Know Thyself

Nothing in Excess
 
HomePortalFAQMemberlistSearchRegisterLog in

Share | 
 

 Satyrnalium

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 15 ... 28  Next
AuthorMessage
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 16790
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 52
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Satyrnalium Wed May 11, 2016 10:52 am

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


Quote :
The general factor of IQ tests is referred to as the g factor, and it typically accounts for 40 to 50 percent of the variance in IQ test batteries. Charles Spearman developed factor analysis in order to study correlations between tests.
E= introversion/extroversion
P = Psychoticism

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

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 16790
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 52
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Satyrnalium Tue May 17, 2016 10:50 am

Many minds reside, separately in one, each one expressed using a different character/caricature, corresponding to a different rearrangement of internal, organic, hierarchies, brought about by shifting circumstances.
More complex minds must content with multiple characters, each one springing out of the same personality.
With no strong Will, this may fragment into what is called multiple personality disorder, when it is an absence of self-knowledge, a well explored ego/self, manifesting as diverse character reactions to external stimulation, which is to account for mental fragmentation - schizophrenia emerging out of a lack of mental cohesion (compartmentalization) when a unifying source of identity is missing, or when traumatic experiences force a rearrangement that will push them down into the subconscious, preventing psychotic rupture, or worse.

In more stable psychologies each character/caricature belongs to a complexity of non-contradictory aspects of personalty (personae), each one emerging to accommodate the particularities of the patterns in behaviour involved in the willed, approach towards the desired goal/objective.
The objective dictated by the internal shifting hierarchies.

With no central control, a dominant organ, these shifts in character can be extreme.
When one organ establishes a dominance then the shifts never divert to a degree that would be considered "out of character".
If the dominant organ is the brain, then all characters emerging will be arranged around an objective understanding of the circumstances and the lucid appreciation of the goal/objective.
A pragmatic approach, some would call cold and calculating,will function as the central stabilizing theme, from which all characters/caricatures will express themselves in a controlled degree, after the circumstances have been fully evaluated.


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

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 16790
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 52
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Satyrnalium Tue May 17, 2016 5:29 pm



Out of the depths of our past/nature we un-cover our values - to know thyself is to know that you know this past/nature.
Matter/Body = corporeal exoteric.
Mind/Spirit = energy esoteric.

Because the past/nature precedes self-consciousness, and even consciousness, there is no way to represent it, to symbolize it.
The mind borrows from the immediate, the conscious, to construct an image, often a mixture of one, or more phenomena.
But it knows, or ought to know, that this is a representation, symbolizing what can only be understood as energy - patterns (inter)acting, and so spirit refers to this ambiguity of dynamic patterns, symbolized with these fantastic images, which are then taken literally.
Data collected from internal sources are such pure energy patterns, that have to be processed by adopting experienced/perceived phenomena, gathered from external sources, or they remain intuition, emotion, sensations.


Neurological disconnection of the exoteric from the esoteric, or the esoteric from the exoteric, leads to this "schizophrenia" of Modernity: word representing sensations, emotions, with no reference to anything outside the brain, and the phenomenon lacking dimensional depth, as if it simply is with no past/nature, emerging out of nothingness, called "superficial", or materialism.

On the one hand a man completely given over to internal forces, steaming out of his internal hierarchy, his subconscious, building a fantastic, delusional world with no external references, and on the other a man living on the surfaces of appearance, the immediate of pleasure, and emotional reactions, with no connection to himself, totally identifying with the symbols he adorns himself with to compensate for this void.

Connecting these symbols, metaphors to the phenomenal world is the begin of deciphering what is of an external source, and what of an internal source, one referring to world and the other to past/nature, adopting imagery from the external world to express itself, to be revealed, un-concealed.

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

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 16790
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 52
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Satyrnalium Wed May 18, 2016 12:02 pm

Using Jung's introvert/extrovert psychological types, expanded and fleshed out by Eysenck...

Extrovert = less prone to stimulation - requiring higher intensity stimulation to be aroused.
Strong nervous system, or a unsophisticated nervous system, unable to process patterns below a certain level of intensity.
Impulsive behavior has been associated with extroversion.  

Introvert = experiencing higher arousal requiring lower levels of stimulation.
Introversion may be a product of a weak nervous system, having to rest in low stimulus environments, or the overwhelming of the mind with more frequent, higher intensity data (sensitivity to the subtle), recurring a shutting away to process, and to rest.  

Obsession (mind), and addiction (body) having a different source and function in extroverts and introverts.


Introvert


Obsession = extreme focus on a small part of a phenomena, excluding all other stimulants - (neurological noise).
Addiction = used to calm an overstimulated nervous system - calming effect.



Extrovert


Obsession = focus on stimulant that produced a arousal it cannot experience from other sources - monomaniacal hyper-interest in an external phenomenon at the exclusion of all else which appears bland, dull by contrast.    
Addiction = to chemicals multiplying/accentuating, exciting arousal, stimulants, increasing the experience to a level the mind can appreciate fully - raising the mind's sensitivity to the level of an introverts.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν


Last edited by Satyr on Tue Mar 20, 2018 7:39 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 16790
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 52
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Satyrnalium Mon Jun 06, 2016 6:42 pm

It is to be expected that Nihilism would produce insanity in human being, in the same way caged domestic animals go crazy when they are placed in a cage preventing them from expressing their mind/body duality, via their nervous system- the energies accumulate there, pooling, with no outlet.
This converts to physical energy, being expunged in nervous twitches, trembling, or such methods.
in humans where the mind is more powerful the nervous energy is directed to brain, where it pools.
If there is an outward outlet it is expunged in sports, artificial realities, music gyrations, or numbing chemicals...some are redirected inward.
The mind becomes increasingly isolated from external, living in its own private uni-verse, with words/numbers, symbols serving as the boundary of their esoteric world.

The sturdier the self-containing boundary must be, the more extraordinary the impact of the symbol.
The symbol usurps the sensual - multiplying or dividing it, expanding it into a hyperbolic idol, or fragmenting it into pieces, separating the various abstractions into self-contained, particles where one can contradict the other.

There is positive psychosomatic effect, as is experienced in all faith based Abrahamic religions - the relief of having a symbol separating the individual from a harsh, unpredictable, indifferent, cosmos.
A relaxing of stress.
Of course, this benefit would be deadly with no sheltering institution protecting the organism from the consequences of its own detachment form world.
Modern Madness, subjectivity, is dependent, is a codependency, of inter-subjectivities.
One madness reinforcing and reaffirming the other.
Only rule not to disrupt the delusion, of your fellow inmate - love thy neighbour.
This risks the collapse of the asylum all depend upon to remain carefree, careless, trapped in their own private uni-verse, trying to expand it by introducing it to other asylum dwellers through words - memetic infection.
With no natural limiting standard, and no past/nature determinants accepted, the only thing left is the immediate inter-subjective exchange of minds - how each one impact the other, how many it seduces and incorporates into its own insanity, are all sources of self-esteem.

Modern Ideology & political discourse, a conflict of competing insanity, all rooted in repeated lies, gaining validity with each repetition - prayer recitation.
discontentment dealt with using artificial methods: entertainment, drugs, alcohol, porn, pop-culture, games, sports, endless debates over inanities, childish cynicism, trivial distractions etc.


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

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 16790
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 52
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Satyrnalium Wed Jun 08, 2016 9:53 am

Signaling fitness is a big part of the heterosexual subliminal discourse.
A female’s shape, her scent, coloration, indicating fertility, readiness, and health; a male’s proportionality/symmetry, of mind/body, his scent, appearance, aggressiveness, coloration exposing the handling of melanin, but also self-handicapping.
Examples of self-handicapping includes the peacock, with its elaborate tail… and among the mammals some notable examples are the bighorn boat, and the red deer each carrying a disproportional, to its overall mass, and size, handicapping signal of dominance.

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

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

The handicap signals the male’s fitness, its health (parasite resistance, potential to endure a disadvantage in an environment where advantages are crucial).
In males we may dare to include the Negros’s above average penis size, connecting him to a primal less stressful environment where pleasure exceeds creativity as the desirable trait.

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


Besides the pheromone subtle indicator, and female/male physical symmetry, proportionality, expressing an inherited resistance to Flux, self-handicapping, using these disproportional physical displays appears to be sperm-warfare upping-up the stakes.
The evolution of such extraordinary displays places the survival of the genes above the survival of the particular manifestation of said genes. Males face increased probabilities of death, where the survival of the individual and the species are not an end, and have a short time to take advantage of a disadvantage.
The competition of one-upmanship, is an inter-species affair.
The advantage towards member of his own, is accompanied by an increase in the disadvantage in relation to world, and every other organism in nature.
Elaborate songs, among bird species, exposing its position to predators, are such self-handicapping signals to females of their own species.      

