kinds of tricks, other than word-juggling.
There's hot-air blowing and twisting into funny manimals, and the talent of falling without getting hurt, and performing before a large audience full of men-children wanting to be entertained.
You have to keep your performance fresh and exciting, with new tricks, like balancing on tight-ropes, or pie in the face routines, or riding on mono-cycles, or using confetti and bubbles, or little puppies in the act.
It's a full time job being a clown.
It required a vivid infantile imagination. You have to know what immature, little girls, and still developing men-children want, how they think,and then give it to them.
You can't pretend to be a clown. The kids will see right through it. You must embody clownishness. You actually have to become a clown, not act like a clown.
You have to believe in the performance.  


The attraction of a circus is that it offers a magical alternate reality the audience can enter and leave behind the real world, full of their real problems - a welcomed relief.
Men-children adore clowns and the strange world of the circus, because it triggers their childish fantasies.
Clowns juggle words, and symbolic things....they blow-up colourful balloons with hot air from their bright-red mouths.
Men-Children laugh and clap when they watch big, bright, hot-air rising into the air....going higher, higher and higher, floating up with them in their heads - magical stuff.  
It's well known that the real men, under all the clown makeup and the clown baggy uniforms and floppy shoes, hiding the body, are usually miserable people, acting happy to earn a living, and enjoying the attention - evaluating themselves by the quantity of people that came to watch them, and by the applause their antics produce.
All clowns really want is to be loved by men-children, and by little girls....to be adored and acknowledged by an audience. That's the only standard the clown has.
All the clown really wants is to make men-children happy, because a clown is a man-child himself, under all that clown makeup, and his asexual, non-human, getup.


As long as there are men-children, and little girls, in the world, wanting to be taken away into magical lands, there will be clowns to be found, in and out of a circus.

There are, of course, as with everything gradations of clownishness.
There are clowns aiming at a infant audience, those aiming at a boyish crowd, and there are clowns who want to attract older men-children, around the teenage years.
These clowns have their own paraphernalia.
Instead of balloons, they have bongs, to help the adolescents watch one another get high - the usual giggling and laughing, and mirth is to be expected, as joy is the target of the clowns inflation of reality, to a hyper-reality.

A adolescent audience requires adolescent cloning around.
Word-juggling becomes slang, Ebonics, to sound cool and to differentiate the group from the others, whoever they might be...those that are not high, or having fun, or enjoying deep insights in their narcotic joy.
Some are more health oriented, demanding magic mushrooms to get their magic fix.
A nice natural way to get wasted.
Magic visions, the world turns to a kaleidoscope of distractions.


Lost men-children, and teenage girls, need a higher level of clown to bring them out of their insecurity shells...to let go, and be themselves in a crowd.
The clown is always sexually oriented. Directly or through insinuations.
The magic gets you what you most desire...money, pussy, love, cars, deep insights into the nature of reality...anything.
You just have to keep an open-mind and be brave enough to let go.

The clown has the role of performing hypnotist, cultivating a certain ambience to bring out the adolescent anxiety - to release itself.
Symbols/words, sturgeons it's all part of the act, of making teenagers comfortable enough to become receptive to suggestion.
Then it's a party...and what teenager does not love to party?

Nihilism is an idea which negates reality, by proposing a concept that is not only void of meaning, outside the human mind, but it contradicts the experienced world.

It usually proposes an occult, hidden realm, in the beyond - above or below perception - or an ideal that has never, been witnessed, and attempts to justify this concept using symbols/words.
In other words it proposes an absolute, has no evidence of it, justifies it as hidden in the metaphysical or the idealistic hidden world, and then uses words to validate it, because it is unable to point to an example that does not require a symbol/word.

This is what makes it entirely dependent on symbols/words, and the esoteric, or some beyond time/space, alternate world, that is more real, than the real..

