Power of Nil

With so many variables, so many unforeseen repercussions for every act, every thought, how could a man be held accountable for what he could not foresee, when his own intentions are not entirely known to him?
Would he not be innocent, from ignorance, and if omniscience has proven to be non-existent, then are we not all, to some degree, innocent?
Would not ignorance be a measure of our innocence, each vying to prove he was entirely ignorant and therefore not responsible?

Faith a product of an absence, or rejection, of responsibility - a rejection of the daemonic.
To remain purified in self-abengating, self-dinal.

Power of nil.
Our new god.

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

With the one discredited, what will unburden us from our own bad choices?
The [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.].

Where shall we turn to for absolution?
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The abysmal void waits, and we shining our light into it expecting something to reflect it back.

Atzmon, Gilad wrote:

Borochov and Nordau provided us with a possible answer. In the seeking of a ‘political identity,’ the emancipated Jew ends up succumbing to the dialectic of negation. His or her political identity is defined by what he or she isn’t rather than by who he or she is.
United as a group, they aren’t Germans, they aren’t British, they aren’t Aryans, they aren’t Muslims, they aren’t just ordinary proletarians or even boring peace-lovers, they aren’t just common, working class people. They are Jews because they aren’t anything else. At first glance it seems as if nothing is wrong in being defined by negation. Yet, a deeper critical glance into the notion of negation may reveal some of the devastating aspects of this form of emancipated dialectics.

Nihilism, the nil is our modern/postmodern identifier.
The Jewish mindset is exposed. It should not overly surprise us if such words can be so openly spoken, because they only serve to enhance and reinforce the natural desire of the Jew to be seen as a victim, even if he claims a position of power.
Having no confidence to meet an opponent head-on, the Jew grovels and cries for mercy taking on the role of god’s forsaken one; chosen, by universal forces, by deterministic fate, to suffer, as evidence of divine disapproval and its imminent mercifulness.

Atzmon, Gilad wrote:

More frightening is the fact that people who succumb to the dialectic of negation cannot engage in peace-making and reconciliation. The reason is simple: the notion of peace, reconciliation and harmony entails a collapse of the politics of negation. From the point of view of negation, reconciliation means elimination. Loving your neighbour may lead towards an identity loss. Needless to say that in the last centuries, millions of European and American Jews have chosen peace and total assimilation. They have divorced their Jewish identity and disappeared into the masses.
However, the fact that emancipated Jewish identity is defined by negation may also help us to realise why it is that emancipated Jews are so often part of political campaigns and revolutionary movements: Those who are defined by negation are always against something. It could be the bourgeoisie, capitalism, colonialism, Palestinians, Iraq, Iran, Islam, the Goyim, human rights abuse, historic revisionism, Zionism and so forth. Seemingly, the journey between ‘dialectic of negation’; and ‘politics of hate’ is rather short.

Atzmon goes on to paint a picture of a nihilist Jew finding identity in the nil, and in the course of his assessment reveals his own liberal politics of total disappearance into the masses, i.e., dilution through integration.
Although identity is built upon negation it is not built upon total negation, as this last entails the dismissal of the world, in the hopes of a better one.
The Jew finds himself, as he always has, and as his god demands of him, in a perpetual state of self-denial and self-obliteration, wanting to take the world down with him in some grand moment of retribution. The more modern Jew turns this self-negation into a less destructive and so a more positive alternative, viz., self-negation by complete immersion in the non-distinct; a slow disappearance rather than an explosive show of world denouncing hatred. Having no context to draw pride and nobility from, the secular modern Jew, like Atzmon claims to be, denounces his ancestry as being that of hypocrisy and decrepitude, only to find in the Negro wailing in self-pity, an all-encompassing existential alternative to the politics of hate, fleeing into the loving embrace of assimilation. If he will not go down in pieces, kicking and screaming, then he will lie down and be eaten alive; consuming and being consumed is fundamental to this form of self-abnegation. He strives to find kinship on a more visceral level: the kinship of a shared state of suffering not fighting to maintain its identity, no matter how pitiful it may be, but one surrendered to fate. In this Atzmon simply proves to be a more advanced, i.e., progressive form of Jewishness – a Jew wanting to return to the safe space of obscurity.
The nomad finds a home within urban western lifestyles, playing those old slave tunes, wailing in the twilight of the idols, transcending on the notes those vicious cycles of naturally selected injustice. He hasn’t really rejected Judaism, he has only rejected its older expressions and styles. He can now pretend that he does not really hate himself, and is not ashamed of his nihilistic inheritance, because he has abandoned himself to the intangible notes of inevitability, swept away and over to the “right side of history”.

nihilism is not simply skepticism.
In a world of absent absolutes all is uncertain and an approximation, therefore doubt is part of uncertainty and the anxiety of existing consciously.