The human species extends this genetic signalling, using words/symbols.
Self-handicapping may take the form of revealing controversial, unpopular positions, within a group, where such displays have a high cost, or it may take the form of hyperbole, approaching the level of insanity.
A male, in an effort, to out-do his competitors, go to extreme levels of signaling his fitness, either by imitating, and risking being exposed as a fake, or by applying the extraordinary, to impress, and attract, risking being exposed as mad – because on a personal level such handicapping is a form of madness (sexual frenzy).  
   Masculine “thinking out of the box”, desperate to be seen, appreciated, by potential mates, may succumb to desperation when its own mind fails to find a unique insight. Creativity begins to seek alternate methods of accomplishing the same effect, a profound insight would have, by using the manipulation of words – to such an extraordinary effect as to imply what cannot be delivered, or presented, but only appreciate esoterically, as a secret insight.
The practice of suggestion, and shame, can bridge most any skepticism in the intended audience, when it is comprised of average minds.
The effect is self-defeating, of course, if the intent is to attract a superior female, who will see through such methods, but males tend to settle, for what they can get, and will inflate the outcome to hide their disappointment – this is part of the political agenda, directed to the members of the group that witness all of this; converting a defeat into a victory, or a disappointment into a great success, signals to the females in the group that this male is gifted.
The motive is to pass on the genes, at the cost of self.
Intellectual signalling takes this form of linguistic hyperbole, where the male signals its fitness, in relation to others in its group, while handicapping itself in relation to world/nature/reality.
Though the idea(l) expressed may be detrimental to the individual, in the world, which remains indifferent to such matters, having no connection to it, its ability to impress, with extraordinary claims, those within the group feeling the stress this world places upon them, determines its internal value – this is called politics.
Elaborate, supernatural, extraordinary word-based displays, that only have an inter-species effect, are examples of human self-handicapping.                    
               

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν


Last edited by Satyr on Tue Mar 20, 2018 8:02 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 16790
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 52
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Satyrnalium Wed Jun 08, 2016 12:22 pm

Females must be pragmatic.
They evaluate from immediate appearances and do not delve into the reasons or the circumstances in past, beyond a certain level - their perceptual-event-horizon is shallow/narrow when compared to a male's who must prove himself worthy, by exceeding competing males - intellectually this means to think outside the perceptual-event-horizon box of the challenger, or of the median.
A female big horn goat does not have to understand the how and the why of the male's extraordinary, disproportional horn display.
She responds to its presence, acknowledging the handicap as evidence of the male's health - that the male survived, up to that moment in space/time, with such a handicap is evidence of his endurance, balance, strength, cunning etc.

In human contexts, the sheltering of institution, allows exaggerated human displays of handicaps, but the female need not evaluate this factor, unless she is, herself, exceptional, but only respond to the fact that despite the handicap the male is present, is immediately apparent.
This exacerbates the sperm-wars where male self-handicapping is used to signal health, and passes into the absurd, because there is no big cost to the handicap.
What is left to appreciate is the immediate effect.
Human males begin to compete on the level of noetic absurdities, or symbolic hyperbole, because they will not suffer the consequences of such handicaps, and the human female, being pragmatic, will appreciate the immediate impact, by how pleasing, and impressive the display is - pleasure is the most visceral, primal, way of appreciating value.
She need not incorporate into her judgment the institutional factor, but only the immediate presence, and the fact that it remains present.
No matter how rational, and self-aware she might be, the effect is instinctive, automatic, genetic.
She responds to the impression of the exaggerated self-handicapping, interpreting it as a product of health, fitness, even if it is protected from world and has not been tested in world without this intervening protection.

Competition takes the turn towards the extraordinary, the supernatural, and because words, referring to noumena, have not the cost of actions, or words referring to noumenon connected to phenomena - they do not suffer that limitation - competition between males becomes a game of verbal hyperbole, where the only criterion is that it remains true to its own fabricated premises, no matter how detached from reality they might be.
Self-Cohesion, indicates symmetry, creativity, self-awareness.
Competition becomes a juxtaposition of noetic cohesion, no matter how absurd the abstractions/noumena might be, in relation to an indifferent world of (inter)activities - a display of mental self-referential mastery, a comparison of fantasy, the fantastic (imagination detached from the limiting phenomena of precedent).
The more fantastic, positive, pleasing a fabricated noumenon is, the more it is appreciated, though it remains irrelevant outside the mind.

If we compare this to other species self-handicapping and take the red deer as our example, then the male deer's balance, its ability to endure the mass/weight of those extraordinary, disproportional to body mass/size, horns, brought to bear against another male of the same species, will determine the victor, and the female's surrender.  
These same horns may be a detriment against species outside this sexual display, or completely useless - species is a sexual category, as is human.
The female awaits the victor, and does not evaluate any other factor. She does not have to, since this is all automated, and a product of evolution, as is her appreciation of a male's impressive handicap.
As such, a more severe handicap, measured against that of another male's, for balance, endurance, self-referential cohesion, is appreciated by the female - she is attracted to it and does not have to comprehend the reasons, nor evaluate factors in relation to long-term consequences.  

In a noetic context, because human females appreciate physical and mental symmetry, any intellectual competition comparing world-views, or awareness in general, are evaluated in relation to themselves - how balanced, how not self-contradicting they are, because survival is not in question.
The absence of value in world, like the deer's exaggerated horns, or their minimal effect, does not matter.
What matters is inter-species comparisons of handicaps.
The value, in other words, based on pleasure, or how it impresses and remains true to itself, and not how it relates to world.

Philosophy becomes such a display, when left in the hands of men-children, handicapped and detached from reality.
How pleasing and impressive the claims, how they remain self-referentially harmonious with their own premises, is what is judged - though these same positions might be detrimental, or insignificant, useless, in the world.

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

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 16790
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 52
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Satyrnalium Wed Jun 08, 2016 1:46 pm

Like ornaments in our home, they serve no practical purpose.
Their value is symbolic, transmitting a meaning we wish to associate with who we are.
Ornaments, like sexual signals, are representations; superfluous, useless in all matters except how they pass on a message to the ones that can interpret/translate it – in most cases members of our own species (gene), evolved to respond to these ornamental displays, or members of our own meme, trained, to decipher the meanings symbolized, educated to connect them with other meanings, other noumena, or to phenomena.
Some signifiers cross species (genetic) boundaries. Mammals understand a growl, for example, but not fish, not birds, the latter simply responding to the loud noise.
Sexual signifiers are also ornamental, having exceeded, sometimes contradicted their original function.  
Peacock feathers, evolved to give flight, now weigh the animal down. Goat horns evolved for defence, or scraping nutrients out of soil, tree bark, now are useless in that function, or their utility is severely hampered, and only serve as display pieces, that actually make the animal less able to defend itself, or efficient in feeding.
Words, released from their utility, of man engaging world, placed in a safe environment where survival is practically guaranteed, become ornamental displays – superfluous, symbolization, hampering the mind to engage world, but meant to seduce, to impress, to attract with their garish insinuations.

MANifesto: Society – Culture – Words
Language made into an ornamental display – art with no functionality, no relationship with reality.

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

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 16790
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 52
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Satyrnalium Thu Jun 09, 2016 6:32 am

Nietzsche wrote:
In  the proximity of madness.
The sum of sensations, items of knowledge, experiences, the whole burden of culture, that is to say, has become so great that an over-excitation of the nervous and thinking powers is now a universal danger; indeed, the cultivated classes of Europe have in fact become altogether neurotic, and almost every one of its great families has come close to lunacy in any rate one of  its branches. It is true that health is nowadays sought by all available means; but what is chiefly needed is an abatement of that tension of  feeling, that crushing cultural burden which, even if it has to be purchased at a heavy cost, nonetheless  gives ground for high hopes of a new Renaissance.
We have Christianity, the philosophers, poets, musicians to thank for an abundance of profound sensations: if these are not to stifle us we must conjure up the spirit of science, which on the whole makes one somewhat colder and more scep­tical and in especial cools down the fiery stream of belief in ultimate definitive truths; it is principally through Christianity that this stream has grown so turbulent.


Let us dust-off the idol, sitting on the bookshelf, and make use of his psychological impact in our age.



Nietzsche wrote:
Superstition in simultaneity.
Things that happen simultaneously are connected with one another - that is the general opinion. A distant relation dies, at the same time we dream of him - there you are!
But countless relations die without our dreaming of them. It is as with the shipwrecked who take  vows: the votive tablets of those who perished are not afterwards observed in the temple.
A man dies, an owl hoots, a clock stops, all in the same night hour: must there not be a  connection?
So intimate a relationship with nature as is assumed in this supposition is also encountered in a more refined form among historians and depicters of culture, who usually suffer from a kind of hydrophobia in regard to all the meaningless juxtapositions in which the life of the individual and of nations is nonetheless so rich.


A primitive mind confuses coincidence for consciousness.
Coming across a snake wrapped around a tree-branch it recalls how it coiled around its mate, the night before, and concludes that snake and tree are in the throws of passion.
When he finds gold in the granite he concludes that gold is being birthed by granite, recalling how his mate gave birth to his child.
When he listens the wind rustling leaves, he recalls the stirring of his own heart, and believes wind and tree are in love, dancing with joy.



Nietzsche wrote:
Genius of  culture.
If anyone wanted to imagine a genius of culture, what would the latter be like? He would manipulate falsehood, force,  the most ruthless self-interest as his instruments so skilfully he  could only be called an evil, demonic being; but his objectives, which here and there shine  through, would  be great  and  good. He would be a centaur, half beast, half man, and with angel's wings attached to his head in addition.


I can think of one other half-man, half-beast combination.
Something less noble.

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

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 16790
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 52
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Satyrnalium Thu Jun 09, 2016 7:15 am

Satyr wrote:
All of human cognition, including the formal, such as Geometric shapes, and Mathematics, can be reduced down to the simple binocular mammalian cognition.
Binary logic, and dualism is a product of this.

The organism's eyes become the base, and the convergence point the tip of a triangle.
The tip is the point in space/time, the object/objective.

