Sloterdijk

Sloterdijk wants to assign the human being on the one hand like Spengler either only to one space, namely the nature (environment), or several different spaces, namely the cultures, on the other hand like Heidegger only to one space, namely the world, i.e. to understand it as an "being-in-the-world", and therefore to assign only one society to the world, what Luhmann has also done in the context of his theory of society. According to Luhmann, since the beginning of the modern age - by which only the occidental modern age can be meant, which, however, remains unmentioned by Luhmann as well as after him by Sloterdijk (!!!) - there is only one society: the "world society". According to Luhmann's system theory, before modernity there were societies with forms of differentiation by (a) segmentation (cf. descent, genealogy, filiation, tradition and the like), (b) center/periphery, (c) stratification, but since modernity there is only one society - the "world society" - with the form of differentiation by (d) function.

Luhmann and Sloterdijk interpret our occidental modernity as something it is not, or at least not yet: a "human modernity". This interpretation of Luhmann and Sloterdijk (if he does not simply follow Luhmann) and the concomitant alignment of "humanity modernity" and "world society" are to be understood as an eve-landing (westernization) of the world, an eve-landing of all people. The "modernity of mankind" and the "world society" are projections of occidental people on all people and the world, therefore they have nothing to do with reality, if one disregards certain institutions, which meanwhile spread their rules over the globe, although they are occidental institutions too, even if they are accepted by non occidental people. The subject is just only relatively valueable. As long as the science of history cannot prove the "modernity of mankind" and the "world society", these two occidental "constructs", representing more wish than reality, are not yet counted among the historical facts. If in Sloterdijk's spherology the foam is the metaphor for the very complex society according to Luhmann's system theory and if according to Luhmann's system theory it is necessary to reduce complexity or to sink into the entropic (chaotic) complexity, then Sloterdijk's conclusion from his trilogy of spheres can only be that it is necessary to reduce the foam or to sink into the entropic (chaotic) foam.

But the point is that both Luhmann and Sloterdijk - Sloterdijk in particular - repeatedly let it be known that they also judge it in the same way as I do, so that my criticism would not even be necessary if there were not something like "political correctness" at work here.

But please do not get me wrong: I understand that they do it this way because if they did not, they would never have become known worldwide, and almost all of us had to miss their magnificent philosophy.

I have already said that Sloterdijk is wrong by making the world and all human beings occidental. In connection with "all humans" and "occidentals" Sloterdijk does not always use certain words semantically correctly: "antiquity", "middle ages", "modern ages", "culture", "civilization", "modernity" and others. I choose here as an example the use of the word "modernity": Sloterdijk uses the word "modernity" in the sense of a "modernity of mankind", although he means and can only mean the modernity of the Occidentals. The Occidentals have indeed tried to bring their modernity closer to all others, namely to the Non-Occidentals, but they have only rarely succeeded in doing so, and their prosperity-enhancing technology alone has not been sufficient to successfully pass on their modernity, the basis of which is their culture with all its values and norms, to the Non-Occidentals. It is still the case today that the Non-Occidentals want to have the technology invented by the Occidentals, because it brings high prosperity, but they strictly reject everything else invented by the Occidentals. The Non-Occidentals want the prosperity of the "devil" whom they hate. There is no mankind consisting only of occidental people, consequently there is also no modernity of a mankind consisting only of occidental people.

The absence of accessible frontiers places us in a Behavioural sink situation.

Cultural uniformity is a by-products of cross-contaminaiton - cultures cannot remain separate and distinct because of the earth's containment and technologies shrinking spaces - boundaries can no longer prevent ideological contagions from spreading.
Nihilism is an ideological contagion - a memetic virus. It's utility lies in tis detachment from reality - offering opportunity to construct whatever the mind can imagine. Their only criterion is cohesiveness - it must be self-consistent - and hedonism - it must be seductive, offering pleasing possibilities to alleviate existential anxiety.

I've approached this from a organic - Spenglerean - perspective, offering diagnostics - like Nietzsche began to do but, in my view, did not go deep enough. He had issues with Christianity because of his father...so, in a way, his work is a rebellion against his dead father, ands his own Christian upbringing, seeking for a more noble father-figure. It attracts boys who are in the same predicament - rebelling against authority - i.e., paternalism, their own father's failings, or his absence...

This is a mental disease - an [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] - and there's nowhere to quarantine oneself, or flee into uninfected nature - it is global.
My positions on a [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] alludes to the psychological species emerging from this ideological environment - global zeitgeist.
We are entering a [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], a.k.a., Dark Age.

Modernity - starting with the French Revolution - leads to postmodernism - if it remains true to tis own principles.
Modernism is seductive to those who are beginning to realize that they are not genetically fit - using biological definitions - but are unfit - and that without social systems they would never have been born nor survived.
This is the first realization of self-cosnciuosness which necessitates the defensiveness of nihilism to protect the ego.
Dutton calls them "spiteful mutants"; I call them [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] - essentially we are referring to the hordes of accumulating and compounding mutations that begin to despise themselves - via their past, and all that made them possible - and express this self-hatred with self-deciet and nature-hating, reality annulling semiotics; all methods of self-medication, self-narcosis.