Its methods are psychological.
It implies that to understand it you must be of a certain quality....like those fArtists who splash paint on canvas, and sell it as profound to gullible imbeciles.
Talent is replaced by salesmanship.
You can sell anything to a fool, if you determine his weakness.
Using something as simple as peer-pressure, and the desire to fit-in and to not be excluded, and to feel special, the salesman sells you a shit-box, and calls it a Jaguar.
All it takes is product sexiness, using the right name.

If our ideas cannot be shown, but only spoken, or written, then they are not real, they are representations of the real, and exist in the mid, and only in the mind, as a neurological pattern, energy: vague, emotional, sensational, arbitrary.
It is only useful as a psychological tool to manipulate others, to seduce, to convince, to coerce them.
It is like the #1, or the concept of a circle...it is an idea, a concept, that can apply to anything that is approximately like the perfection in our heads.

If you cannot point to a one, a perfect circle...an absolute - indivisible, immutable, complete, perfect - then you only have a theoretical idea(l), and nothing more.
if you believe in it literally, then you are a nihilist.
It's not the world, it's YOU.
You are the problem.

If you cannot point to a behavior, a pattern, as evidence of the concept the word 'absolute' refers to, then what is it?
Why can't you find the word, as you define it, anywhere outside your skull, and the skulls of those who understand it in the same way?

Take the word 'love'.
It refers to particular behaviors, and feelings, we as social animals, have experienced.
But in the minds of romantic idealists it means something divine, extraordinary, supernatural....and their repeated failure to possess it, and their inability to show it, proves that it only exists in their mind, as a vague idea(l) they, theseelves, cannot fully comprehend....justifying it using mysticism, pretending that only the worthy know it, is bullshyte.
Any absurdity can be "proven' in this way.

I can declare goat-men as being more than metaphorical, but that ti takes a special language, special qualities, a worthiness to find one in reality.
I can say that goat-men are for the few, special, ones, because it requires a higher logic, and that this logic is too sophisticated for me to get into.
I can say that the language i apply usurps common language...it revolutionizes human understanding.
I can say that goat-men exist out there, somewhere above or below, and it has yet to be discovered but it will, one day, in the future when humanity is ready to accept this magical creature.

Objectivity means you attempt, when possible, to connect the dictionary definition of a word, the conventional meaning ascribed to a symbol, with a phenomenon, in the world.
You connect, using semiotics, the noumenon with the phenomenon.  
You relate, the subjective interpretation of reality, with the object of interest, the objective, the world.

This is what I mean by bringing it 'down to earth' and objectivity.  

The desire to dismiss all such attempts, because you prefer that those particular words remain vague, idealistic, and easily ridiculed, or to use this detachment to justify any hypothesis, is founded on an ulterior motive, and a lack of integrity - cowardice, and shameless hypocrisy.

The simplest things allude the idealistic mind of the degenerate.
They imagine primal human as being nice, pacifistic, non-violent.
The myth of the 'noble savage' has become an ideal they cannot let go of.

No tribe, in the history of man has ever not been pacifist.

Simple exercise...
Imagine a tribe that is pacifist....does not kill, is against violence, would rather die than fight.
Their ideal is peace, cooperation, compromising, sacrificing self to other.
Imagine a tribe that is violent....kills to survive and to expand its power.

What will happen when the first tribe comes across the second?
How long will it take for tribe #2 to slaughter and/or enslave tribe #1?

Romantic idealism belongs to nihilism.
It is rooted in a mind that has refused to confront itself and the world ti is born into, thrown into.

In its ill mind it begins to believe violence is learned and not part of nature, or that if it is part of nature, man is excluded.
Such a degenerate imagines an idealized primitive man - kind, docile, loving, cooperative....This is the crap he was told in Abrahamism, to convince him that all this was because man sinned...that Adam was this ideal primitive, or it is brain washed by Marxism to believe that selfishness is a product of Capitalism, and that before that system was invented, out of thin air, all humans were communist.
It confuses blood relations, and tribal instincts for a passive, sharing, egalitarianism.