This is the First Level of Cognition, corresponding to Psychology's  First Level of Intentionality:
Consciousness - Subjectivity of the First Order (Primitive Organism).
A Line


Then, from this, the organism imagines (projects) himself on that point, and perceives itself perceiving.
The organism has made of itself a noetic point in space time.
This is the Second Level of Cognition, corresponding to Psychology's Second Level of Intentionality: Self-Consciousness - Subjectivity of the Second Order (Higher Organisms).
A Triangle



Then, the organism begins to imagine itself imagining itself imagine, a third party triangulating upon a point in space/time.
The two triangles side by side form a square, or a rectangle.
This is the Third Level of Cognition, corresponding to Psychology's Third Level of Intentionality: Objectivity of the First Order (Advanced Organism).
A Square



Then, the organism begins to imagine itself imagining itself imagine a third party triangulating upon a point in space/time, where all, including its own triangulation are part of a whole.
It has projected itself outside all triangulations.
The organism can only perceive outwards but now it imagines itself outside itself, in the Third Cognitive Level, and also behind itself, and beside itself (around itself), creating a noetic circle encircling a noetic point encompassing all this triangles.
This is the Fourth Level of Cognition, corresponding to Psychology's Fourth Level of Intentionality: Subjectivity of the Third Order (Sophisticated Organism).
A Circle



Then, the organism begins to imagine itself imagining itself imagine a third party triangulating upon a point in space/time, where all, including its own triangulation are part of a whole, and it is above, looking down - it is twice removed.
It has projected itself outside all triangulations, and above this outside.
The organism can only perceive outwards but now it imagines itself outside itself, in the Third Cognitive Level, and also behind itself, and beside itself (around itself), creating a noetic circle encircling a noetic point encompassing all this triangles.
This is the Fifth Level of Cognition, corresponding to Psychology's Fifth Level of Intentionality: Objectivity of the First Order (Hyper-Cognitive Organism).
A Cube/Prism/Sphere


This is where the conception of a whole takes place.


Then, the organism begins to imagine itself imagining itself imagine a third party triangulating upon a point in space/time, where all, including its own triangulation are part of a whole, and it is above, looking down - it is twice removed - but it is also perceiving itself looking down - it is thrice removed.
It has projected itself outside all triangulations, and above, and outside, this outside.
The organism can only perceive outwards but now it imagines itself outside itself, in the Third Cognitive Level, and also behind itself, and beside itself (around itself), creating a noetic circle encircling a noetic point encompassing all this triangles, and it is detached from it all.
This is the Sixth Level of Cognition, corresponding to Psychology's Sixth Level of Intentionality: Objectivity of the Second Order (hyper-Sophisticated Organism).
Fluid Space/Time - Thinking outside the confines of Geometric Shapes

A primitive mind/psychology, not yet having developed beyond the Second Level of Cognition & Second Level of Intentionality (triangulation), cannot dislodge itself, its emotions, prejudices, its still youthful self-awareness from subjectivity.
It is closer to animal.
It projects this spotty, yet intimate, knowledge of self, into the alien other, beginning the process of advancing further towards objectivity.

Modern man, having advanced into the Third Level, and beyond, still suffers from the inexperience, and the anxiety this stimulates in him.
Nihilism stifles his courage to stand firm and move on; he is seduced by the idea of settling for the easy, the primitive, the seemingly certain - path-of-least-resistance.  
He stumbles back to the Second Level, that is easier, simpler, only daring to advance further, when there is nothing personal, intimate, at stake.
Titter-Tottering between the two, he compartmentalizes his "reasoning", and is conveniently selective with the standards of his "judgment": schizophrenic.
He becomes a child at play, calling this up-down on the seesaw, evidence of his "balance".


To comprehend the alien other, he uses his selective knowledge of self - projecting in this otherness his own best qualities, or the most neutral if he wishes to pretend objectivity.
He is immersed in a human, all too human world with him at its centre.
Stones, water, wind, mud, all alive with himself; all moving with intent, with meaning, with a purpose no different than his own.
He is in "agreement" with his own "reason", in conflict with it, in alliance with it.
He feels himself moving in all things, but thinks of them moving in him.
He hears his mind speaking to him from afar, from a tree, from a river, from the soil - Bicameral Mind, self-consciousness still awakening to consciousness, as if it were an-other.
Self-consciousness becoming conscience - whispering in the wind, code in the raindrops, the world is speaking to him in his own images, his own symbols, his own words.
His heart beating in all.
He is a God, with God, and this is comforting.

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

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 16790
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 52
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Satyrnalium Thu Jun 09, 2016 7:54 am

Degree of alienation of man from humanity, individual from group, is proportional to the degree of self-awareness, and homogeneity: ideal/real agreement.
Self-Awareness comparing itself to awareness.
Nihilism produces alienation of man, as past/nature, from himself – private from public man, personae from character.
To know thyself makes one immune to such internal fragmentation – man is confronted by otherness, distinguishing himself as different from other, and relating to this divergence from otherness through a judgment on the degree of similarity.

This is why a simple animal never feels alienated from world – it cannot compare its own noesis, its abstractions, with the apparent, the world as presence, from the Third Level of Cognition perspective; it is never divided into public/private, having no self-knowledge to hold back, in hiding, any part of self.

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

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 16790
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 52
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Satyrnalium Thu Jun 09, 2016 10:28 am

From a psychosomatic point of view, there is reasoning behind the Paternalistic ideal of marrying a virgin.
More than just about idealization of purity, cleanliness, the unsoiled, unconquered pristine wilderness, a man could claim as his own, the pragmatic motive is one having to do with human, mammalian, sexuality, and male/female promiscuity, where the latter was most costly, and the former had to be slightly curbed to permit the latter to be cultivated.
We know that no such inhibitions upon male sexuality was practiced when dealing with females of other tribes, there it was unleashed in rape and pillaging, and in appropriating another tribe's genes to invigorate the male's own tribe.
Idealizing female virginity was more about the promotion of monogamy, as a male integrating technique.
A female's sexual control, signaled her resistance to temptation, and her inexperience meant the male had no memory, of another male, to compete with.
Her inexperience has no other man to compare the first experience with, ensuring that doubt would add to social pressures to reinforce the manmade institution of monogamy.

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

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 16790
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 52
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Satyrnalium Fri Jun 10, 2016 2:19 pm

In the past, do you think they chose leaders by how attractive they were, how pleasant, how fun, how "open" to alternatives and suggestions, how fair, how chill they were?
When it was a matter of life and death, what part did fun and games have in the decision; how much did getting laid factor into it all?

When the potential for a severe cost was at hand, how much did potential benefits have to do with it?

Did the leader call all women, children, and imbeciles to offer their two-cents?
Did retards dare to doubt?

The choice is a simple enough, even in these sheltering times....judge, to the best of your abilities, and then live with the consequences - good or bad.
human sheltering has advanced, but it is not perfect, not complete....your choices have consequences outside man-made memes, that cannot be escaped.

No system can absolutely protect the individual from the cost/benefits of his own choices. There is just no way.
Time and the consequences this forces the individual to face, is evidence enough.
There is no real debate.
The costs, even if decreased by an intervening force, are enough.

Then it becomes a matter of identity, and not confusing empathy with sympathy.  
They made a value judgment...let them live with the full brunt of the consequences.
If they asked, and you gave them an honest assessment of their situation, then compassion has no place in it.
Let them experience the product of their judgments.
Do not intervene, do not try to decrease the costs - this will exacerbate the phenomenon.
They have a brain, they made a choice, let them live with the repercussions.

 Top intervene, adding to the already interventionism of institution, is to damn future generations to the same mental qualities that lead to the same errors in judgment.

Let the plot play out.
Watch, learn what you can...and do not care.
This is not about a single individual, but about the species.
No matter if it is one, or a billion, or a trillion, no human fabrication can evade nature, for long.

In the conflict between ideal and real, reality always wins.
In the contradiction of subjective and objective, the objective always dominates.
It's only a matter of time.

The debate between human and human is not significant.
What matters is the dialogue between human and world, subject and object, is what matters, and in that dialogue there is no debate.
No human law, no human intervention, no human fabrication, no human idea, morality, ideal, will be enough.
In this, man adapts or he suffers the consequences.
The degree of disagreement between man and world, determines the severity of the suffering.

It's all a matter of time - movement in space, measured using human metabolic rates.
Then....wait.

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

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 16790
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 52
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Satyrnalium Mon Jun 13, 2016 2:17 am




Satyr wrote:
Females must be pragmatic.
They evaluate from immediate appearances and do not delve into the reasons or the circumstances in past, beyond a certain level - their perceptual-event-horizon is shallow/narrow when compared to a male's who must prove himself worthy, by exceeding competing males - intellectually this means to think outside the perceptual-event-horizon box of the challenger, or of the median.
A female big horn goat does not have to understand the how and the why of the male's extraordinary, disproportional horn display.
She responds to its presence, acknowledging the handicap as evidence of the male's health - that the male survived, up to that moment in space/time, with such a handicap is evidence of his endurance, balance, strength, cunning etc.

In human contexts, the sheltering of institution, allows exaggerated human displays of handicaps, but the female need not evaluate this factor, unless she is, herself, exceptional, but only respond to the fact that despite the handicap the male is present, is immediately apparent.
This exacerbates the sperm-wars where male self-handicapping is used to signal health, and passes into the absurd, because there is no big cost to the handicap.
What is left to appreciate is the immediate effect.
Human males begin to compete on the level of noetic absurdities, or symbolic hyperbole, because they will not suffer the consequences of such handicaps, and the human female, being pragmatic, will appreciate the immediate impact, by how pleasing, and impressive the display is - pleasure is the most visceral, primal, way of appreciating value.
She need not incorporate into her judgment the institutional factor, but only the immediate presence, and the fact that it remains present.
No matter how rational, and self-aware she might be, the effect is instinctive, automatic, genetic.
She responds to the impression of the exaggerated self-handicapping, interpreting it as a product of health, fitness, even if it is protected from world and has not been tested in world without this intervening protection.