The "modernity" of the "western" - occidental - is infested by a messianic parasite which urges it to make its disease universal - global.
This is why I mention Messianism.
Founded on nihilistic binaries: good/bad, paradise/hell, utopia/dystopia, salvation/damnation.
Like selfish genes selfish memes hijack the organism's processes, for tis own purposes: self-maintenance and self-propagaiton.
To put it ideologically, the nihilistic ideology/dogma - meme - is programmed to be imposed on the world, otherwise it perishes - like capitalism must grow, constantly produce more wealth, otherwise it atrophies.
Nihilism cannot survive outside brains, because it is anti-rela, anti-nature. It needs a host - a proxy.
Nihilism is impotent beyond the minds it infects - dominates - because it is entirely abstract with no external referents. It's only avenue to power is via hearts and minds, so it must spread as much as possible - it must proselytize, or integrate the masses into tis principles; its "magical force" is entirely dependent on exploiting and manipulating psychology, so it needs organisms with sophisticated neurological systems to infect.
Nihilism is entirely semiotic....and cannot exist without symbols/words - semiotics are its DNA.

See the conventional definition of nihilism.
It negates, or describes a world void of human abstractions that have never nor can ever exist outside human brains. For the infected psyche the world is "negative" because it lacks what the human brain fabricated and expects to exist.
One-God, universal morality, cosmic meaning, i.e., purpose, intent, motive...In fact if these did exist independently from human minds then experienced existence would cease and life would be improbable.

Satyr wrote:

The absence of accessible frontiers places us in a Behavioural sink situation.

Cultural uniformity is a by-products of cross-contaminaiton - cultures cannot remain separate and distinct because of the earth's containment and technologies shrinking spaces - boundaries can no longer prevent ideological contagions from spreading.

"Cultures cannot remain separate and distinct" only if (and because!) the history of the occidental culture - consistently thought to the end - is extended into the infinite space (because it should and must become according to the Ursymbol [see Spengler's concept of "Ursymbol"]). The globalists are westerners and want to dominate the globe and thus all people forever. Thus, all rhetoric is geared towards this. This does not mean, however, that this will actually remain so.

Moreover, one should not forget that Islam (part of the magical culture [see Spengler's concept of the "magical soul"]) and other civilizations (India, China) are still active and do not want to be westernized. Even Slavs and Hungarians do not or not really want to be westernized. Black Africans and others also do not want to be westernized. Well, they all have - as a people - not much to say, so that one can pass over them. But that still doesn't mean that globalism (which, as I said, is western!) will prevail forever.

When there will be no more money in or from the West for the non-westerners, it will become uncomfortable, very uncomfortable.

I also think that the attempt to mix the western peoples is counterproductive and will finally only ensure that the "Great Chaos", which will inevitably come (in parts is already there!), can and will then be ascribed to false (!) "causes". So this mixing of peoples is only good for the globalists. But I do not believe that they will have success with it forever.

With it we are back to the question of Spengler, whether there will still be a new culture in the future or not. - I don't know, but I doubt that globalism with its rhetoric (the "One World" as the "One Civilizationã) will be able to hold its ground in the long run or even in the medium run. I say only: War!

Technology - even Western technology - can also be (made) forgotten.

If the globalists will fight among themselves, as the "Caesar(ist)s" once did, then, following these wars, everything is possible again, but in a "wintry" form.

What we are experiencing at the moment are really the last moves of history, giving it all once more, after which it will become quiet, very quiet. Whether this will happen in the sense of the "One World", i.e. as the final stage (civilization) of the occidental culture, or rather even again quite primitively, I do not know exactly, but I know that it will be "wintry".

Satyr wrote:

Nihilism is an ideological contagion - a memetic virus. It's utility lies in tis detachment from reality - offering opportunity to construct whatever the mind can imagine. Their only criterion is cohesiveness - it must be self-consistent - and hedonism - it must be seductive, offering pleasing possibilities to alleviate existential anxiety.

Yes. Nihilism is very successful, it works like an exponential function. At first, only a few are infected, but suddenly the infection rate increases exponentially. Nevertheless, there are also people who are immune to it. Most people come from a high culture (I call them „history cultures“ because they have a history based on writing, unlike primitive cultures), and that is why these are mostly affected by nihilism, even if the present nihilism is an occidental nihilism. Those who have the most immunity to any nihilism are the members of primitive cultures.
Let's go to the jungle!  [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]  [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Satyr wrote:

The "modernity" of the "western" - occidental - is infested by a messianic parasite which urges it to make its disease universal - global.
This is why I mention Messianism.
Founded on nihilistic binaries: good/bad, paradise/hell, utopia/dystopia, salvation/damnation.
Like selfish genes selfish memes hijack the organism's processes, for tis own purposes: self-maintenance and self-propagaiton.
To put it ideologically, the nihilistic ideology/dogma - meme - is programmed to be imposed on the world, otherwise it perishes - like capitalism must grow, constantly produce more wealth, otherwise it atrophies.
Nihilism cannot survive outside brains, because it is anti-rela, anti-nature. It needs a host - a proxy.
Nihilism is impotent beyond the minds it infects - dominates - because it is entirely abstract with no external referents. It's only avenue to power is via hearts and minds, so it must spread as much as possible - it must proselytize, or integrate the masses into tis principles; its "magical force" is entirely dependent on exploiting and manipulating psychology, so it needs organisms with sophisticated neurological systems to infect.
Nihilism is entirely semiotic....and cannot exist without symbols/words - semiotics are its DNA.

