Man as a system

Laconian wrote:

The earlier authors are verified classics. Their value is "proven" by numerous secondary literature on them.

Their value is proven by the quantity of scholarly commentary devoted to them?

Quote :

Quote :

What course should humanity take if there is no God to command it? What course, given the warning that the Feminization of Mankind represents?

Read Sloterdijk, Heidegger and Spengler, (instead of Nietzsche, Weininger and Schopenhauer).

So you don't have any ideas. Thought not.

Stick to regurgitating the words of other men. It suits you.

reasonvemotion wrote:

sounds very much like what was written below

Not really. He'd have to be offering his own creation rather than a collage of a half-dozen other peoples.

The masculine imposes order. The feminine is the vessel of the masculine. In this way, Laconian could be likened to a harlot; a vessel of orders from many sources..

Get it?

apaosha wrote:

Why hate weakness? Why persecute a victim? Why burn and flay the herd?
Because I live in the modern age, where weakness is protected and indulged, where the victim is always sympathized with, where the green pastures are becoming universal.

I think this is the essence with you. Satyr is more relaxed on this forum. He was like that on the other forums. You make no difference. You're always in attack mode. I can kind of relate to that. I was once more a wolf myself. I am a vegetarian today. Nietzsche is more of a mind-expanding drug than anything else. Be careful. He is not to be taken literally (in all cases). I know you want to impress your idol.

I liked this part:

Quote :

My concern is the present and the future. Not for myself, because I will be who I am, I cannot be anything else. But for others like me; I am narrowly altruistic. That narrowness is the heart of the issue here. To further the interests of my kind before all else is all that matters to me. I am no universalist, or even a humanist.

Indeed, I love mankind.

Thereby you imply that you see in Mo or me or whoever else on here at least some similarities to you. That's a good start. Community building. I mean it's the internet, everything moves slower. Give us some time. When we come on here, to show ourselves. I mean this doesn't work so fast, like with the psychobabble of Freud. "I tell you straight to your face that you are a motherfucker." (His oedipus complex.)

I saw that deleted post. I don't want to fill your vessel, sorry. What is the future of mankind?

Suffice it to say: I asked you questions. But the answers to them must come from you.

There is a split occurring. I am quite definitely headed in one direction.

Quote :

Thereby you imply that you see in Mo or me or whoever else on here at least some similarities to you.

Did I say that? What did I say? Read what I wrote.

I love mankind for it's potential to deliver those rare few. Quality.

Quote :

Community building.

Community building? Really?

This is you masturbating again. Fapfapfap.

apaosha wrote:

Community building? Really?

This is you masturbating again. Fapfapfap.

So no community building.. Okay. This must be stressful, to be in fighting mode all the time. No time for recreation ever. I remember those days. Like I said: I can relate. But I am 33 now, no more in my early till mid or even later 20's.

This isn't exactly a forum dedicated to socializing, fag. But at least you've made your priorities clear.

apaosha wrote:

This isn't exactly a forum dedicated to socializing, fag. But at least you've made your priorities clear.

Then what is it dedicated to? Isn't socializing the only real basis to get to know thyself, or the other? I mean all this fighting, is nice but quite tiring and easily to hide behind, calling others names to display masculinity. This to me shows nothing about you, who the apaosha is.

I tried answering your questions however, since you are the boss on here and I am glad about the effort you put into this forum.

Would you consider all, universally to be human?

Yes.

Would you possess a criteria that the other must meet before they would be considered worthy of the privileged designation: human?

No.

Would you possess an even stricter criteria that the other must meet before they could be honoured with the designation: my people?

I don't have a people.

Would you, could you, love yourself enough to see that designation as an honour?

I don't understand this.What designation?

Would you, could you, be sufficiently a man to redeem the woman in woman?

This "redeem" I don't understand. Maybe you can formulate the question differently.

Would you champion inequality, redeem hatred, speak the truth even when it wounds, even when it wounds you?

Yes. Again "redeem" I don't fully understand by the dictionary.

Would you invite the worlds hatred and repugnance in pursuit of your own sense of justice?

Yes.