Competition takes the turn towards the extraordinary, the supernatural, and because words, referring to noumena, have not the cost of actions, or words referring to noumenon connected to phenomena - they do not suffer that limitation - competition between males becomes a game of verbal hyperbole, where the only criterion is that it remains true to its own fabricated premises, no matter how detached from reality they might be.
Self-Cohesion, indicates symmetry, creativity, self-awareness.
Competition becomes a juxtaposition of noetic cohesion, no matter how absurd the abstractions/noumena might be, in relation to an indifferent world of (inter)activities - a display of mental self-referential mastery, a comparison of fantasy, the fantastic (imagination detached from the limiting phenomena of precedent).
The more fantastic, positive, pleasing a fabricated noumenon is, the more it is appreciated, though it remains irrelevant outside the mind.

If we compare this to other species self-handicapping and take the red deer as our example, then the male deer's balance, its ability to endure the mass/weight of those extraordinary, disproportional to body mass/size, horns, brought to bear against another male of the same species, will determine the victor, and the female's surrender.  
These same horns may be a detriment against species outside this sexual display, or completely useless - species is a sexual category, as is human.
The female awaits the victor, and does not evaluate any other factor. She does not have to, since this is all automated, and a product of evolution, as is her appreciation of a male's impressive handicap.
As such, a more severe handicap, measured against that of another male's, for balance, endurance, self-referential cohesion, is appreciated by the female - she is attracted to it and does not have to comprehend the reasons, nor evaluate factors in relation to long-term consequences.  

In a noetic context, because human females appreciate physical and mental symmetry, any intellectual competition comparing world-views, or awareness in general, are evaluated in relation to themselves - how balanced, how not self-contradicting they are, because survival is not in question.
The absence of value in world, like the deer's exaggerated horns, or their minimal effect, does not matter.
What matters is inter-species comparisons of handicaps.
The value, in other words, based on pleasure, or how it impresses and remains true to itself, and not how it relates to world.

Philosophy becomes such a display, when left in the hands of men-children, handicapped and detached from reality.
How pleasing and impressive the claims, how they remain self-referentially harmonious with their own premises, is what is judged - though these same positions might be detrimental, or insignificant, useless, in the world.

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

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 16790
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 52
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Satyrnalium Mon Jun 13, 2016 11:14 am


Don't know if they've done studies on intellectual signaling and self-handicapping.
Perhaps I've touched upon a field that requires exploration.
Tried to give an overview of the topic, as I understand it.

Basically, the same that applies for self-handicapping in the reproduction strategies of song-birds, big horned goats, peacocks, and in human social self-handicapping as ornamentation, jewelry, and consumerism, in relation to "sexy" products like clothes, and cars must be followed further to include signaling on an abstract, intellectual level.
A male looking for a higher-end female, mentally speaking, and wanting to display himself in relation to males belonging to an intellectual sub-group, will contexts the average mind will not pick-up on, like the signaling of a red dear is lost on a wolf, or another species.
On the intellectual sub-grouping self-handicapping will take the form of ideologies, theories, appropriated, slightly altered, and then inflated to an extreme to impress others that can read the signaling.
Again, the theory built within a sheltered environment does not have to worry about the costs, and only expect the benefits, if it remains within "acceptable" parameters.

A male, wanting to signal his own genetic value will adapt a pre-existing one, personalizing it linguistically, by altering the metaphors, the words associated with it.
The utility of the "philosophy" need not apply to a world outside human artifices, same as the peacock's tail, need not have any other utility outside peacock mating rituals, and signaling status to other male peacocks.
Its "utility" is strictly emotional, its motive to impress with its hyperbole.
If it were to be applied outside human contexts it would either be useless, having a neutral effect, or detrimental to the individual - self-handicapping.
Within the relative safety of man-made environments built these elaborate mental structures, and compare them to one another's.
They have no application in world.
Their value determined by their appeal, how impressive they are, and how self-cohesive - they do not contradict themselves within their own premises.

The signaling is the same as it is in any other species: "Look at my beautiful construct, useless in all ways except as a exhibition of how much time and how many resources I can waste within suffering any immediate negative consequences."

Words (symbols) take the place of feathers, sentences and ideas (abstractions) the place of the tail, or the song bird's song, or the ram's horns.



From meme to gene...
Feathers arranged into tails, wings, meant for a specific function, sometimes change acquiring a new function,m which now comes into conflict with the original function.
This is true of horns, feathers, singing, and words.
The original function of the word as a connector between subjective and objective (subject/self <> word/language <> world/object, corresponding to mind <> nervous system <> body and/or son<>holy spirit<>god/father).

We can now understand the Modern approach to "philosophy", as a signaling medium.
With survival relatively "guaranteed" language becomes a medium for displaying self.

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

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 16790
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 52
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Satyrnalium Mon Jun 13, 2016 1:35 pm

In the following description the division of subjective/objective becomes clear...

Satyr wrote:
All of human cognition, including the formal, such as Geometric shapes, and Mathematics, can be reduced down to the simple binocular mammalian cognition.
Binary logic, and dualism is a product of this.

The organism's eyes become the base, and the convergence point the tip of a triangle.
The tip is the point in space/time, the object/objective.

This is the First Level of Cognition, corresponding to Psychology's  First Level of Intentionality:
Consciousness - Subjectivity of the First Order (Primitive Organism).
A Line


Then, from this, the organism imagines (projects) himself on that point, and perceives itself perceiving.
The organism has made of itself a noetic point in space time.
This is the Second Level of Cognition, corresponding to Psychology's Second Level of Intentionality: Self-Consciousness - Subjectivity of the Second Order (Higher Organisms).
A Triangle



Then, the organism begins to imagine itself imagining itself imagine, a third party triangulating upon a point in space/time.
The two triangles side by side form a square, or a rectangle.
This is the Third Level of Cognition, corresponding to Psychology's Third Level of Intentionality: Objectivity of the First Order (Advanced Organism).
A Square



Then, the organism begins to imagine itself imagining itself imagine a third party triangulating upon a point in space/time, where all, including its own triangulation are part of a whole.
It has projected itself outside all triangulations.
The organism can only perceive outwards but now it imagines itself outside itself, in the Third Cognitive Level, and also behind itself, and beside itself (around itself), creating a noetic circle encircling a noetic point encompassing all this triangles.
This is the Fourth Level of Cognition, corresponding to Psychology's Fourth Level of Intentionality: Subjectivity of the Third Order (Sophisticated Organism).
A Circle



Then, the organism begins to imagine itself imagining itself imagine a third party triangulating upon a point in space/time, where all, including its own triangulation are part of a whole, and it is above, looking down - it is twice removed.
It has projected itself outside all triangulations, and above this outside.
The organism can only perceive outwards but now it imagines itself outside itself, in the Third Cognitive Level, and also behind itself, and beside itself (around itself), creating a noetic circle encircling a noetic point encompassing all this triangles.
This is the Fifth Level of Cognition, corresponding to Psychology's Fifth Level of Intentionality: Objectivity of the First Order (Hyper-Cognitive Organism).
A Cube/Prism/Sphere


This is where the conception of a whole takes place.


Then, the organism begins to imagine itself imagining itself imagine a third party triangulating upon a point in space/time, where all, including its own triangulation are part of a whole, and it is above, looking down - it is twice removed - but it is also perceiving itself looking down - it is thrice removed.
It has projected itself outside all triangulations, and above, and outside, this outside.
The organism can only perceive outwards but now it imagines itself outside itself, in the Third Cognitive Level, and also behind itself, and beside itself (around itself), creating a noetic circle encircling a noetic point encompassing all this triangles, and it is detached from it all.
This is the Sixth Level of Cognition, corresponding to Psychology's Sixth Level of Intentionality: Objectivity of the Second Order (hyper-Sophisticated Organism).
Fluid Space/Time - Thinking outside the confines of Geometric Shapes


A primitive mind/psychology, not yet having developed beyond the Second Level of Cognition & Second Level of Intentionality (triangulation), cannot dislodge itself, its emotions, prejudices, its still youthful self-awareness from subjectivity.
It is closer to animal.
It projects this spotty, yet intimate, knowledge of self, into the alien other, beginning the process of advancing further towards objectivity.

Modern man, having advanced into the Third Level, and beyond, still suffers from the inexperience, and the anxiety this stimulates in him.
Nihilism stifles his courage to stand firm and move on; he is seduced by the idea of settling for the easy, the primitive, the seemingly certain - path-of-least-resistance.  
He stumbles back to the Second Level, that is easier, simpler, only daring to advance further, when there is nothing personal, intimate, at stake.
Titter-Tottering between the two, he compartmentalizes his "reasoning", and is conveniently selective with the standards of his "judgment": schizophrenic.
He becomes a child at play, calling this up-down on the seesaw, evidence of his "balance".