See the conventional definition of nihilism.
It negates, or describes a world void of human abstractions that have never nor can ever exist outside human brains. For the infected psyche the world is "negative" because it lacks what the human brain fabricated and expects to exist.
One-God, universal morality, cosmic meaning, i.e., purpose, intent, motive...In fact if these did exist independently from human minds then experienced existence would cease and life would be improbable.  

I think I understand your meme theory pretty well, and admit that it was your writing that drew me to this web forum.

From where, if you don't my asking?
How did you come across my writings?

I was looking for philosophical web forums - I don't remember with which search word/s - and got a link to this forum, among others.


The search words were probably "genes", "memes", "genes versus memes" or the like.

According to my theory or philosophy, there are two main realms, one is the realm of real things (the body, you could also say) and the other is the realm of signs (of language, you could also say). I call the directions in which they develop "genetics" and "metagenetics". This naming, although "only" referring to the developments, has similarity with the naming of "genes" and "memes", to which I also refer.

Decisive, however, is according to my theory or philosophy that I call the sign realm "language", independent of which signs it is about. Luhmann has chosen the word "communcation" for it in his system theory. But this is, in spite of or - even more - because of all today's communication euphoria, more confusing than one would like to believe at first. I also use the word or the term "language" because the earlier philosophers did it too and in my estimation they knew more about this topic than today's newspeak functionaries who are on the money drip.

The difference is one of direction - movement/motive.
The realist begins with the physical - body - and moves towards the idea/ideal - mind.
The realist begins with the idea/ideal - mind - and moves towards the physical, tangible, the experienced - body.

This corresponds to Bottom<>Up, or Top<>Down, differentiating subjective emoting from objective reasoning.
The nihilist - or delusional, or hypocrite or desperate degenerate - begins with the answer, the desired conclusion, and then works backwards trying to integrate the sensually perceived in his already established convictions - beliefs.
The nihilist prefers to leave symbols/words in the air - not anchored in anything real, because then he can manipulable the meanings. Even the meaning of the word "meaning" is treated this way.
The goal is meaninglessness, so that they can define concepts arbitrarily, using emotional criteria, not rational criteria.
Now they are "detaching" the words "male/female" from their experiential referents, converting them to ideological abstractions, that can be given any definition anyone desires.
Then, the definition that offers the most pleasure to the most degenerates becomes validated collectively - this is collectivism.
Nietzsche called it "herd psychology".

Obscurantism, mysticism, is how they validate their absurdities - they refuse to clarify because on the twilight all mixes and mingles - nothing is distinct and clear - Platonic cave metaphor.
Light is the medium of discrimination. They despise light.
They prefer the darkness, where nobody knows where he begins and the other ends; nothing is ever distinct, and all turns inward into esotericism to find salvation.

Peter Sloterdijk has published a new book: "Der Staats streift seine Samthandschuhe ab" ("The state takes off its kid gloves").

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

I will very probably buy the book.

Translation ( [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] ):

"Peter Sloterdijk is one of the best-known and most effective thinkers of our time. His philosophical diagnoses of the times and political interventions are risk-taking, contentious, and at least as illuminating as they are surprising. This could be witnessed once again last year, when he was questioned in numerous interviews about the pandemic and its social, political, and existential consequences.

The most important interviews and contributions are now collected here and document a learning process in which the seriousness of the situation and the search for appropriate interpretations are increasingly taking shape. For Peter Sloterdijk, the Corona crisis is not merely an economic or sociopolitical caesura. Rather, it marks the 'beginning of an age whose basic ethical evidence is co-immunism, the swearing in of individuals to mutual protection'. This requires a new definition of togetherness, a 'changed grammar of our behavior', and a global immunitarian reason. What consequences this will have for us - that, too, can be gleaned from these clairvoyant, forward-looking talks.

Table of contents:

- Previous note.
- The Western system will prove to be just as authoritarian as the Chinese one.
- There is no more room for exaggeration.
- Co-immunism in the age of pandemics and climate change.
- Man is not prepared to protect nature.
- Man, the distant being.
- The state shows its iron fist.
- Please explain the time we live in!
- Is it legitimate not to be afraid of Corona?
- Are we living beyond our means?
- Humor, a civic vaccine.
- Of the discomfort in the fiscal culture.
- Life without excuses.
- One cannot live in revolt.
- Why are more and more people stepping out of reality?
- Instead of an epilogue.
- Life in the philosopher's cave"