Would you, could you, be rapaciously selfish (for your self or for your people) and take only what you want from the world and give nothing back?

Yes.

Would you ever see the world as not something to be saved or cured - but enjoyed?

Yes. Would you?

Would you ever admire greatness rather than resenting it?

Yes.

Would you ever hate weakness rather than sympathizing with it?

Yes.

Would you ever persecute a victim because he deserved it - for allowing himself to be a victim?

No. I think I wouldn't "persecute" anybody. (I had to look up the term "persecute" and it has different german translations.)

Would you ever pursue greatness for the simple reason that you cannot bear that there are others who are greater than you?

Yes, I think this is the only reason to do anything.

Would you ever burn and flay the herd because you are a wolf and you eat only lamb's flesh?

Like I said: I am vegetarian now.

Would you willingly court danger and violence - and thrive to spite them?

Too many words I have to look up in this question: "court", "thrive" and "spite". So in either way I understand the question too vaguely to answer it.

Quote :

Then what is it dedicated to? Isn't socializing the only real basis to get to know thyself, or the other? I mean all this fighting, is nice but quite tiring and easily to hide behind, calling others names to display masculinity. This to me shows nothing about you, who the apaosha is.

Know Thyself. Nothing in Excess.

The expression and discussion of ideas in a manner which is not censored by cowardice. Read Ascetic's Guidelines Concerning Insults: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

There is a difference between this and socializing as I use the term, which is just the search for entertainment in others. Socializing of course will occur here and is not discouraged as such, but it is incidental and not the primary goal. That is why we are often silent: we say nothing when we have nothing to say.
Often there are periods of silence followed by great outbursts of activity: the dam bursts. You must have a build-up before you can have an overflowing.

Honesty is valued here. And directness. As well as a willingness to hurt or wound the other for the sake of truth, or just to win. It is expected of you to be strong enough to bear that burden and thrive under it.

Incidentally, I realise your first language is German. Please ask people what they mean if you do not understand them. Much of your difficulties may arise from the language barrier.

Quote :

Would you consider all, universally to be human?

Yes.

Would you possess a criteria that the other must meet before they would be considered worthy of the privileged designation: human?

No.

So a dog is a human?

Being more specific: Is a retard a human? A chimp? A negro?

What does it mean to be human?

Quote :

Would you possess an even stricter criteria that the other must meet before they could be honoured with the designation: my people?

I don't have a people.

Why not?

Do you not know who you are, and do you not see similarities in others, others with whom you could identify with and consider of your kind?

Quote :

Would you, could you, love yourself enough to see that designation as an honour?

I don't understand this.What designation?

I mean that were you to have a sense of Self, an identity.... that this identity could be compared with other people..... and from that comparison you see similarities and bonds - of identity.
Therefore, if you loved yourself, you would see it as an honour towards others to liken them to yourself.

Could you love the idea of a people - your people?

Quote :

Would you, could you, be sufficiently a man to redeem the woman in woman?

This "redeem" I don't understand. Maybe you can formulate the question differently.

To redeem the woman: to be man enough that your woman can be a woman towards you. To be sufficiently masculine to bring out the feminine, and only the feminine, in a woman.

"Redeem" because these days, with feminism, femininity is also demonized.

Quote :

Would you champion inequality, redeem hatred, speak the truth even when it wounds, even when it wounds you?

Yes. Again "redeem" I don't fully understand by the dictionary.

"Redeem" hatred: again because the total rejection that hatred represents has also been demonized.
Would you, in other words, be intolerant? In every meaning of that word, as necessary.

Quote :

Would you ever see the world as not something to be saved or cured - but enjoyed?

Yes. Would you?

Yes.

Quote :

Would you ever persecute a victim because he deserved it - for allowing himself to be a victim?

No. I think I wouldn't "persecute" anybody. (I had to look up the term "persecute" and it has different german translations.)

Okay, in other words again:
Would you see it as the victims responsibility for being the victim, or would you see it as his attackers responsibility for exploiting a weakness he perceived in the victim?

Who is responsible for victimhood?

Quote :

Would you ever pursue greatness for the simple reason that you cannot bear that there are others who are greater than you?