To comprehend the alien other, he uses his selective knowledge of self - projecting in this otherness his own best qualities, or the most neutral if he wishes to pretend objectivity.
He is immersed in a human, all too human world with him at its centre.
Stones, water, wind, mud, all alive with himself; all moving with intent, with meaning, with a purpose no different than his own.
He is in "agreement" with his own "reason", in conflict with it, in alliance with it.
He feels himself moving in all things, but thinks of them moving in him.
He hears his mind speaking to him from afar, from a tree, from a river, from the soil - Bicameral Mind, self-consciousness still awakening to consciousness, as if it were an-other.
Self-consciousness becoming conscience - whispering in the wind, code in the raindrops, the world is speaking to him in his own images, his own symbols, his own words.
His heart beating in all.  
He is a God, with God, and this is comforting.


Geometry functions as symbolic connecting noumenon with phenomenon.
What is meant by "objectivity" is clarified, as a cognitive advancement detaching subjective emotions, sensations, interests, personal tastes, preferences,from the observable other.
The process involves self-awareness so to then, slowly, reduce the corruption of subjectivity, used as a standard, from the evaluation of objective other.  
A process where courage, integrity, ans self-knowledge are all essential factors - more so than processing speed, and sensual acuity.

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

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 16790
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 52
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Satyrnalium Tue Jun 14, 2016 6:28 pm

Alexandrian man is the psychosis of having been given a cure for a childhood viral infection.
Munchhausen Syndrome for the newly released from a hospital ward.

What can, possibly, match the all-seer's loving embrace, and his offering of eternity, if not the sanctified warmth of a billion bodies pressing you into a womb-like, self-crippling pretzel-like form?
Every nibble a validation of your tastefulness, every sniff an experience if your salty-goodness - living forever in a myriad minds as a positive memory.
In between omniscience in other, and omniscience in the possible future, pagan man sits... in he middle and "knows".


Frost, Robert wrote:
The Secret Sits

We dance round in a ring and suppose,
But the Secret sits in the middle and knows.


The idea that the cosmos is knowable, or some underlying logic, order, governs it all, is nothing more than the dying echo of the God of Abraham.
His multifarious forms represented in multiplicity of symbols, words, names, all implying the same presumed absence.

Long after the parent dies, the child holds onto mementos, unable to let go.

One knows there is an absolute 'truth', and calls it God, the other knows there is absolute 'truth' and calls it by another name, open to its eventual discovery.
Pagan, the natural man, deals in probabilities within a cosmos of possibilities; he builds hierarchies, and lives by them, accepting both costs and benefits.

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

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 16790
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 52
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Satyrnalium Wed Jun 15, 2016 12:00 am

From an evolutionary standpoint all the organs participating in the hierarchy, the emergent unity we call organism, cooperate, with varying degrees of harmony, for the preservation of the unity – for the maintenance of this manifesting as presence past.
The brain will not evolve toward higher level of cognition, unless there is a need to.
There is no telos, no innate objective, but only the preservation of what has proven successful in the past – what could endure the world.
Growth, expansion, reproduction is forced upon the organism by cosmic Flux.
Life is this resistance to chaos - both its product and its antagonist.
In healing the damage done by attrition the organism expands, and becomes stronger – by reacting to mortality the organism reproduces, by following a pattern that facilitates continuance, the organism grows.
It is increasing chaos that stimulates ordering, as the recalling of the near-absolute.

A paradox: to desire that which if finalized, if attained, would mean your end.
Melancholy of understanding this, with nostalgia.
A brain that cannot endure an awareness of world beyond the minimum required to persist, will not become aware.
It will fall back to what it can take without shattering; it will settle for the comfortable, on the edge of its endurance.
Consciousness is not the end, it is the means to an end; it is not the objective but the means towards an objective.
Philosophy as the discipline of exploring reality above and beyond what is immediately necessary, can only be the product of excess, and of psychological strength above and beyond the average – it is an entering into unknown dangerous territories, and the engagement of world on a level that may break it.
It has always been those rare types, in every age, who had access to excess resources and who possessed an excess in psychological constitution that could survive philosophy.
Some went mad, when age decreased their endurance.
Genius and madness have been closely associated for a long time – perhaps after human knowledge grew to such an extent that the strength, and stamina required to bear its implications became too much for even the gifted.

It was then when survival took the backseat to human intellectual expansion, and brave spirits ventured into the wilds, risking their mind.
It could only be the highest of the species, with the ability to perceive and to care for more than the immediate; for more than simple animal existence, that could become philosophers of any importance.
In those that went beyond the 3rd Level of Cognition, and could detach their mind, their consciousness, form the body, and its past/nature.
For most this detachment became permanent, evolving in what we now know as nihilism.
The pain/suffering, the need, awaiting them in the body too much for them to reattach with, to accept.
Schizophrenia is a defensive measure.
It is why you cannot reason with moderns, nor hope to convince them of anything.
No argument, no evidence, no reason, is enough to risk madness and/or death.
For those few the death wish and the pleasure principle coincide – the tension not able to tear them apart.
These ones are few indeed.
Called monsters, evil, by those that would be shattered by such perceptions, by those who cannot relate – feared and admired, but mostly despised.
To them philosophers have always had to hide, become reclusive; they have had to hold back their thoughts, or contrive ways to speak of them indirectly, metaphorically, to make them more bearable.

           

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

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 16790
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 52
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Satyrnalium Wed Jun 22, 2016 1:06 pm

What, the fuck, does Nietzsche have to offer someone like me, other than willingly provide his literary expertise and put words to what I've known before I ever heard of his name?
His metaphysical insights are nothing spectacular, other than as a means of offering a connection to psychology.
A new way to connect noumenon to phenomenon.  

He appeals to women, children, & emasculated Modern males, with no sense of past, no connection to the real.
For them, and to them, he speaks of things they have never heard of, have never felt, cannot relate to.
As a cognitive bridge between Aryanism, through pre-Socratic Hellenism, and modern philosophy
he appears a god.
He uses the metaphors of Dionysian and Apollonian, offering further connections to what most are ignorant of.
What use does a mind have of such metaphors when reality is clear to it?
But then, have not geniuses appeared as gods to the base throughout time - have they not been called shamans, magic users, mystical creatures, leaders, priests, by dolts unable to rise above their primitive nature?
What, in he past, was called divine, is called "political" and/or magical today.  
The political leader, the preacher, teacher, is yesterdays demi-god.
This is what these needy charlatans wish to re-create.
But their NEED exposes them to minds like mine.
Have not similar minds mesmerized imbeciles throughout history, more so before the internet gave them access to the "source" of their mystical "power"?
Have not the "above", the superior, seduced, exploited, manipulated the "below", the inferior, even while feeding them delusions of parity?
Is not this, most current, most popular, new, modern lie part of the mechanism of exploiting?

If Nietzsche is a deity, an icon, an idol, among the upper-end of sheeple, is this not part of the strategy?
It would seem so if pleasure, immediate gratification, were not the only goal.
If the idea(l) was more than self....such as it is for I...Satyr.

...and yet...if genius we mean expressing, exposing what is self-evident, though denied, what is apparent, though we are blind to it, then, yes, Nietzsche was of my kind, and I will be forever grateful for his existence, and his contribution to this fight against dis-ease and filth; until new frontiers make of the filth something to be left behind, and not recycled, or paid attention to.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν


Last edited by Satyr on Wed Jun 22, 2016 1:28 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://satyr.canadian-forum.com/
Satyr
Daemon
avatar

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 16790
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 52
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Satyrnalium Wed Jun 22, 2016 1:23 pm

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

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

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

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

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 16790
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 52
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Satyrnalium Wed Jun 22, 2016 1:48 pm

The time for civility is over.
The time for politeness is gone.
Too much has been lost giving kindness where none is deserved, offering platitudes to the obtuse, the degenerates, the feeble.

Some cunning, some self-control, is still to be applied, not to trigger the herd's natural defensive mechanisms, not to comfort; to empathize but not to sympathize - not to humour and humour, but to disembowel, to cut part, to devour.
Time for niceties is over.
The dis-ease has spread, due to these earlier tactics.
This is a time of warfare...where each takes a risk, in accordance to his/her own comfort level, his/her willingness to sacrifice; this is a time, for each and every one of us, to lay themselves on the line, to whatever degree they are willing to do so, and take a stand before this multifarious illness of the mind.

If we do not, then who?


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

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 16790
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 52
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Satyrnalium Thu Jun 23, 2016 7:52 pm

In the nervous system the opposites emerge and converge, first splitting and then returning to be reunited as symbol.
Reason and madness are born here.


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

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 16790
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 52
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Satyrnalium Thu Jun 23, 2016 8:44 pm

in the nervous system the binary system is born, dualism emerges as symbolic representations of opposites...which are not truly opposite.
It is the nervous system that places itself as the mediating dividing line, splitting energy from matter, objectivity from subjectivity,mind from body, order from chaos, and then reunites them as abstraction in the brain its creative nexus.

It method of interpreting a neural pulse (energy) passing through a neuron (matter) as "on", and the absence of such a passing as an "off" begins the process of consciousness.

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

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 16790
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 52
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Satyrnalium Fri Jun 24, 2016 9:46 am

Retarded can be chic, when being ignorant is cool, and smart easily faked.
Off-the-Grid lifestyles, for the discerning rebel, no more a "bum" but a Bohemian, tapping into the network to rummage, like a parasite.
The beggar resides next to urban garbage dumps, like internet forums, where he collects, combining trinkets and gadgets, in innovative ways - impractical but impressive in their ingenuity to seem like they are doing something when they are not.
It does not matter how the pieces fit together, bringing us back to the distinction not understanding what is known.
Discerning free-spirits innovate, producing machinations of no utility, but with aesthetic appeal.
Recycling an expression of perspectivism in a materialistic capitalistic urban setting, rejecting materialism, going strait for masturbation relief.

