Power of Nil

Thoughts are like existence....they come from nowhere and nothing.
Something other than self must be the creative agency.
Self is all lucid, awareness. No subconscious, internal processes triggering biochemicals cascading processes. There's nothing, a void, and then there's something, a thought.
There is nothing before there is a conscious thought. Nothing happening subconsciously.
If it isn't conscious it doesn't exist.
So, our thoughts are not our own....they come to us from somewhere else.
No, not god, don't be so hasty...but something other than. Something cosmic. Something mystical.
So, if the thought pops into my mind to kill someone, it isn't really my own, so its not my fault.

Then, of course, there's the honest, less Abrahamic possibility that a living organism is process.
Two sources of data - one external via the sense organs, including the skin; the other internal, via the nervous system.
Cells sending data to the brain, as it receives data from beyond itself, and the two streams merging into a synthesis we call consciousness.
Even plants have this: external/internal sources of data. Experiential/Genetic. Sensual, cellular.
Now, ni plants there is no central nervous system to merge and transmît the data to a central processing organ, i.e. brain, so its reactions are local, cascading across the organism.
with more complex organisms the process is more complex. There's the plant method, and then there's transmission and synthesis via the nervous system, including the brain.
Once the process begins there si no end to it. Even when asleep consciousness continues.
The difference between wakefulness and the sleep state is the degree of external and internal data streams. During sleep the external sources are shut down, allowing only the internal sources to dominate consciousness.
There is no stoppage to thinking, except when death occurs.
There is a continuous stream of consciousness which the lucid brain either is aware of or is not.
If the ludic part of consciousness, i.e., ego, is unaware of consciousness doesn't mean consciousness has ceased.
When we sleep our consciousness has been reduced but it hasn't stopped.
If a sudden loud sound snapped us back to awareness we wake up....but we have to be conscious to become aware of a loud sound.
Brain functions don't stop, unless we die....they reduce in intensity but continue in a continuum.

We can say that when a foetus forms the consciousness of the parents merge and continue on.... the child's consciousness a continuation of its parents.

Typical rationalization of the book, by the book, for the book.

2000 years and people still haven't figured it out....

Many cite women's vindictiveness as being legendary, often lasting their whole lives, but they ignore that man's potential for it can sometimes far exceed it even lasting multiple millennias past their death.

I know nihilism seems like an automatic process and will likely develop unconsciously but i still think there was something raw that motivated it, as feminine as that inference is.

I wonder what was Socrates' motive, he was not a slave, he had a wife and sons, and was a member of the martial caste... Was it his several defeats in life? Forced to settle with an inferior woman and a defeat from a Superior Army?

Impulso Oscuro wrote:

Many cite women's vindictiveness as being legendary, often lasting their whole lives, but they ignore that man's potential for it can sometimes far exceed it even lasting multiple millennias past their death.

I know nihilism seems like an automatic process and will likely develop unconsciously but i still think there was something raw that motivated it, as feminine as that inference is.

I wonder what was Socrates' motive, he was not a slave, he had a wife and sons, and was a member of the martial caste... Was it his several defeats in life? Forced to settle with an inferior woman and a defeat from a Superior Army?

Socrates believed that if he made young men doubt themselves and their conviction he could spark thinking in them.
It produced tyrannical psychologies, so he changed his mind when he returned from war to discover what these youths had become.
When he was off to war he had come across some Thracian, Zalmoxis, that introduced him to monotheism, probably Zoroastrianism. That's why he is considered an apostle of Abrahamism. That and Plato's influence and obsession with him.
Plato's idealism was perfect for Abrahamism that sanctified ideas and separated their perfection from the physical.

We can't know why he decided to submit to the will of Athenian justice when his supporters could have saved him, but at the time being ostracized and losing your citizenship was a big deal - like losing your identity.
A man without a city was not an individual. He was a nobody. But we can assume that at his age he wanted to make a point, since death was inevitable. We can't know if he suffered some ailments or what his family situation was like - legend has it that his wife was a bitch and that is why he spent most of his time in the agora.....but that's a Greek thing that continued up to my father's time. Men went to coffee houses to hang around with other men, playing backgammon or cards and discussing politics.