Man was made violent, and selfish....he learned this behaviour.

Such retards have never read a single book on evolution, the selfish gene, for example, or Evolutionary psychology...they dismiss all animal behaviour because it contradicts the delusion that man is born a blank slate and has all its nastiness put in him, by some evil will.
They romanticize man....like all retarded naive imbecile do.
Because it feels good, it gives them hope, it is comforting.
It's a way to avoid facing their own feebleness, and need for self-evaluation, and action, adaptation.
they insist that it is the world that must change to accommodate them...and that this world exists behind, below, up there, down there, somewhere.
This ideal keeps them sane.
They giggle nervously when it is contradicted...having nothing but this expression of release to answer the arguments and the evidence their own eyes are exposed to.

They've inverted reality to accommodate their inadequacies, and have invested a lifetime to preserving these delusions.

Natural selection works on competitiveness, violence, injustice, cruelty.
Some are born sexy, others are not.
Some are born strong, others are not.  
Some are born smart, others are not.

Nature works on differences, not on similarities.

How can you have a serious conversation with someone who does not even accept the fundamental principles of natural selection?
Better to discuss Peter Pan with a ten-year-old.

---A theory has to be observable by all. It has to be available to everyone for validation, testing.
Placing the justification in an internal, esoteric, private realm, is an easy way to evade this necessity.
Then all you are bound by is self-consistency and, if you wish to add external validation, it must be seductive, pleasing, promising, hopeful....positive, to as many minds as possible.
The theory compensates for a lack of external references with a multiplicity of followers, believers, creating an echo-chamber of inter-subjectivity. Each believer using his own personal feelings, interests to justify the same theory independently from all others.
The theory, the ideal, becomes a focal point - a world on its own. It replaces the observable, indifferent, shared world with a web of internally self-consistent abstractions, once a few basic presumptions have been establishes as self-evident.

---A theory must provide the possibility for prediction, or it has to have a utility - it has to be applied.
This is in correlation to the previous.
It is a reaction to the first.
The theory may or may not offer its own implied reactions, methods of dealing with what is exposed as common, as observable by all.
This is not necessary because each individual is unique in his attributes, and motives.
What works for one, may not work as well for another, and what one desires may be a secondary desire for another.
The theory provides the framework within which individuals, or categories of psychologies, can determine and place into action their own reaction to what is revealed.

---A theory must be independent from any one individual.
The most objective theories are the ones that would hold true even if there were nobody present to know and understand them.
A theory's dependence of minds to be convinced, to follow, to appreciate, to acknowledge, to believe, are not objective.
The standard is external to the particular individual, so that each holds himself accountable to it, independently from everyone else.  
A theory describing something that can be ignored, or dismissed with no consequences, demanding that one acknowledge it before it has an effect, is not philosophy...it is sophistry.

---A theory ought not to require specialized language, or experts to be understood and validated by an average mind.
If it describes and defines something in a shared reality, an average intelligence can comprehend and validate it on its own.
The term 'revealing', or the Greek term 'aletheia', -un-forget...implies something all can see, and know, but have forgotten.
It is not the world that has concealed itself but they have concealed the world from themselves, or it is some other mind, or collective, that has placed it in concealment. The un-covering, is experienced as a revelation, a clarity, unveiling, of what has always been present.
The awakening mind feels like he or she has always known what it is being exposed to.
Understanding is finding patterns in the patterns, data - connecting relationships.
A teacher may reveal these connections to a student that could not, but when the connections are revealed the student wonders why it could not see what was always before its eyes.