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

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 16790
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 52
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Satyrnalium Sun Jun 26, 2016 4:29 pm

Huskinson, Lucy wrote:
The Self as a union of opposites
The achievement of the Self marks the telos of the psyche, where the opposites within the psyche are no longer related by conflict but by compensation. The Self is thus ‘the container and the organizer of all opposites(Jung, 1946, par. 536).
It signifies the unification of opposites within the psyche, wherein the four functions, two attitude-types, shadow, anima/animus and persona are integrated within the wider unification of consciousness and the unconscious, thereby creating a new and richer focus within the personality to balance the ego with its tendency to prejudice.

It is generally thought that Jung primarily developed his concept of the Self primarily from his own concept of the ‘transcendent function’, and from Eastern Mysticism, which frequently refers to notions of totality (Jung, 1951, par. 350).
As we saw in Chapter 5 , the transcendent function is part of the symbol-forming
aspect of the unconscious that possesses a purposive tendency to hold both conscious and unconscious together. Its purpose is to enable the psyche to realize the Self – the ultimate psychic balance where all oppositions are resolved.

In 1916 Jung wrote:

Jung, Carl wrote:
The shuttling to and fro of arguments and affects represents the transcendent
function of opposites. The confrontation of the two positions generates a tension charged with energy and creates a living third thing... a movement out of the suspension between opposites, a living birth that leads to a new level of being, a new situation.
(Jung, 1916/1957, par. 189)
- Nietzsche and Jung


This ‘third thing’ and ‘new level of being’, which culminates in the unification of opposites, is virtually identical with the Self. In this sense the Self (as with the transcendent function) can be regarded as the mediator of opposites. It is equivalent to the ‘third’ element that is introduced in the second stage of the alchemical process of Ostanes, which, through its affinities with both opposites, enables their unification (cf. Jung, 1946, par. 474). The Self is both a crucial ingredient within the process of uniting opposites and the very end-product of this process, the union of opposites itself.

Self as product of mind/body.
A more precise analysis would do away with the abstractions of opposites, and understand them as relative to the metabolic rate of the organism in question, which cannot help but place itself at the center of existence – as the measure of all things.
Opposites dissolve into degrees of dynamism, or fluctuation, in relation to the cells converting the stimulation into a form it can transmit and process.
There are, in fact no opposites, only patterns that repulse and attract in accordance to their own essence – their own pattern relating to that of another.
Opposites are ideas.
How the human mind interest (inter)activity in relation to its own processes.


Huskinson, Lucy wrote:
Jung did not develop a substantial theory of the Self; and thus the notion of the individuated personality, which has attained ‘Selfhood’, remains equally elusive.

In ‘The Undiscovered Self’ (1957) he bluntly states: ‘Since self-knowledge is a
matter of getting to know the individual facts, theories are of very little help’ (Jung,1957, par. 493).
We know that the Self is the ordering and unifying centre of the total psyche, and that while the ego is the centre of the conscious personality, the Self is the centre of both the conscious and unconscious personalities (Jung, 1936a, par. 44); but this description leads only to an inadequate and limited analysis of Selfhood. This is because the Self is only partly capable of being consciously perceived, as its totality encompasses every psychic manifestation – including
those unconscious processes that remain ineffable and forever out of reach to ego comprehension and understanding:
The self is a union of opposites par excellence...the self, however, is
absolutely paradoxicalin that it presents in every respect thesis and antithesis,
and at the same time synthesis. . . it is itself both conflict and unity.
(Jung, 1944a, par. 22, italics mine)
Thus, the Self as a paradoxical entity evades logical explanation.

A rational theory based on empirical data is useless for the depiction of the Self, as it cannot be reduced to intellectual knowledge. Scientific discourse relies heavily on abstract theorizing about well-defined data and seeks to exclude the symbolic metaphors through which the unconscious finds expression. Indeed, Jung writes that the Self is experienced as having a value quality attached to it, namely its feeling-tone. This indicates the degree to which the subject is affectedby the process or how much it means to him. . . In psychology one possesses nothing unless one has experienced it in reality.
Hence a purely intellectual insight is not enough. (Jung, 1951, par. 61)
Trying to explain the Self is akin to explaining God. God, or the abstract idea of God, is not contained in rational thought or empirical sense-data. He is found through metaphors and symbols, as a force primarily experienced rather than understood on a reductive level of intellect.

The experience of the Self, as with all numinous experiences of Otherness, is an affective experience of immense proportion (Jung, 1951, par. 53).
The Self is other to the ego; it is an experience of the ‘not-me’ in the ‘me’, a religious experience.

Emmanuel Levinas takes up a similar idea in Totality and Infinity(1969) where the contradictory elements of ‘Same’ (ego) and ‘Other’ (Self) can never exist as  a totality in union.
The Same exists because the Other is irreconcilable with  it, otherwise both Same and Other would be part of a greater totality or whole  that would invade and invalidate their separateness. Levinas paradoxically says they are related as a ‘relation without relation’ (ibid., pp. 79–80).
It is a relation because an encounter does take place, and it is ‘without relation’ because that encounter does not establish understanding: the Other remains resolutely Other.
This does not invalidate the Jungian interpretation where the Self encompasses the ego in a totality, for the ego remains at all times an element separate to it. (If the ego were identified with the Self, ego-inflation would result: Jung, 1951, par. 44) .
The Levinasian discourse continues to parallel Jung’s and offers insight into the  nature of the Self. In his text Levinas proceeds by stating that the encounter
between the Same and Other is essentially of a violent nature.

Levinas wrote:

‘Violence consists in welcoming a being to which [the mind] is inadequate’ (Levinas, 1969, p. 25). The encounter with the Other causes the Same to realize its impotence; it creates a surplus value of infinity within the Same, which disrupts the totality and self-containment of the Same.

The Same cannot integrate the Other and is reconditioned by it: ‘The I loses its hold before the absolutely Other . . . [it] can no longer be powerful’ (ibid., p. 17). Thus, the Other overturns the very egoism of the personality and puts consciousness into question; consciousness must answer to the Other and realize that it is not in total possession of the world,(ibid., p. 173).
Jung describes this encounter with the unconscious Other as a wounding:
Jung wrote:
Whoever has suffered once from an intrusion of the unconscious has at least a scar if not an open wound. His wholeness, as he understood it, the wholeness of his ego personality, has been badly damaged, for it became obvious he was not alone; something which he did not control was in the same house with
him, and that is of course wounding to the pride of the ego personality, a fatal blow to his own monarchy.
(SNZ, II, p. 1233; also see SNZ, I, p. 449)

Self, in this context is the totality of attraction/repulsion occurring as part of organ relationships, and the effects of world upon the organism, which remain below the level of cognition.
The mind awakens to itself, as one awakens to a stranger, beginning the slow laborious process of increasing intimacy with a fluctuating self (know thyself) – an intimacy humbling to the ego.
An imposition of an external identity founded on the judgments of otherness, splinters the ego into personae, the original and still undeveloped, unknown – here called Self – and the character as the partially recognized Self, the ego.
The organism requires a stable identifier, and finds it in the projection of a goal, into the distant future. The distance gives the illusion of perfection, of stativity.
Moving towards the objective is the motive with which the organism identifies; the focus of the aggregate processes its be-coming.
When self-consciousness emerges this movement is the primary source of ego.
The sum of all (inter)actions participating in its emerges imploded into the idea(l), first in the form of an objective.
The most primitive objective being the gratification of a need, coming from inside as the sensation of lost energies, focusing the mind outward upon what promises its satisfaction.



Huskinson, Lucy wrote:
The individual must, therefore, acknowledge that he is a being of both consciousness and unconsciousness, of Same and Other. Experience of the unconscious directly affects the conscious ego; the ego is reformulated or damaged by the ethical demand placed on it in the presence of the Other. Jung warns of this potential danger many times. According to Jung, the individuation process is often experienced as dangerous and violent. Jung writes:

Jung wrote:
The rediscovered unconscious often has a really dangerous effect on the  ego . . . In the same way that the ego suppressed the unconscious before, a
liberated unconscious can thrust the ego aside and overwhelm it. There is  a danger of the ego losing its head, so to speak, that it will not be able to defend itself against the pressure of affective factors.
(Jung, 1916/1957, par. 183; also see Jung, 1951, par. 33)
The danger and pressure arise when the conscious attitude is confronted by its shadow – those characteristics of a contrary nature that can appear alien and
morally reprehensible. The realization of the whole personality is a powerfulnuminous experience that is dangerous and violent. As we saw in Chapter 5, the alchemical process describes the rebirth of the ego ‘into’ the Self as a painful experience, for the king (who represents ego-consciousness) must suffer an awful death if he is to be reborn into a complete form. The death of the ego, as with the death of the king, ‘signifies the overcoming of the old and the obsolete’ (Jung, 1955–1956, par. 169), and this entails a wounding from the might of the Self.
The ego experiences the king’s sufferings: of dissolution and decomposition, the extinction of its light (its power and domination over all), and incineration in the fire (in the greater power) (Jung, 1945/1954, par. 468).
Within the individuation process the Self forces the ego to acknowledge its impotence, and through its affects it inflicts a radical change in the attitude of the ego. The ego is no longer in its petty personal world – believing itself to be in total possession of the world – as it was prior to individuation, but now participates freely in the wider world of objective interests (Jung, 1929, par. 68).
It sheds its limited subjectivity for ‘an attitude that is beyond the reach of emotional entanglements and violent shocks’ (Jung, 1929, pars. 67–68).
The king is thus reborn; his monarchy is revitalized so that his power can no longer be questioned, for he has attained the ultimate power:
Selfhood.
The ego must try to accept its rebirth (Jung, 1951, par. 51) and try to ground  its experience of the Other in a framework to which it can relate. The two  opposing rational functions of thinking and feeling are required to secure this kind of understanding (ibid., par. 52); but this is difficult to achieve (ibid., par. 58) as  it requires a personality that has already achieved a sufficient degree of individuation, where both functions have developed. If the ego does not try to accept its rebirth and tries instead to ignore the experience of the Other, or tries to explain it away as illusion, or reduce it to the level of the intellect, it will have to deal with the consequential onslaught of ‘insanity’ and ‘destructive mass psychoses’ (Jung, 1929, pars. 52, 53).
Here the Other and the ego can be regarded as opposites; when the ego ignores the Other or reduces it to ego-consciousness it is equivalent to  the domination of one opposite over its counterpart, and neurosis will inevitably follow. Likewise, the promotion of the Other over the ego will have similar results.
Thus, although the Self, as the unknowable Other, appears as a violent entity to ego-consciousness, it cannot be wholly destructive. The Self does not seek  to eradicate all ego-consciousness, for the opposites of ego and Self are of equal importance. As we saw in Chapter 5, ‘Unconscious compensation is only effective
when it co-operates with an integral consciousness. Assimilation is never  a question of “this or that”, but always of “this and that”’ (Jung, 1934, par. 338).
Therefore, the Self cannot kill the ego, for the ego is the Self’s feet (SNZ, II,
p. 978)
.
When the ego fails to accept its rebirth and is at a loss of understanding, the psyche spontaneously produces a compensatory symbol, a symbol that expresses
totality (and thus the union of opposites). This symbolic framework enables the ego to relate to the unconscious experience and protects it from the onslaught of insanity that would otherwise overcome it.

When this symbol of unification is manifest, the balance between the ego and the unconscious is restored. The presence of these symbols provides an empirical grounding for Jung’s ‘theory’ of the Self, for although ‘wholeness’ seems at first sight to be nothing but an abstract idea,  it is nevertheless empirical in so far as it is anticipated by the psyche in the form of spontaneous or autonomous symbols.
(ibid., par. 59)

Huskinson, Lucy wrote:
An empirical grounding, however, does not mean that Jung is on his way to establishing an objective theory of the Self that can be tested and qualified, because these Self-symbols (or transcendent functions) remain numinous – they are conscious interpretations of unconscious communications, the archetypal images of the archetypal Self. These symbols are clothed with finite images that are accessible to the ego, images that are subjectively defined by the ego according to its response to the a priori archetype and its conscious attitude (Jung, 1951, par.
355)
; but the archetype in itself, behind this subjective clothing, can never be attained. The Self remains elusive, concerned with individual facts that escape
testable theory (Jung, 1957, par. 493). It is experienced by the individual and symbolically expressed in individual terms.
Symbols have a subjective power, and may thus be effective for one individual and appear as a mere sign for another. Likewise, from an objective standpoint, one
symbol is only as appropriate as the next.

An intellectual classification of symbols will achieve little. Jung, however, is intent on making more of his ‘empirical theory’ (Jung, 1951, par. 59), to the extent that he is guilty of objectifying the subjective, by predetermining what is personal, in giving specific examples and an overall schematization of Self-imagery. Jung attempts the very thing he maintains should not be done: to establish a concrete theory of the Self, a theory of its objective symbolic form. He states that the Self will appear in dreams as an elephant, horse, bull, bear, white and black birds, fishes, and snakes
...tortoises, snails, spiders, and beetles. The principal plant symbols are  the flower and the tree. Of the inorganic products, the commonest are the mountain and the lake. (Jung, 1951, par. 356)
Here Jung is limiting Self-symbols to rigid, personal examples, and consequently fails to acknowledge the subjective rule of symbolism, where a specific image may not express the Self and the unification of opposites to every individual. It would be more appropriate for Jung to express his ‘theory’ only with such abstract
statements as: ‘Anything that a man postulates as being a greater totality than himself can become a symbol of the self’ (Jung, 1942/1948, par. 232). Or again:
‘the self can appear in all shapes from the highest to the lowest, inasmuch as they transcend the scope of the ego personality in the manner of a daimonion’ (Jung,1951, par. 356).
These statements are detailed and yet flexible enough to be applicable to every subjective symbolic formulation of the Self.  
Jung is quite willing to give many examples of Self-symbols (most of which are found in Aion, CW9ii, 1951).

Edward Edinger dramatically summarizes these interchangeable images and themes of the Self as follows:
Edward Edinger wrote:
Such themes as wholeness, totality, the union of opposites, the central generative point, the world navel, the axis of the universe, the creative point where God and man meet, the point where transpersonal energies flow into personal life, eternity as opposed to the temporal flux, incorruptibility, the inorganic united paradoxically with the organic, protective structures capable of bringing order out of chaos, the transformation of energy, the elixir of life
– all refer to the Self, the central source of life energy, the fountain of our being which is most simply described as God.
(Edinger, 1972, p. 4)

Huskinson, Lucy wrote:
The God-image and the mandala sacred circle are the two Self-images that fascinate Jung the most. The former led Jung to his somewhat controversial response to the idea of theodicy by explaining God in terms of completion rather than perfection, and of therefore harbouring an evil shadow side (Jung, 1951, par. 123).
Christ, as a Self-symbol, represents a personality greater than the average individual (Jung, 1942/1954, par. 414; Jung, 1951, par. 42); but to be a
symbol of integration and unity Christ must be linked with His opposite – the Antichrist – to convey good and evil. And the latter led Jung to his experience and
discovery of the Self, for in drawing mandalas every morning (in 1918–1919) he came to realize that they are ‘cryptograms concerning the state of the Self’ (MDR,
p. 221)
, an illustration of his psychological disposition at that time. In these mandalas he saw his whole being actively at work, and through them he acquired
a living conception of the Self. The mandala symbolizes a protective circle, which would lessen the intensity of the violent experience of Otherness, and thus ‘protect
the unity of consciousness from being burst asunder by the unconscious’ (Jung, 1929, par. 47).
Symbols are psychic images that, through the purposive tendency of the transcendent function, link opposites together: what is known to the unknown, the rational to the irrational, and consciousness to unconsciousness. These Self-images provide the ego with a subjective framework through which it can relate to the
Self, and come to terms with its impinging unconscious forces. The images are not the actual Self; they are merely approximations representing states of relative
wholeness or ‘Self-ness’. It is impossible to arrive at the archetype-in-itself, we can experience its effects only in its corresponding symbol, and there are an infinite number of symbols that may apply. Such limitless conveyance of the Self suggests to me that the Self is not such an unbroken and coherent entity as is often
thought. The images of the Self are not described theoretically, but metaphorically, as a finite expression of something infinite. The union of opposites, as a symbolic representative of the Self, is thus only one subjective interpretation from an infinite variety. In this sense it seems to have little prominence. However, if we regard  the union of opposites as the process through which the Self is realized, then  it assumes great significance. But this incurs a conceptual problem. For, if
we attribute value to the union of opposites because it producesthe Self as its  ‘end-product’, then we imply that it is not equivalent to the Self; we presuppose
that the process through which the ‘product’ is realized has an identity separate from it.

This problem can be avoided if we interpret the process as circular and not linear. In this case the Self is identified with the process and yet also beyond it; it is a synergy of the three elements of the process (the two opposites and  the ‘third’ alchemical mediator). This means the Self is not identified with any  of the three elements in isolation, neither is it identified with the sum of its  parts; rather the Self surpasses its parts, thereby making its constitution beyond examination. Warren Colman adopts a similar approach to this in his analysis of the Self. Colman explicitly defines the Self as both the product realized by the
process and the process of realization itself, as an organizing principle and that which is organized. Colman maintains that there is no principle or archetypal
structure that is separate from that which it is organizing; the structure is inherent in itself. He regards the Self as both ‘a tendency towards organization’ (the
process of uniting opposites) and ‘the structure of that organization’ ( ).
‘In other words, the psyche is self-structuring and the name for that process is  the self’ (Colman, 2000, p. 14). Colman does not regard the end-product of the
process as separate from the process, but as the point at which the process ceases to continue. The process of uniting opposites is therefore inextricably linked
with the Self; it is an expression of the Self’s activity, its ‘tendency towards organization’.

