My father exercised every single day. He'd been to jail for stabbing people. A single demonstration my father: One day, my mother was outside and a neighbor insulted her. That night, the neighbor was throwing a party with 30+ grown men. They were aboriginals who just so happened to be unemployed. When my father go home from work, my mother told him about how the neighbor treated her.
He put down his work shit, left the house, we heard commotion and he came back with bloody knuckles, unblemished. He was a fucking psycho, at least to my mind.
How does a teenager rebel against this? I starved myself, and made myself physically weak and vulnerable, to spite my father.
How very revealing. If your father, who sounds like a good man, is still alive what an embarrassment you must be to him.
It's a pity you became alienated. As he represents a virile, masculine force, your ressentiment had to in turn cast itself as the mirror, the opposite, in order to negate him, as you lacked within you the quality to emulate or exceed him.
He never spared you, he never indulged you, he was never gentle. He wanted you to be strong. He wanted you to be like him. He wanted you to be a man.
But instead.
Please stay here. You need to be studied.
_________________ "I do not exhort you to work but to battle; I do not exhort you to peace but to victory. May your work be a battle; may your peace be a victory." -TSZ
Coward says... "equal footing', yet he worships love, as the divine.
Sense preceded emotion....consciousness preceded self-consciousness...the senses are first outwardly focused, and so they function as an engagement of what is unknown. Later do they discover self, amongst otherness, through reflection.
The first (re)action to otherness, the unknown, can only be anxiety. Only when similarity is perceived in the patterns, can habituation result in comfort.
The fight/flight automatic reaction evolves first as the best reaction to the unknown.
Cooperative survival strategies evolve later...later you turd...not first.
All creativity is rooted in need...in relation to a threat. I innovate to compensate for a personal limitation in relation to the other.
The greatest technological leaps occur in times of war.
Even the need to alleviate boredom, to deal with existential solitude is a need, producing an anxiety.
the act of sexual intercourse necessitates the placation of the female so that penetration must occur. The body is also tricked to accept the alien, to it, spermatozoa, and to gestate it. The autoimmune system precedes, in evolutionary terms, the sexual method...and so it must be numbed, tricked, inebriated, fooled soa s to make heterosexual reproduction possible.
Social behaviour turd, begins simply as schooling, or herding. This offers protection to the individual by causing confusion in the predator. Social behaviour is a survival strategy forced upon the individual because it lacks the capacity to survive on its own.
From this survival behaviour natural selection takes over, eventually evolving into social groupings which necessitate a self-repression.
Similar behaviour can be observed amongst birds
And mammals...
The predator must isolate its prey so as to ficus its energies upon it. Here, we also witness the adaptation to this herd mechanism. Cooperative hunters must evolve to deal with herding...you dumb turd.
Social behaviour does not preceded the single organism, multiple cell organism follow the single cell, you imbecile.
_________________ γνῶθι σεαυτόν μηδέν άγαν
Satyr Daemon
Gender : Posts : 37359 Join date : 2009-08-24 Age : 58 Location : Hyperborea
Single cell reproduction precedes the evolution of heterosexual reproductive methods.
To cope with the already evolved identity, particularly amongst larger brained species, the fight/flight reaction, along with the natural anxiety, stress before the unknown other, must be dealt with.
The female specialized role, in particular must be numbed so as to permit penetration, after she is approached by an oftentimes larger male. This is particularly so in solitary species, such as bears, where the other is a stranger..but even in social species, such as lions where males often take over a pride, kill the young, forcing the females into estrus...and so the females are chemically induced to accept a strange male into their physical being...one that has just murdered their young.
Now, you imbecile, you may begin to understand both why females are more sexually cautious, in natural environments, and why their love/lust is longer-lived yet quickly gone. The seven-year itch is not accidental...it corresponds to the amount of time a human-child needs to reach a stage of maturity where it can fend for itself.
The female is naturally inclined to sample genetic material, and so monogamy is as antithetical to her nature as it is for males. Why? Because having multiple children from multiple fathers, as is becoming common in this modern age where female sexuality has been returned to its primal state, increases the survival of, at least, one, in the event of a environmental change.
Why is love deified in herd psychologies? Because without it the individual feels vulnerable, exposed, weak ...the herd psychology, is more feminine ...it requires quantities, because it lacks qualities.