Infinite number of interpretations, competing in the real world, is the natural selection of ideologies.
An interpretation has to refer to refer to phenomena in the real-world, outside the brain, otherwise it is pure noetic abstraction - theoretical ideology.
This would include all negations of ideologies, because it\'s easy to reject, deny, declare something wrong, using symbols/words, just as it is to create something, a theory, which is self-consistent and declare it right.
In both cases there is no application, or no negation based on observable, testable, shared phenomena.
There are only declarative affirmations and negations, using symbols words rooted in personal interests, emotions, or some synthesis of abstractions that have no external reference.
Those I named positive Nihilists, compensate for this absence by hijacking words, pulling them out of the world and converting them to noetic constructs, and then redefining them in accordance with their private, esoteric, self-referential, self-flattering, self-preserving, consistencies, and by substituting an indifferent world with a collective of minds, full of cares - needs, desires, prejudices.
This is their 'external validation': followers, believers, peers, quantities, popularity. Majority is the absolute validation of their theories.

Philosophy is to symbols/words what a painter is to shapes and colours.
A philosopher is an artist using language.

A painter, when he wants to paint a tree, sits down in a park, or a forest, and paints one directly, or uses his vast experience with trees, in their many forms and hues, to then represent one, from memory, sitting in his den.
His talent, his eye for details, is represented in the painting, which all can appreciate, given that all have experienced, have personally seen trees.

A nihilist, splashes some random colours on a canvas and calls it "a tree", daring anyone to say that it isn't, because he wishes he were an artist but has no talent for it...or he copies a painting of a tree that was once highly appreciated, and often mentioned as a beautiful depiction of a tree, by a very talented artist, only altering the shapes, and colours, to hide his forgery, or he combines two, or three different paintings of trees, altering, again, their shapes and colours to hide his forgery.
The outcome looks surreal, not real, because in his haste to replicate the appreciation, the fame and fortune, the accolades and acknowledgement, he copied and presented a caricature of a tree, that looks nothing like any tree ever experienced, by anyone.
He then gathers his cronies, who he has sold on the depth of meaning his painting has, and cultivates the myth of his own talent, by implying that whoever does not see the perfect depiction of treeness in his caricature is unsophisticated, or not worthy of his "art".
He may even claim that trees are internal concepts, and that his painting of a caricature of a tree promises far more than any real tree can ever promise. The idea of a tree being preferable to an actual tree.

Then, there's the cynic, who seeing a realistic painting of a tree, questions its veracity by asking for evidence that green is the colour most trees have, or demanding a definition of 'greeness', and why we see green when colour is subjective.  
He wants to hide his lack of talent, or his fear of reality, in an unending pseudo-intellectual skepticism that can never go anywhere because it does not even begin from the observed, from the obvious.
He becomes, conveniently, stuck in semantics and doubting his own senses.
He wants to settle on there being no such thing as trees, and so no way to know if they are really green or not.
He does not want to discuss a general greeness most trees have, and then proceed as to why and how, but demands to begin with trees that may not be green at all, but red....or purple....or orange.
A ploy, for he doesn't really want to know why most trees are green, he only wants to not validate any depiction of trees, and their treeness, fearing he will also be so easily perceived and depicted.
He declares trees to be more than their appearance....and that any painting of a tree cannot possibly hope to depict the essence of treeness...nothing can compare to the idealized tree, the perfect, absolute tree.
What's the value of a tree anyhow?
Who's to say which painting of a tree is more accurate?
Maybe a line with some dots on paper is better.
Who's to know?

An enjoyable movie. Beautiful aesthetics, true to the original.
A bit slow moving, again, in the same style as the first, but overdone - as if it were trying to seem profound,
Same themes as those found in many other films, including the Aliens franchise, concerning man, his place in the cosmos, the nature of life, more particularly of humanity, and his destiny.

In the new Blade Runner movie, 2049, a recurring theme of man's anxiety before his own obsolescence is explored.
Man having prospected externally his own self-awareness is confronted with the externalization of this self-knowledge: DNA converted to binary code...from four factors (G-T-A-C) genetic code, to dualistic, two-factor binary code (1/0) reflecting the division of the physical from the mental.
In one scene this is mentioned explicitly.  