The Self is Other and no complete explanation of it can be determined; only its partial representative elements can be examined, and if the Self is a ‘synergy’, the
examination of its parts will not give an accurate representation of the Self.
However, this has not deterred other commentators on Jung from attempting to do so; they offer definitions of the Self by regarding one of its different aspects as the principal aspect of the archetype. For example, Elie Humbert regards the Self primarily as an ethical postulate. He writes: ‘If you were to ask what the other
self signifies for me, I should reply that it is, above all, the inner voice which tells
me frequently and precisely how I am to live’ (Humbert, 1980, p. 240). Indeed, Jung himself describes the Self as ‘the will of God’ and an inner ‘absolute which one must learn how to handle correctly’ (Jung, 1951, par. 51). As a God-image, the Self provides an ethical challenge to confront one’s projections and resolve the confrontational issues from within. Andrew Samuels also refers to the Self as a religious challenge:
The self involves the potential to become whole or, experientially, to ‘feel’ whole – a part of feeling whole is feeling a sense of purpose, of sensing a
goal. Part of wholeness is to feel that life makes sense and of having an inclination to do something about it when it does not, thus, to have a religious capacity.
(Samuels, 1994, p. 91)
In support of his claim to a religious capacity he cites Jung as saying: ‘The self, though on the one hand simple, is on the other hand an extremely composite thing,
a “conglomerate soul”’ (Jung, 1950, par. 634). Judith Hubback in ‘The Dynamic Self’ (1998) takes a different stance and suggests that the Self is principally
associated not with its capacity to motivate, but with the movement it inspires.
Hubback thus focuses on the Self’s propensity to action and dynamism, an interpretation that takes us away from the structural interpretation of the Self as symbolic imagery. She notes that Jung’s descriptions of the Self in Aionculminate
in ‘numerous nouns and verbs (powerful ones), containing the elements of energy and psychological action’. She proceeds to list these in their chronological order
as follows:
‘Integration’ and ‘assimilation’ (par. 43), ‘discrimination’ (par. 44), ‘energetic tension’ (par. 53), ‘confronts’ (par. 59), ‘affected’ (par. 61), ‘relate’ (par. 65).
In the later chapter ‘The Structure and Dynamics of the Self’ there are: the self ‘a dynamic process’ (par. 411), ‘move’ (par. 413) and ‘Sooner or later nuclear physics and the psychology of the unconscious will draw closer together as both of them . . .push forward into transcendental territory’ (par. 412).
(Hubback, 1998, p. 279)
The definitions of the Self, cited above as its principal (but incomplete) aspects, refer either directly to the process of uniting opposites or to its experienced effects.
Thus, Humbert and Samuels refer to the sensing of a teleological purpose and movement towards a personal whole with ethical connotations, and Hubback
refers to the process impersonally, in terms of its energetic movement and activity.
Each of these commentators equates the Self with its process of realization; they do not attempt to define the Self as distinct from the process of uniting opposites.
Although we noted that the process of uniting opposites, as a symbolic representative of the Self, is only one subjective interpretation from an infinite variety, it is significant that these commentators and I support Jung in raising it to a prominent position. Indeed, although there are an infinite number of symbols, the
effectiveness of which are subjectively determined, some have greater significance than others. For example, the symbol of the cross does not endure solely because
of one individual and his subjective determinations, but according to millions of people who all share in its symbolism as a power of collective validity. Similarly,
the union of opposites is not ‘just another symbol’; it has enormous influence;  its connotations, unlike the particularity of the cross, range from the general to
the specific as its potency incorporates such notions as difference, relationships, totality, unity, separateness, paradox, death, regeneration, dynamism and so on.

The symbol of the union of opposites, as Jung himself maintains, conveys the  very meaning of life (cf. Jung, 1917/1926/1943, par. 78). I believe it is more applicable than other Self-symbols that Jung describes. It is certainly more pertinent than the ‘elephant, horse, bull, bear, white and black birds, fishes, and
snakes...tortoises, snails, spiders, and beetles...the flower and the tree...the mountain and the lake’ (Jung, 1951, par. 356).
It is perhaps also more powerful than that of the mandala and God Himself, which, although equally effective  in the transformation of psychic energy, remain abstract images that are not immediately entertained in the individual’s life. Thus, while the notion of opposition is empirically evident in life (‘the sad truth is that man’s real life consists of a complex of inexorable opposites – day and night, birth and death, happiness and misery, good and evil . . . life is a battle ground. It has always been, and always will be’: MHS, p. 75), the notions of the ‘sacred circle’ and God remain obscure and perhaps less likely to be identified by ego-consciousness. Just as Nietzsche promoted the Will to Power over and above the other instincts as the ‘unifying concept’ that organizes the instincts into a ‘hierarchy’, the symbol of the union of opposites can be regarded as a more significant and powerful Self-symbol over and above other Self-symbols. However, we must remember that this attempt, as with any other attempt to rank symbols by value, can be justified only at a subjective
level.
The Self is susceptible to potential inconsistency because it is not grounded within concrete theory, but within subjective interpretation. The Self is an elusive
entity, one that is defined by infinity and irreducible to intellectual terms. It is effectively a transcendental postulate ‘which, although justifiable psychologically,
does not allow of scientific proof’ (Jung, 1928b, par. 405). This postulate serves only to formulate and link together the psychic processes that have already been theoretically established.
If the Self were available for an intellectual encounter it could be understood without much difficulty, for its symbols are ‘formulations that can easily be
mastered by the philosophic intellect’ (Jung, 1951, par. 60) – though, as we have seen, some can be mastered more easily than others. The intellect promotes the illusion that one can be in possession of the Self and can master and manipulate it
accordingly,
But actually one has acquired nothing more than its name, despite the ageold prejudice that the name magically represents the thing, and that it is sufficient to pronounce the name in order to posit the thing’s existence . . . the intellectual ‘grasp’ of a psychological fact produces no more than a concept
of it, and that concept is no more than a name, a flatus vocis.(Jung, 1951, par. 60)
In terms of an intellectual theory, the Self is simply the ‘name’ given to that which
is unfathomable in the psyche, a metaphysical concept. But this is inappropriate for Jung. For, even though the Self cannot be known, the Self is a concept or postulate that is grounded neither in metaphysical speculation nor faith; rather, according to Jung, an adequate picture of the Self is formed on the basis of a
thorough ‘experience’ of it: ‘Just as the concept arose out of an experience of reality, so it can be elucidated only by further experience’ (ibid., par. 63; cf. Jung, 1931c, par. 1292; Jung, 1932, par. 501).

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

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 16790
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 52
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Satyrnalium Mon Jun 27, 2016 7:00 am

Listening to ignorance come to a conclusion on a subject they know nothing about is an opportunity to delve deeper into a corrupted mind.
The projected conclusion can be traced by to a deeper dis-ease, more so when it leaves "bread crumbs" of its "reasoning", along the way.

As an example I use a most current mental handicap attacking using Nietzsche, the thorn in the Christian side.
The first mistakes is associating Nietzsche with Nazism, and the objective harshness of his insights with the horrors of war, of which only one side is mentioned.
The stunted mind then proceeds to connect words... Nazi, Nietzsche, and from there Nazi National Socialism it concludes that all advocates of Nietzsche are nationalists.
In this it shares the misreading with those he then stands as the opposite.

But, simply being a christian has already exposed a malaise all subsequent errors in judgment accentuate.




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

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 16790
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 52
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Satyrnalium Mon Jun 27, 2016 7:07 am

Lacking the constitution to advance above the third level of intentionality the typical modern mind cannot differentiate empathy from sympathy, allowing his own dis-ease to seep into his judgments of other.
His method is a clean projection of self in the place of other, unable to decrease the personal in the projection he settles for unloading upon other what he is most ashamed of, in what he knows of self.
The other becomes a vehicle for taking away, distancing, the elements in self he cannot accept, or deal with, and this would include his genetically produced intellectual limits.

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

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 16790
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 52
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Satyrnalium Mon Jun 27, 2016 7:24 am

To be a philosopher you must have a variety of personalities living inside of you, most the result of emphatic connections; as if you've lived, vicariously, a hundred lives, without losing yourself in them.

We always use self as our starting point.
To understand other, one begins with understanding self.
Without this understanding of self fully developed the mind simply projects what superficial knowing it has, usually keeping the desirable, the good, as identifiers of self, and unloading the insulting, the bad, upon the mysterious other.

We can safely assume that an inferior mind can never understand what is superior to it, and when it tries to get into the mind of what is above it in complexity, in power, into god's mind, as it were, it settles for what it is able to do: find in self something comparable, which is, most often, what it holds in hiding because it is overwhelmed by it, what in self it cannot comprehend, and this causes it anxiety.
The superior other, also fills it with fear, and so the connection of self with other is made, and what is most despises in self, because it cannot control, or understand, it projects on the mysterious other; another who triggers the same anxiety of uncontrollable, incomprehensibility.

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

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 16790
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 52
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Satyrnalium Mon Jun 27, 2016 10:33 am

Schopenhauer, Arthur wrote:
The will is metaphysical, the intellect physical; the intellect, like its objects, is mere phenomenon, the will alone is thing-in-itself. . . the will is the substance of man, the intellect the accident; the will is the matter, the intellect is the form; the will is warmth, the intellect is light. (ibid., vol. 2, ch. XIX, p. 201; also see vol. 1, par. 39, p. 203)

Schopenhauer, Arthur wrote:
The higher the consciousness has risen, the more distinct and connected are the thoughts, the clearer the perceptions, the deeper and profounder the sensations. In this way everything gains more depth: emotion, sadness, joy and sorrow. (ibid., vol. 2, ch. XXII, p. 281)

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

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 16790
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 52
Location : Flux

PostSubject: Re: Satyrnalium Fri Jul 01, 2016 9:10 pm

On my way to re-covery, out of the mad-house, I turn on the lights, and find the windows and doors, to let nature's brilliance in.
My spirit prepares for the danger and the solitude, choosing to risk death than live in the infirmary.
I spit out their narcotic pills, to make room for my tongue, and I say YES to their No.

Yes, a thousand times yes.

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




PostSubject: Re: Satyrnalium

Back to top Go down
 
Satyrnalium
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 3 of 28Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 15 ... 28  Next
 Similar topics
-
» Satyrnalium

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