Satyr wrote:

Socrates believed that if he made young men doubt themselves and their conviction he could spark thinking in them.
It produced tyrannical psychologies, so he changed his mind when he returned from war to discover what these youths had become.

Makes me wonder why he even wanted to spark thinking in them in the first place, instead of allowing it to emerge naturally.

Satyr wrote:

When he was off to war he had come across some Thracian, Zalmoxis, that introduced him to monotheism, probably Zoroastrianism. That's why he is considered an apostle of Abrahamism. That and Plato's influence and obsession with him.
Plato's idealism was perfect for Abrahamism that sanctified ideas and separated their perfection from the physical.

During his travels to Egypt, Plato might have also been influenced by Jeremiah, one of the prophets of the bible. I still wonder what inspired them to rebel, if things were relatively healthy. Perhaps they had a higher standard for their pride, which we wouldn't even be able to understand given how much we've declined, arguably as a result of their idealism.

Satyr wrote:

We can't know why he decided to submit to the will of Athenian justice when his supporters could have saved him, but at the time being ostracized and losing your citizenship was a big deal - like losing your identity.
A man without a city was not an individual. He was a nobody. But we can assume that at his age he wanted to make a point, since death was inevitable. We can't know if he suffered some ailments or what his family situation was like - legend has it that his wife was a bitch and that is why he spent most of his time in the agora.....but that's a Greek thing that continued up to my father's time. Men went to coffee houses to hang around with other men, playing backgammon or cards and discussing politics.  

Why refuse to blame himself for his fate, when it was the established order for so long, and he clearly brought it on himself? Perhaps he was already seduced by monotheism and its ability to shift responsibility away from the self. Yeah, his wife was a bitch, but exceptionally bitchy even by Greek standards, and the fact that he needed to justify settling down with her as some "challenge", reveals he was already infected by nihilism, turning his shame into pride.

Impulso Oscuro wrote:

Satyr wrote:

Socrates believed that if he made young men doubt themselves and their conviction he could spark thinking in them.
It produced tyrannical psychologies, so he changed his mind when he returned from war to discover what these youths had become.

Makes me wonder why he even wanted to spark thinking in them in the first place, instead of allowing it to emerge naturally.

Men want to see the fruits of their labour.
It isn't always certain that progress will occur naturally. Athens was already in decline and he saw what Plato later also appreciated about the truth about Democracy.
Plato admirer Sparta and his republic expresses a rejection of the masses having the wisdom to elect good leaders.

Impulso Oscuro wrote:

Why refuse to blame himself for his fate, when it was the established order for so long, and he clearly brought it on himself? Perhaps he was already seduced by monotheism and its ability to shift responsibility away from the self. Yeah, his wife was a bitch, but exceptionally bitchy even by Greek standards, and the fact that he needed to justify settling down with her as some "challenge", reveals he was already infected by nihilism, turning his shame into pride.

Yes, he saw what Socrates eventually saw, that the rabble needs an authoritarian totalitarian leader....including a god.
The mases need superstition and occultism. They demand a fahter-figure in the sky, and as reproduction increasingly becomes guaranteed then the masses of mediocrity need Abrahamic-like lies...just to cope.
This is why Christianity became popular among the slaves, first, and remains popular among the lower races and the average man, and women....
Socrates believed he could liberate Athenian youth form his times superstitions, and he was wrong....because once liberated they became decadent like they are becoming in the States.
This was Judaism's appeal....to the lowliest of the low, at first, and to human existential anxieties. It gave them a mythos that raised them from the low to the high - inverting.
This is also how nihilistic defensiveness works in general, whether it takes the form of Marxism, secular, or Abrahamic, religious, spiritual. It theoretically, abstractly, linguistically inverts hierarchies.  