Yes, I think this is the only reason to do anything.

Then why do you so often submit when challenged?

Quote :

Would you ever burn and flay the herd because you are a wolf and you eat only lamb's flesh?

Like I said: I am vegetarian now.

In other words:

Do you find sheeple repugnant?

Quote :

Would you willingly court danger and violence - and thrive to spite them?

Too many words I have to look up in this question: "court", "thrive" and "spite". So in either way I understand the question too vaguely to answer it.

Would you willingly put yourself in danger for the opportunity to improve yourself? Would you see danger as a challenge which inspires you?

Quote :

Laconian:

And what is a male to you?

To be able to give a timeless definition of manhood, one that applies to men in any situation in life and from any culture would require simplicity.

So I put forth as the basis for being a man, (in all times and from all cultures), virtue, character, competence and excellence.

Although, it would take men to live it deliberately, to enable them, to make it a reality.

apaosha wrote:

The expression and discussion of ideas in a manner which is not censored by cowardice. Read Ascetic's Guidelines Concerning Insults: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

I am not granted access to reading this. It says: "Sorry, but only users granted special access can read topics in this forum."

reasonvemotion wrote:

it is certain some may never achieve it.

You added that later.

And what is an ideal female to you?

I was able to see the "insult guidelines" now. Again: I don't see anyone on here as my opponent. As a mod, I understand that you are curious about anybody coming on here. But why would anybody come here? Mostly because they somehow heard of this place and feel some kind of connection to this place. Want to contribute to this community. Not to cause trouble, I don't think. Of course to argue, to present better arguments. To advance this place or "the discourse" in general, but mostly to live and learn and let others benefit also, from their knowledge. Most people search refuge, a community, a bubble, a shelter, a cave, from a world that is brutal and cold.

Quote :

I was able to see the "insult guidelines" now. Again: I don't see anyone on here as my opponent. As a mod, I understand that you are curious about anybody coming on here. But why would anybody come here? Mostly because they somehow heard of this place and feel some kind of connection to this place. Want to contribute to this community. Not to cause trouble, I don't think. Of course to argue, to present better arguments. To advance this place or "the discourse" in general, but mostly to live and learn and let others benefit also, from their knowledge. Most people search refuge, a community, a bubble, a shelter, a cave, from a world that is brutal and cold.

That is the difference between here and places like ILP. This not a shelter, in the sense that it's a microcosm of the greater macrocosm; a place to socialize and escape from reality. Not all are welcome.

Know Thyself.

What can be offered here is only yourself. Because there are differences among people, a hierarchy develops. Thus, what is offered is offered on different levels to different people.

That's what the groups are for. Varvaroi for where anything goes. Perioeci, like you, for the common citizens, the rabble. Homoioi for the nobility, whose insights are sought out and privileged, for whom the reservation of the Adyton is set aside where they can converse peacefully without vulgar interruptions.

Ones status can be raised or lowered at request, by sponsor or through punishment for misbehaviour. The decision is left to the Prytanes: me or Satyr.
We've been cautious lately about raising new people because of that business with the pedophile a while ago.

But to address your main point; your desire to belong here. What connection do you feel to this place? Why here and not ILP or PNow, where you would be more suited?

apaosha wrote:

What connection do you feel to this place?

Satyr is a philosopher. One of the last ones I know. Who on ILP or PN would you call a philosopher? Name me one and I shall read their posts.

Quote :

Why here and not ILP or PNow, where you would be more suited?

Satyr just wrote this (in an answer in the love-topic):

"If I cannot even speak my mind here, then what is lefty?
If you cannot be honest here, then where can you be so?
If my tongue is kept still, due to the same social conventions it is silenced out there, then what use do I have for this place?"

This is my agenda, to move the Adyton outside of the backrooms, so that all can benefit, if they wish to. But also to further the discourse. I am not interested in becoming a Homoioi, if you consider me rabble than so be it. I haven't seen much of the quality the Adyton is supposed to contain outside of it (apart from Satyr's posts).

This is the sort of thing that would be impossible today, because of fear of being thought “gay.”
This is the wrestling scene from Women in Love, D H Lawrence.