I repeat... Love is an adaptation of lust...a sexual need that places the brain in a state of frenzy...madness....also associated with love in the erotic sense. The other kind of love, agape, associated with friendship, parental love, divine love, retains its erotic element but detaches itself form the copulation act. Kissing is a sexual activity derived from a mother passing food to an infant...and the sexual act itself retains element of feeding...biting, scratching, licking etc.
Turd...if you close your eyes and prey to your holy divine concepts, you might be saved from reality. God bless you, child....God=Love.
_________________ γνῶθι σεαυτόν μηδέν άγαν
Satyr Daemon
Gender : Posts : 37359 Join date : 2009-08-24 Age : 58 Location : Hyperborea
The modern nihilists, the cowards, the stunted psyches, cannot have it both ways. No, positive and negative are not subjective terms...and no love and fear could not have evolved simultaneously...no more than consciousness and self-consciousnesses could have evolved simultaneously. There is no equality here...no parity....no sameness. There is a hierarchy based on utility, effectiveness.
There is a reason, a rationale, as to why I place fear first. Not only because of its importance in survival, unlike sheltering environments survival demands care, awareness, caution...a dog is friendly because it lives under the care of a human...a wolf is not...but more so because of the fact that the sense organs evolved not for introspection and gazing into the mirror, but to deal with the alien, unknown, otherness.
Consciousness begins with the primitive form of sensing...which is of the other. The senses evolved not for kicks and giggles, but to direct the will in relation to a threatening to life world. If this bothers the modern man it is because he is, like the dog, totally domesticated.
How very revealing. If your father, who sounds like a good man, is still alive what an embarrassment you must be to him.
It's a pity you became alienated. As he represents a virile, masculine force, your ressentiment had to in turn cast itself as the mirror, the opposite, in order to negate him, as you lacked within you the quality to emulate or exceed him.
He never spared you, he never indulged you, he was never gentle. He wanted you to be strong. He wanted you to be like him. He wanted you to be a man.
But instead.
Please stay here. You need to be studied.
In my opening posts in this thread, I explained how I came to be an anorexic.
I did emulate my father, I even fought him. When he hit me, and yelled in his face to do it again, and of course, he obliged. I did the same for my older brother, who was just like him. If he tried to assert his will on me, I wouldn't give an inch.
When at school, I'd fight anyone who wanted to fight me. I fought people, or groups of people multiple years my senior.
My principle described me to my parents as a pitbull.
After fighting and fighting and fighting, my father got me into martial arts. The trainer is the person who convinced me to stop fighting. He displayed an alternative to my father, someone who is strong but doesn't need to attack others, or to prove one's capacity.
He was a man who treated himself with respect, unlike my father, who hated himself and his children.
I didn't respect myself enough to begin the lifestyle my trainer showed me, but enough anger to rebel against my father. Anger and hate can't bring you health, but they can help you resist the bullshit.
----
Everyone left my father. That's when he was left to face himself, which he couldn't stand. Eventually he changed the way he looks at the world, and came back to me, and conceded that what he did was wrong, and that he has no idea how I managed to become such a good man with the father and mother I had.
He respects me and if he didn't, as he didn't for quite some time, I wouldn't give a fuck. I don't rely on his approval. I have my own convictions.
Satyr seems a lesser version of who my father was, and I see through all his bullshit.
All he can do is attack, because he can't stand looking at himself.
Satyr Daemon
Gender : Posts : 37359 Join date : 2009-08-24 Age : 58 Location : Hyperborea
And now, ladies and gentlemen, we are told the real reason for this repressed fear and this projected animosity.
What a terrible world that turns boys against their fathers, or ensures that sub-standard males can become fathers. The consequences are there to see....desperate lost boys, flailing about...without a clue.
Love serves an independent purpose than fear. Satyr can't explain how love is a product of fear, because it's illogical. A stretch that under any scrutiny, snaps.
I have a very clear idea of what I'm doing. I'm offering the people who frequent this forum an alternative than your ignorance.
You'll twist around, flailing YOUR arms around, dragging anyone within reach underwater with you. Then you can comfort yourself, 'The water in my lungs is normal. Anyone with integrity admits it. Like these fine people'.
You're a naive child in a man's body.
We don't need to live in fear anymore. The threats you perceive are either illusions, or can be overcome with strength. Therefore, fear is unnecessary.
You're afraid of anyone thinking independently, that's why if there's a belief that doesn't gel with your propaganda, you must rush to offer the 'ladies and gentleman' a way to dismiss the position, instead of letting them consider the position on their own terms.