Nihilism is using the nil - the absent of the absolute, the one, as an excuse or justification to dismiss anything and everything, including one's own existence, and one's own agency.
Honesty deals in probabilities, i.e., what is more probable versus what is less so.
Doubting probability without offering a superior alternative is an excuse - an easy excuse, given that there are no absolutes, ergo there can never be absolute certainty, as there can never be omniscience or omnipotence, or a whole, i.e., complete, final, end.
The absolute, whatever name it is given or in whatever way it is conceptualized, is an antithesis - a nullification - of the experienced.
To demand, or expect, it is a cope-out - a cowardly way of evading the necessity for arguments and evidence that increases probability.
A typical Desperate Degenerate uses this absence of an absolute to justify any absurdity, on the ground that there is no omniscience, therefore anything is possible, including the absurdity he needs to help him cope with uncertainty or how the world is. Since nothing is certain, the Desperate degenerate argues, then anything is possible even what he cannot prove or justify, or offer arguments and evidence that could compete with the dominant theory of probability.
To agree with another is not a surrender to his perspective on faith, but on merit; to eternally disagree on principle, despite the merits of a perspective, is a symptom of insecurity and fragility.
One does not disagree just to disagree no more than one agrees just to agree; one accepts a perspective as superior on tis merits, compared to another perspective, not just because there are other perspectives.

Nihilism becomes a political and religious tool of mass manipulation, dependent on tis utility as a psychological crutch.
The exploiter/manipulator feeds into the psychology of the mediocre masses and supports its excuses and absurdities, with a few caveats, presented as necessary sacrifices.
The mediocre mases - Desperate Degenerates - are more than willing to make these sacrifices if they can preserve their self-medicating absurdities without needing to provide evidence or superior arguments.
Superior/Inferior correspond to possible/probable, in reference to a shared world, viz., in relation to an objective, indifferent, unconscious, will-less, world all experience - even fi differently. It is this difference that is naturally selected, but is socially selected when human interventions offer sheltering as part of their exploitation/manipulation.
In this case unfit mutations increase and compound until the entire arrangement collapses.
Nihilism has nothing to do with rejecting conventional beliefs or accepting an opinion on faith, since philosophy and science expect no such faith based submission.

The standard is outside human subjectivity, if and when no human agency intervenes to adjust the consequences., in which case the entire arrangement is destined to collapse, i.e., suffer a reality check, or be faced with a reckoning.
Socioeconomic systems - arrangements - offer more and others less sheltering; some intervening more and others less - sheltering.
Nihilistic dogmas/ideologies propose more sheltering, if and when they are ever applied. Most fail to be applied because they are so out of touch with reality that they are inapplicable. So they remain eternally theoretical - sublime and pure in their ideological/dogmatic untested perfection.
Those that have been applied, or some attempt was made to apply them, have failed, forcing them to accuse others for their failures or to contradict their own principles so as to not fail.

There are two basic methods to evaluate - judge - a perspective to determine its merits?
One is directly, and the other indirectly.
One is about applying the theory, the other is by comparing the theory not with other theories but with reality, gauging over time its probability.
Space/Time is the qualifier.
One does not juxtapose perspectives, but juxtaposes each with experienced reality - empirically: noumena juxtaposed with phenomena, and not noumena with other noumena, or words with more words; but words with actions, activities, interactivities, i.e., existence outside human environments where humans intervene.

The first method - application evaluating consequences in relation to expectations - is superior to the second - evaluating theories by juxtaposing them with each other in relation to a shared world outside manmade circumstances which adjust the consequences.

The nil is seductive because, as I've repeated, it nullifies the real on the grounds that it does not exist.
It demands absolutes, i.e., immutable, indivisible, wholes, and if it does not receive them it declares them null and void.
It fabricates the idea of an absolute - which exists only in the mind as a vague, obscure, often undefined concept - and then expects reality to provide evidence - and if it doesn't it declares existence nil.

It refuses to begin with the existent - the perceptible, empirical - because then it will be exposed to traumatic probabilities - it intuits this, if it hasn't already glimpsed it.
So words - semiotics - is where it remains - ideologies, abstractions; words/symbols with no referents.

Even its inability to perceive meaning in the world is based on its misinterpretation of the concept "meaning", because the world is full of meaning if you define the term properly.
All words are incorporated into the nihilistic paradigm, including the concept of nihilism.