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


Everything came naturally to our forebears, it came from their life experience, but their life experience was so different from today. They were not constantly shielded from danger or risk taking. They had so many ways available to them to express their manly spirit. They had manly rites of passage. They had been tested by wars, famines, depressions. To be a man is not the result of acquiring the sort of “how to”, just as this applies to a woman. It is gained through trials and tribulations. In a world that is “safe” and “nice” modern, is it possible for manliness anymore. Except, perhaps, through revolt against all the modern world..

Please note that all of the problems have only been made possible by the cooperation of men by their not being manly enough to say “no” to women.

reasonvemotion wrote:

it is certain some may never achieve it.

You added that later.

Oh, is that not allowed on this forum. OMG have I broken a rule or something, as there seems to be so many of them here and the men can be so nasty, for no reason at all

And what is an ideal female to you?


Well I have shown you mine.

It's your turn to show me yours.

What is YOUR ideal female.

Adyton should be thought of as a Hellenic Symposium; an enclosed setting within which friends gather to express themselves on any topic in whatever manner they see fit.
It is an exclusive club.

There, the politically-correct methods of censorship are kept outside, so that topics can be covered in ways not permitted any place else, or that would receive so much negative attention, from the mediocre, as to flood them into the great sea of uniformity.
It is also a place for exchanging information.

Some topics I placed there, I've subsequently posted in the Agora section.

reasonvemotion wrote:

What is YOUR ideal female.[/b]

This is a good question. I haven't met her yet.

The way I see it in the decline: one has to work with what is available. I believe in education. Some females are capable to learn. My companionship has to do with either people who wish to improve themselves or who were brought up in a good home and keep a close relation to their parents and brothers/sisters.

Satyr wrote:

Some topics I placed there, I've subsequently posted in the Agora section.

Thanks. What was politcally incorrect yesterday, maybe more tolerable today. There are always pioneers out there who popularize these memes. Race for example. The second world war from first hand sources, rather than commentary. All this becomes more and more available and popular.

reasonvemotion wrote:

What is YOUR ideal female.

The word "education" missed the mark a little in my above anwer to your question. The German word "Erziehung" is between discipline and education. Ascesis may be another more suitable term. The female should learn from males. Let herself be taught. Be a good student.

I am still troubled with Sloterdijk's progressivist tendency (as of lately)(as well as his liberal position on race.). I like his pure analysis a lot better. I don't share his opinions all the time. "You must change your life" is like N's "WTP": a pure advocacy of this "priestly type" (Will over Reason and Passion). Hubbard also. Schopenhauer as well. ("World as Will and...") The Will as the driving force gets us in as much trouble as passion. "You must change your life" is self-help literature. Essentially the academic Encyclopedia of it, excluding the esoterics/new agers, who wear these labels in a too accepting way.

With Reason on top, the future becomes the most uncertain, but also: life opens up. "Act as so the number of your possibilities increases."-ethical imperative by Heinz von Foerster.

What fascinates me most with Sloterdijk is his thinking from Space(s). This is a unique perspective. Even Heidegger's time focus may lead to Nihilism. Heidegger inspired Sloterdijk actually with a little piece on the space(s) question (where do we live?). The forest glade as a metaphor for Aletheia looks kind of like the reverse Platonic Cave, but it is actually meant to be the same. If we think of the forest, the trees/woods, as the subconscious, the "ocean of being" or whatever: we need to chop, to cut, to fight free an open space for ourselves, to let some light in. In my opinion this is also where "Gelassenheit" (Heidegger) comes in. A relaxing. This is also Aletheia. Aletheia is not an extra truth like Veritas. Aletheia is the truth that is always just THERE, but invisible to us, because of all the trees in the way. This is why the forest glade is necessary. A place to rest, to relax, to take one's time to make sense of it all. Reason/Knowledge/Wisdom is always there, among all these "trees of the subconscious", in the forest, we are in the middle of. But our action must be the chopping and cutting free of a space for us, to let some light in, in this otherwise too dense world. Aletheia to me (inspired by a text by Sloterdijk on it) is the act of laying open (bare): the truth.