Mind functions on on/off mechanism, manifesting in binary-based subjective interpretations (good/bad, order/chaos, one/nil...) of the objective fluctuating world.
The physical is more sophisticated than the mental, which is still nascent. This is reflected in  the mind's inability to break free from its own creations, its own art = linguistic, symbolism.
Here we see where nihilism detaches mind form body, the interpretation, representational form the physical, form the real, to construct its own alternate reality.

The movies alludes to the difference as that between being born and being programmed = gene/meme dynamics.
Being born differing in the amount of choice and the amount of past participating in the outcome, in comparison to being programmed, trained, educated, nurtured, out of nil - tabula rasa. Nature/Nurture.  
Love, as physical attraction, is the irrational/rational synthesizing as child, whereas a 'replicant' is entirely the result of the creator's will, his preferences, his motives.
This distinction is presented using the word 'soul'.
"Irrational" meaning what is of the body's,a s opposed to the lucid reasoning of the mind. Body has a wisdom of its own. it oftentimes judges in contradiction to the mind's judgments, evaluations - gene/meme conflict.  
'Do replicants has souls?' the movies asks, which is the same as asking 'what makes one human?', or 'what does it mean to be alive?'
Philosophy provides clarity, if it defines its words/symbols correctly, and when the mind applying it is motivated by the desire to see the world as it is, and by no other motive.
By "correctly", I do not mean some personal preference but a connection of the symbol/word to reality; the re-connection of the noetic, the mental abstraction, the subjective interpretation, with the apparent, the phenomenon, the objectively real.
This is the relationship of subjective mind, to objective, the world being the objective, which is being interpreted subjectively, and in world is where the interpretation validates itself as consequence - cost/befit.
Symbol/Word being the neurological nexus where mind/body synthesize, the advantage going to the body, the physical, the real, from which mind emerges, or from which life emerges to become aware.
Body works on DNA code....brain on binary code.
The symbol/word is in question.
Moderns have given this word (soul- spirit) mystical definitions, as they do with all of their language. They prefer to make complex, mystical, of what is obvious to an honest mind who only wishes to clarify existence, not to mask it in obfuscations.  
They wish to hide from world, hoping it will not affect them.

The symbol/word 'soul', or 'spirit', is what refers to the extension of the 'self', in space/time.
It refers to memory, making DNA not the representation of the individual's experiences, but more than this, it is a representation of inherited experiences through thousands of years, preceding the individual's birth.
DNA strands are memory links to the past - past made presence.
Using language to clarify, rather than to confuse, I use the Greek word for self, 'ego', to refer to the lucid part of consciousness - the awakening to itself self-consciousness - and I use 'Self' to refer to the totality of experiences since birth, most of which are not lucid - the subconscious as they call it in psychology.
Given this distinction we can refer to experiences participating in self, that precede its birth, as soul/spirit.
Spirit/Soul are now rightfully placed in world as words representing the sum of all past nurturing, manifesting as an individual organism.
This would also include a collective unconscious, as per Jung, as species experiences shared by all members of the same species - and further back as memories shared by all life, sharing a common ancestry.  