This was the lesson Socrates learned...when you liberate the midcore and place them on top, he becomes a tyrant, venting his resentment.
Liberate a slave and he becomes a cruel master, avenging himself upon his past, and all that he suffered because of it.
A philosopher, a master, an aristocrat is born, and then cultivated, i.e., enhanced.

It's a cruel truth. Hard to accept.

Plato expressed this truth Socrates, supposedly, came to realize, through his philosopher king.
A leader who must be forced to lead, because of his rare combination of traits which makes him reluctant to dominate.

These wannabe philosophers prove the opposite of what they attempt to declare...that they are no philosophers and no leaders, but needy spirits that covet greatness because they are not great. Charlatans...con artists....marketing gurus, selling themselves as a cult of personality.
If you've noticed most of them worship some icon as an idol. This alone tells you a lot.
Religious spirits dram of becoming priests...or religious leaders.

This is the psychology of the chosen...to be chosen by an icon is to be its earthly representative, his continuance, his tangible expression....his christened one.
They always express themselves in grandiose ways, promising great powers, rewards etc.....showing no humility before the cosmos....before the gods that represent the cosmos....hubris the Greeks called it.
I mean just visit ILP....some are till active there. It's a psychosis.....becoming more arrogant in times like these...end of times, end of an empire times. It's when this psychosis comes forth into the squares to announce itself openly, sensing a weakness to exploit.

See, this is what happened to Socrates when he spread doubt among the youth of Athens.
They became arrogant.
He mistakenly assumed philosophers could be made by liberating them from superstition. Not the case.
The manimal needs to be kept on a leash. A totalitarian, authoritarian one-god.

Impulso Oscuro wrote:

Satyr wrote:

Socrates believed that if he made young men doubt themselves and their conviction he could spark thinking in them.
It produced tyrannical psychologies, so he changed his mind when he returned from war to discover what these youths had become.

Makes me wonder why he even wanted to spark thinking in them in the first place, instead of allowing it to emerge naturally.

..because he’d be waiting forever/for godot.. a master, finding a worthy pupil or adversary.

Same thing happened to Marxists. Their master had put it in their mind that the masses would spontaneous rise up and overthrow their capitalist exploiters.
But it never happened.
So, small groups of communist intellectuals, the intelligentsia, took it upon themselves to use any means necessary to make the masses rise up.

We see it in practice in the US where they've converted class warfare into race warfare.
It's no longer the oppressive capitalists but Caucasians, falling in line with Kabballah narratives.
Negroes and lesser races were always ignorant pawns in wars they did not fully understand.

Satyr wrote:

Same thing happened to Marxists. Their master had put it in their mind that the mases would spontaneous rise up and overthrow their capitalist exploiters.
But it never happened.
So, small groups of communist intellectuals, the intelligentsia, took it upon themselves to use any means necessary to make the masses rise up.

We see it in practice in the US where they've converted class warfare into race warfare.
It's no longer the oppressive capitalists but Caucasians, falling in line with Kabballah narratives.
Negroes and lesser races were always ignorant pawns in wars they did not fully

The past cannot be undone.

Stupidity wasn’t a factor in my analysis tho, but the internet does breed contempt, from the lesser masses, lesser, meaning, those with less power/authority/voice.

"Lesser" meaning less intelligent, less self-aware...with less genetic potentials.
Power begins with power over oneself, and this requires honest self-evaluations...Know Thyself.
Then one can proceed - having learned how to be objective in regards to oneself - to evaluate his objective, and finally what it takes to achieve it.
A triad of Objective analysis.

Before all that can begin....the mind must cleanse itself of all the ideological crap that corrupts its understanding and its words, by methodically reattaching words back to their original referents - when and if possible; if it is impossible, due to some limitation or due to centuries of baggage having buried a concept, ro due to the concept's abstractive essence, one must leave aside and return to it later as a addendum to the cleaning world done.
So I have the real, the ideal. The physical the ideological and the metaphysical.
Metaphysics = foundation
Physis = middle world, starting point
Ideology = motive, movement upward and onward - objective

_
Not.. even.. close.