Words lose meaning. Nothing makes sense. All is arbitrary. Nothing matters. All becomes selectively mystical, obscure, inconclusive, vague...
Philosophy is declared at an end, just as the god of Abraham was declared dead.

Mediocrity needs a supernatural authority, and if not that then it will never settle for an earthly, a real, authority - daddy issues. Fragile egos willing to self-decive just to escape the implications.

Nothing to kill or die for, means nothing to live and suffer for.
A life squandered in anticipation; in irrational hope, i.e., faith; in hyperbolic escapes; in unrealizable dreams.
A life wasted ignoring time, time ,ticking away.

God is naught; naught is god.

Power of Nil: If you ain't omniscient, if you do not know EVERYTHING, then you know nothing.
Either/Or
Skepticism pushed to its absolute end - arbitrarily applied to reject or dismiss anything threatening or undesirable, i.e., contrary to an organism's objectives.

Power of Nil: nobody can know me more than I know myself, either because there is no self to know, or the empirical is not sufficient - appearances are "superficial" - ergo, man cannot know any other species more than it can ever know itself.
Hidden complexity underlying a perceived manifestation of interactive order/chaos. The mind is motivated by the need to conceal itself from those who it realizes are aware of its hidden essence - self-cosnciuosness.
 
Appearances: not only visual but all sensual input of the present, interpreted as apparent.
Apparent: interactivity, i.e., behaviour, patterns of interactivity - interpreted first via sensual a priori automated means, and then in the brain as sensation, abstraction.

Double interpretation for organisms with a nervous system, manifesting the body/nervous system/mind triad, corresponding to Plato's metaphor for the human psyche, and to spatio-temporal past/present/future.
Sense data is translated into neural energy - stimulation triggering the process - transmitted to a brain, if a nervous system is present, where the neural energy sequences are reinterpreted into sensation, image, feeling, or, in more sophisticated brains, into abstractions, e.g., ideas.
These can then be returned to the wold, against via the nervous system, where they are converted into actions, or projected as objective, e.g., ideals, art (language).

If parity cannot be found in absolute oneness, then it must be found in its absence, in absolute nil.

In the absence of an absolute, totalitarian, authoritarian one-god, anything goes, which is ironic in a universe of no- free-will.
But it's not ironic because the one-god has not been abandoned he's been renamed - updated, and given a pseudo-scientific, secular, veneer. He is still just as totalitarian and authoritarian and absolutist, but he isn't a "he"...nor a "ze, them they" for that matter, but an "it" - abstracted into the perfect ideological contraption.
It is now the "ghost in the universal machine".

When the one has failed us we turn, with desperate hearts, to its opposite hoping to discover there a higher power to bring about existential salvation, and a final complete restfulness through uniform nothingness.

Do not be tricked by the satanic trickster who had promised us final, complete, peace and eternal prosperity.
Let us rediscover our lord saviour hiding where we once turned away - in the eternal, meaningless, void.
Only there does a final, absolute, and complete respite can be attained, by one and all.

Man is no more and no less than a stone.
Perhaps he is worse off because a stone does not know what it is, and how enslaved it is to nothingness.
As I've read elsewhere:
"If a stone were conscious it would role down a hill and think it was of its own volition"

Uniformity in nil.
Men cannot be unlike one another because they cannot be unlike a stone.
'All is one,' converts to 'All is none' - the call of those who have been disillusioned with their "positive nihilistic" naivete ...and have "progressed" towards the maturity of "purified nihilism".

The absent absolute rather than indicating potency has now become an indication of universal impotence.

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

Chaos underlies ordering.

The abyss reflects no objective. Thus, courage is only the catalyst, part of the primordial striving; the light must make contact with purpose.

When you worship nothing you conceal it with linguistic ploys, feeling proud of belonging to the only ones who worship nothing.
This becomes your collective identity, as the only ones who chose to worship nothing.

But, of course modern man worships nothing. 

Abrahamism is the triad of spiritual nothing, pretending to believe in an abstracted something - an absolute somethingness.
The Jews have placed their collective in the place of the abstract divinity - their collective of believers - chosen - are god.
They hate Christians because Christianity makes all humanity into a divinity. All mankind is one and divine - creators of world.
The arrogance of believing a supreme being cares and has given them the opportunity for eternal life now becomes the arrogance of believing men are gods - subjectivity is the illusion that one's own perspective is just as real as any other - all humans are gods, and if they reach a compromise they can become a collective one-god.
Man believing in himself via a mediating symbol.
When you believe in nothing then the emptiness allows for you to become a god within it - the nothing permits any something.
The "death of the one-god" allows for the emergence of a collectivized one-god.   