Why is the soul mistakenly called 'eternal'?
Because it stretches beyond the individual's own experiences, seemingly into the immutable past (nature), and if reproduced/replicated, extending into the unforeseeable future.
Soul represents the continuum held together by memories.
Memory is the central factor here. It is gene and meme.
It separates the living from the non-living, which is what is in question in this movie.
Non-living matter has no memory and so the term 'self' cannot apply to it. It has no soul/spirit.
DNA is life's memory.
The movie rightfully implies that machines, like the replicants, cyborgs by another name, do have memory, and if the machine is sophisticated enough this memory informs, directs, the replicants behaviour.
This memory is short. It begins with the machine's creation, its programming, and ends when the machine is terminated, 'retired'.
The human transfers his memories to the machine.  
This is what is implied in those 'false memories'.
Replicants are the product of their creator's lucid, conscious, memories and his unconscious memories manifesting as whims, tastes.
The creator transfers to his creation his known self, his ego, to the created, and unwittingly transfers his unknown self, as well, in the form of an error, a mechanical glitch. The machine is the victim of its master's psychosis.
But the movie makes a leap in reasoning, by presenting the replicants as being able to reproduce themselves using biological methods - random combinations, once an attraction, choice of appreciation has been made.
Only living organisms being able to judge, to evaluate and to have values, principles, ideals, producing tastes, can fall in love.
Machines are directed in their construction - eugenics.
The movies inserts the mystical, for Moderns, element of love, as a rational/irrational mystifying factor.
But this factor is not so mystical. They want to think of the human condition as so mysterious that one cannot exclude machines, or any identification from it.
The organism is ordering, it is becoming, so it follows some rules of (inter)activity, patterns of behaviour, and it has in-built tastes preferences, or methods of evaluating, judging, otherness.
Hollywood cannot but repeat the Modern propaganda in every movie it bankrolls and produces, so we cannot expect Ridley Scott to be able to liberate himself from this dependence, if he is not totally assimilated into the mythos himself. He is, after all a modern...a successful one, so he could not have risen to the top if he was not repeating the system's  ideals, and methods of indoctrinating the masses, or of placating them.
He could not have risen to the top, become pleasing to the majority, if he had not assimilated the popular mythologies and prejudices.
Love, as usual, acquires a mystifying essence of reasoning/unreasoning....reflecting the order/chaos dynamic, only chaos does not mean 'randomness, but a hidden order - something divine, magical, occult.
What is insinuated is, again, typical.
In chaos, there is order....so there is no real mystification, only a secret order that can only be felt, and not made lucid.
One can only feel its 'truth'; and not bring it to light.
Its power rests in eluding explanation, demanding a surrender... like when Christians claim one must surrender to Jesus before their dogma begins to make 'sense'.

In the four codes lies man's 'complexity' which the replicants can only reflect, in half, as its shadow with their binary code.
DNA = 4 (G-T-A-C)
Binary = 2 (1/0)
Yet, this 1/0 sequence suffices to produce mystical love, and then manifest as a reproduction, a synthesis of two binaries into one new combination.
Is the secret that the nexus-7 model was programmed with a quad method mirroring genetic code?
Was this technology too revolutionary, in the Blade Runner universe, to be permitted to be mass-produced?  
Was it a threat on mankind and its master/slave system?

What's the significance of giving birth?
It establishes a continuum, a spirit/soul.
If the replicants can combine their codes to produce a new replicant then they break free from wilful programming and become, like all life, agencies of chance and choice, (chaos/order) connected through the ages by shared memories - their binary code.
This was also alluded to in the first movie...in the final death scene.
They become more than machines but a new life form, born of the vanity and need/suffering of man.      
Only life can need and suffer because of its need, because only life is bound by a past, bound to a past. Only life is past made present.
This is the distinction between life and non-life.

*edit*
‘False memories’ in the context of the Bladerunner universe are corruptions of the programming. A way to de-re-program both a replicant and an organism.

The rational/irrational, or the divergence of body from mind, or subjective from objective, is dealt with organically through art.
Art is how the DNA code is understood by a brain using binary code.
Philosophy is the ultimate application of language as art.
This makes it easily corruptible by ulterior motives.
Its art can become from esoteric interpretations of the exoteric, into esoteric projections as exoteric - nurturing.
The real becomes surreal, unreal.
Nature becomes supernatural.

Physical conflict, a contradiction placed in physical reality, does not result in a stalemate, it results in a clear and obvious victor and a vanquished.
In the context of mental conflicts, where the physical is denied, or placed on the periphery, a conflict of opinions, judgments, does not result in a stalemate, an agreement to disagree, or an imposition, unless the world is left on the periphery.
All conflicts are resolved not by declarations or surrendering to a shared need, but by using an indifferent judge, the world as a standard.
Either by the application of the theory, within reality where no mitigating force corrupts the outcome, or by the method of comparing the opinion to a shared experience of it as interacting patterns, behaviours, empirically validated assumptions, symbols/words connected to perceived phenomena.