Hey, Wokeist, if I have two beans and then I add two more beans, what does that make? “A very small casserole.” [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

— Edward Dutton (@jollyheretic) [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

But Desperate Degenerates must believe that the #2, or the #1, which 2 is founded on, has an ontology.
Some can then laugh it all away as being meaningless...or that since the #1 is meaningless, i.e., there is no ontological 1, then nil must have an ontology.
All of them knowingly or not, worshipping the nil.

If nothing is certain then all is uncertain - uniform certainty achieved.
If nothing is provable, absolutely and finally, then all is unprovable.
If no complete, final, answer is possible then all answers are incomplete, ergo all is impossible and possible.

What do I call my worship of the absolute nil?
Skepticism.

An upgrade from what I called my worship of the absolute one, faith.

Plausible deniability replacing plausible undeniability.

Power of Nil finds its roots in the struggle to maintain life within existence.
An organism preserves self by using itself as a standard.
This is also the root of identity.
"I am that which I am not"

Let's go a step further and seek in this negation the method of philosophical exploration.
We begin not by claiming to know what is but by claiming what it is not, before proceeding to clarify from this that which most probably is.

Bottom<>Up reasoning.
Nihilism begins with a declaration of what is absolutely so.
Top<>Bottom emoting
Moving from this declared all-encompassing, final, complete solution backwards, integrating into it what is perceived, dismissing what cannot be integrated, and concealing all contradictions with mysticism and obscurantism.

A nihilistic psychosis will always assume that all perspectives begin, like their own, with a final, complete, absolute, solution, and, again like them, that all use the same methods to validate what they have no way of knowing.
So, they assume that everyone declares an absolute, and then arbitrarily uses reality to justify this final complete solution to all.

Here the Know thyself is a crucial factor corrupting not only perception of self but through it of everyone else.

Obsessive about subjectivity indicates that no objectivity is accepted, because the individual is incapable of not believing what is convenient, or self-flattering, or emotionally gratifying.
Self is the standard and so if this perception of self is self-decieving, over-under-etimating oneself then this standard will warp judgments of other.

So, this is why I've been accused to not doubting my own positions, of imposing them on others - because I don't tolerate idiocy - or that I am proposing a complete final solution to everything, when all I am proposing is what I think is superior.

Remaining intolerant of idiocy prevents me wasting my time and prevents the deterioration of all discussion to infantile posturing, mind-games, etc.
See ILP for an example of what happens when tolerance is the ideal and all sorts of retardation is allowed to express itself.
The example I use to clarify with a allegory is this:
Imagine a conversation, a get-togehter, reserved for adults allowing children to participate freely.
How much dialogue will rise above the level of childishness?
Will any mature agreement be possible?

Now replace "children" with insanity.
Let's relocate our imaginary mature dialogue to a mental institution where the inmates are allowed to participate.
That is ILP.
That will not be KTS, even though the adult section has relocated to Hyperborean and this forum is reserved for more relaxed, open conversations.
Still, insanity is not to be tolerated, because it destroys everything it comes in contact with.
See the US as another example of an all-incusive participation that has gone awry.

It is why the US is not a true democracy, but only in appearance.
No elite would allow the masses of insane uneducated to determine its fate.
Marketing and politics have attained an unprecedented sophistication offering the ability to manipulable psychologies without them even realizing they are being manipulated.
Watch the BBC documentary Century of Self for further insights.

The problem with washing it all away, is that one sacrifices themselves along with the flood. But after the great destructive catharsis, what comes afterward? Ah, creation just complicates things further, and many choose not to concern themselves with it at all.

Nihilism's logical aim is death. Eventually, after a long enough period of time spent in self-deceit, self-hatred, denial of reality, the true purpose begins to gain momentum as well as the true essence of those who construct thier identities around these motives, are revealed as destroyers. Power for power's sake, action for action's sake, belief for belief's sake. The self suspended in the abyss.