Like I've said....in a post Abrahamic god world, recovering Abrahamics are unwittingly worshiping humanity as divine.
Humanity = world; world = humanity.
Humanity = world creator = creator = humanity.
Humanity  = singularity.

Intersubjectivity implies that humanity creates its own reality. 
Man has declared himself god - a collective; a multiplicity of oneness.
This is why we are experiencing this identity crisis.

The body reminds man that he is determined by his past. To be a god he must create himself in the present, as if from nothing....from nil - Blank Slate. 
Postmodernism.
Historical revisionism; historical denial.

Worshipping humanity as god finds its prophets and saints. Now it is individuals who become conduits of the divine spirit of collective mankind. Idols to be worshipped in lieu of a singular presence of this collective multiplicity.

The lost - recovering Abrahamics and disillusioned Marxists - become obsessed with characters - icons of their new divinity.
Some sanctified - made into modern/postmodern Saints - others demonized, converted to Satanic figures.
Love and hate channeled.
Men-Children need a father figure.
Character worship.
Divine figures with supernatural powers. Indubitable, unfathomable.
Sacred. 

When man cannot worship the one or none, he worships whatever he can find.

Waiting for Godot sequel.

Nihilistic man encases himself in subjectivity, the empty room of self-hatred, where he reduces himself to filth and trash, the living dead, zombified corpse, like all the moderns who walk the earth today. He refuses to interact with the world, 'out there', because it is nothing to him, but a void, a reflection of himself. Everything is a threat to him, or disdainful to him, distasteful to him, because it fails to relieve him of his suffering. What doesn't give him respite, he hates. Hatred is a catharsis where he finds some value, rejoicing in his degeneracy.

Nature, life, is only something to be tolerated for the inferior mind. An ugly intolerable thing that causes him pain. Vengeance through self-immolation is his only victory, but, he is too weak to commit it himself, and so he lingers, and that is his revenge.

Sometimes, one who truly grasps the essence of nihilism was themselves, lost in it; Platonic illumination. As where the ones who have assimilated it into themselves, surrendering to it completely, only know how to be its essence, which is formidable in its own right. So we have the scientist who studies the animal, knowing its nature, knowing it more than it knows itself. But the animal possesses a nature of pure being which gives it an unbridled power and strength that can capture a deeper truth. The problem with man, however, taking on this animal form through self-negation, is that his form of unconscious being is brought on by a choice. The need for raw animalistic power, is stunted by choice; the choice to be a fool, to be weak, helpless, degenerate. Whether he is aware of it or not, he chooses his fate, he chooses to surrender himself to an impulse being carried along by primitive drives. Because without self, than the only other form man can take is that of an animal, but an animal without purpose or power because he is still attached to his deficient and ever fleeting desire for selfhood and identity, which would mean awknowledging, accepting, his weaknesses so that strength can be tempered from it. The absence of self, promises a state of pure being, pure power to him, which is what makes nihilism alluring, because it is mans primitive animal state. This Manimal state, always exposes inferiority, because the conscious state was never confronted, only denied, turning it into a sickness, an abomination of power.

"The Blind Leading the Blind"
--Pieter Bruegel

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

Worshiping nothing beyond mind turns inward to find a something to worship - absolute one love becomes the love of self in the nothingness - it becomes narcissism.
A blind love that can find no wrong in the loved one - it replaces one - perfect, whole, singularity - with a perfect, whole, self. It makes of itself and its kind the god it failed to find in the deserts of the real.

Nihilism is a world-view that acts as a defensive measure to developing self-consciousness.
It tries to negate conscience, the suffering of regret.
This si most noticeable in Abrahamism and when dealing with the subject of free-will.

Like I've said...
Nihilism evolves to cope with emerging self-consciousness, exposing man to new, more devastating, sources of need/suffering.
Second-guessing, conscience, regret.....the awareness of being perceived by another consciousness, i.e., sense of vulnerability, being judged by an-otherness, being known by another more than we know ourselves, etc.
All this is disheartening.
Man needs a buffer, and nihilism becomes this ideological - conceptual - buffer between ego and self, i.e., mind/body. A semiotic, i.e., symbolic, linguistic, defensive wall to hide behind, to negate self or other, to fabricate all kinds of excuses, escapes....

Given the continuity of existence, life feels regret because it cannot turn back time; it has one life and that is all. It cannot undo what it has done; un-choose what it has already chosen; undo the judgment that past choices were based upon.
All is negated. No self-imporvment is even attempted or if it is it's all a matter of change....luck.
an individual can just relax and accept whatever happens to him, because he is not in control, he does not participate in his own life - ego is a bystander of a self which is negated or made into an otherness, a divinity, an external agency.