There is no 'he said'/'she said' linguistic stalemate if the world is used as a standard to evaluate all statements of opinion.  
No equality.
No uniformity of weakness and ignorance.

Skepticism does not mean all opinions are equally valid because omniscience is non-existent.
Conviction does not make a theory rational, nor does self-consistency make it pragmatic, realistic.
The absence of absolute certainty does not imply all theories are the same in quality, nor does the absence of omniscience mean any, and all opinions are similarly probable.

In all things gradations - degrees.
Superior/Inferior.
More/Less.
More likely/ less likely.
Probable/Improbable.

How does one evaluate, judge one from the other?
How does one determine which is superior, probable and what is inferior improbable?
Empiricism - the quantity and quality of the opinion's, judgment's references to environment, where there is no mitigating corruptive force, to skew the consequences of cost/benefit.
Precedent - taking into account collaboration of past events, past performances, behaviours, inter-activities.
Memory = How does the inherited and experienced past, relate, to the ongoing present.

Paganism stands outside the nihilistic bipolar paradigm of either/or, absolute positive/absolute negative - absolute order/absolute chaos, complete certainty, complete uncertainty.
The idealization of Positive/Negative, Moral/Immoral, Good/Bad.  

Fluidity, degrees = fluctuating relationships of power, possibility.
Not Being, Becoming.
Not Order, Ordering.
Not Nil, Randomness.
Not complete, whole, perfect, one, but movement towards, completion, wholeness, perfection, oneness.
Movement towards order, and chaos.
Movement towards Being.

We last, few true pagans do not require a mediator to worship our gods.
Nature is all around us, not in a book.
We validate ourselves and world directly, not through texts, and sacred manuals.
We need no special language, no mystical, magical, scribbles, because nature is present all around us - behind human constructs, beneath asphalt, behind marketing icons.
no matter how they dress themselves with wardrobes meant to impress and intimidate, we know what lies behind the fabric.

We need no mediating priest, no words on a page, to worship nature.
We require no escapes into alternate, secret, hidden realities.
We see right through their dazzling semantics, and their needy artifices.
We need no idols or icons, because we worship our blood and bones.

We can define Nihilists as mins trapped in-between two books: one the dictionary, establishing a shared convention of semiotics that enables their communion, and the second some holy text that gives the shared convention a reference and a metaphor that adds mysticism to the first. The words become magical, mystical, engulfing them in the middle of the necessity to communicate and their dissatisfaction with the communication.

World remains outside the loop, only insinuated but never engaged.

Realists begin with the first, the dictionary, and then connect the symbols/words to (inter)activities, to phenomena, behaviours.
A theory is described and then validated independently by each reader it is communicated to by referring to the same shared world.
The philosopher becomes a communicator of what was always in front of the student.

This is not the case for the nihilist priest, guru, cult leader, mediator.
His symbols/words refer to nothing real, so he implies a secret, hidden, reality, over-passing, underlying what is experienced, selling it as an 'advancement', an enlightenment, or power.
Symbols/words lose their connection to reality and refer to an occult universe, an alternate 'higher' reality, morphing them into jargon the participants use to differentiate themselves from the world and those who occupy it.
Sacred text replaces what is considered "surpassed" reality - surpassed as too much to handle, or too little to satisfy the needs of the ones seduced into this web of words.
The priest, guru, acts as a mediator between minds:
The minds of the herd of potential followers and the sacred text, passing through his own mind, or the minds of some dead icons that become the holy text's corporeal idealization - the face of the product that inspires and seduces the flock.

World is really a hindrance, something to be integrated selectively, or reinterpreted to fit into the dogma.
Usually the Holy text offers an over-passing or under-passing promise: too much or not enough.