Hypothesis 1 = 10% probability
Hypothesis 2 = 80% probability
Hypothesis 3 = 1% probability
Hypothesis 4 = 20% probability

Probability established empirically, based on first-hanmd and second-hand experiences.

The Desperate Degenerate concludes all are equally probable, because none is absolute - none is omnipotent, omniscient, ergo all is equally wrong.
Anyone who claims superiority is claiming absolute certainty, secretly desiring to impose his hypothesis on the others.
The absence of absolute knowledge/understanding is a "validation" of his desired hypothesis to be made universal.
That all are equally wrong. All deserve equal consideration.
He wants all hypothesis to receive equal respect, without even trying to increase their probability.
All forms of hierarchy are anathema for him, in relation to his underlying intent, i.e., his objective, which isn't the pursuit of truth.
His objective is social and so he adopts feminine methods, since the social - human relationships - is what females care about the most.
Parity in and through the nil.

The True Believer psychology. Absence of self and identiy means the reinvention of oneself into an artificial ideological surrogate self. Leftist psychology; immersing oneself into collective identity. The fervor of the group sustains the individual mind, subsumes it, provides for it. The "Queen Bee", feeding all the members of the hive with what they cannot give themselves.

Whenever I watch anything coming from American media or Hollywood I enter knowing that it is a propaganda piece.
When it sells the alternative it is to undermine it, ridicule it, make it incomprehensible.

The Matrix, is an example.
It appears revolutionary urging the audience to question its world views, but then it inserts all these not so subtle Jewish memes, as if by accident, and it redirects the audience, such as with the Architect scene where the "anomaly" in the perfection of the system, or of existence itself is identified as choice...no love. Irrational.  
Love corrupting choice.

Biblical.

Good point. Yes. The psychological conditioning of inserting feelings of self-empowerment into the viewer, stimulating thier egos, while keeping them in line with the authority standards, its truth and ideals.

Its how the modern believes they are 'free thinking' or autonomous, by the definition of what they were indoctrinated with.

Under the pretence of intellectual integrity, an honest interest in reality, and using skepticism as a cover of his true intentions, the typical nihilist uses the absent absolute - absent indivisible, immutable, whole, complete, singularity - as an excuse to arbitrarily dismiss anything that threatens his sensitivities.
Eventually the absence of this absolute thing convinces him that the absolute nil is the truth.

His "stringent standards" makes him unable to accept any hypothesis as being superior to any other, yet he lives his life as if there are indisputable facts he associates with absolutes - equating certainty with absoluteness because he often uses the term to emphasise his certainty.

What is indisputable is always what is unthreatening whereas what is threatening can never meet the challenge of his selective skepticism.
A hypocrite.

Anxiety is the common response to mortality; inspiration is the rare response, channeling the affects of the dying process by becoming in sync with the creative process. A redistribution of the accumulated negative entropic energy into creation.

What is error?
An indication that a correction must be made – an adaptation, an adjustment. The degree of the error – its severity, its negative consequences, its contradictions of what was expected – indicates the degree of the error, and the degree of a required adjustment.
Error: Dissonance between idea/ideal and real; contradiction of the subjective by an object/objective.

Accusing an-other – the other – of contradicting itself, of the error you're dealing with, is an attempt to absolve yourself of responsibility and a certain way to remain trapped in error. Even the other's error necessitates an accurate assessment of intent – if it is a willful error or a product of indoctrination.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]..concealed as a one.

Nihilism is the challenge of self-consciousness, not the end point. The quality of the mind is determined by how well they deal with life's challenges and the suffering of meaninglessness. In philosophy, the challenge is to overcome nihilism because it is what awareness is tested by, like heat against metal, it will either become stronger and more resilient or break or warp. The philosophical intellect is subject to the same evolutionary processes as any thing else, those who perish, and those who thrive.

What can health, and beauty be if not a measure of adaptability to reality.
Truth is knowing this reality.

Using a herd, proxies, to hide behind so as to be protected from the consequences of being unhealthy, can only survive behind these proxy linguistic walls - sheltering.
But, for how long?