That's your integrity, and your will to empower others. Make them reliant on you for comfort and validation of their misguided dispositions.
I'm growing bored of you, wise Satyr.
Anfang
Gender : Posts : 3989 Join date : 2013-01-23 Age : 40 Location : Castra Alpine Grug
Love serves an independent purpose than fear. Satyr can't explain how love is a product of fear, because it's illogical. A stretch that under any scrutiny, snaps.
What?? He detailed his position in great detail in this thread. Saying it's wrong should be followed by why it is wrong and that why should focus on the matter and not on the motives of the writer.
Quote :
We don't need to live in fear anymore. The threats you perceive are either illusions, or can be overcome with strength. Therefore, fear is unnecessary.
You must perceive all as one. When all is one in your mind then you will be free from fear. Like all the cells in your body. They all joined into one. You will lose self-consciousness, self-awareness, you will be one, your self will disappear in an ocean and you will be free of fear. All fear will be gone. Also, all love will be gone because you can't perceive your own self anymore. You will be free of your self.
Satyr said fear comes first, and that love is a direct reaction to it. A band-aide fix. That all motivations stem from fear.
He produced evidence that fear emerged first, which I concede. Why? Because in the past, organisms lived under direct threat 24/7. It makes sense that fear would have a role to play before love, I wouldn't argue this.
When I say fear and love are on equal footing, I'm saying that both emerged within us and perpetuated themselves within us due to natural selection. They both encouraged survival. Fear in avoiding damage to one's health, love in encouraging growth of one's health.
Satyr does not justify that love emerged to conquer fear. He doesn't justify how building a bridge is an act of fear. How creating art is an act of fear. How building nanotechnology, 3D printers, A.I. are acts of fear.
I defined fear, told you it's scope. Satyr has failed to justify how there's a direct path between all the results of love, back to fear.
Lyssa put in an effort, but it was a stretch, that can't be defended for long.
Anfang
Gender : Posts : 3989 Join date : 2013-01-23 Age : 40 Location : Castra Alpine Grug
Fear is about seperating. To distinguish oneself from the environment. What is me, must be protected and what is out there is a possible threat which seeks to potentially destroy me.
Love is about inclusion, merging with something.
Depending on the available energy, biomatter, sunlight, coal..., its density and quantity - larger or smaller organisms, seperated units, emerge. That's what they are adapted to.
When we speak of love and fear then we suppose a consciousness. It's a spectrum of towards - What I mean is: An organism or society which is on the way towards merging, towards getting larger, closer to one consciousness, over time, is feeling more love than fear. It will grow until there is a balance between fear and love. On the other hand if fear is stronger than love, then, for that time period, the (super)-organism will break apart.
The growth of an organism necessitates the dimming of consciousness of its comprising parts. Perfect love and integration demands a loss of self. They merge to one self above them. Once the former individuals, like cells in a body, have merged to a certain degree then this process can't be reversed. The individual is gone. At that stage the former individual doesn't feel fear or love, it's not conscious enough for that.
If you put love over fear, all the time, then the organism must grow and the integration and merging must and will continue until all individual consciousness is gone. Then there is no love and no fear left for those former individuals.
Satyr Daemon
Gender : Posts : 37359 Join date : 2009-08-24 Age : 58 Location : Hyperborea
The environment confronts an organism. It both births it and threatens it. The relationship is antagonistic, as the organism is forced to adapt or die. The universe does not give a shit. Necessity is the mother of invention, you imbecile. We create because we need, because we must survive, because the universe confronts us.
Lust/love evolves after, later, than single-cell replication, you imbecile. Lust is a hormonal state of frenzy where the organism acts in ways detrimental to its well-being. We observe this condition in the wild, amongst males during the breeding season.
This is the gene imposing itself upon the brain, which has evolved to facilitate survival. The fight/flight automatic mechanism is a primitive form of (re)activity to stimuli. ALL organisms are reactive. They act out of need, out of necessity.
A God needing nothing would have no reason to act, unless there was a need: boredom, you imbecile, is a need. A need produced when the brain, evolved to facilitate survival, finds itself in a state of inactivity.
Fight/Flight is the precursor to the alter to evolve anxiety concerning the unknown. Anxiety is a preparatory stage ...the organism gathering energies to (re)act.
Because heterosexuality is a more sophisticate form of reproduction, later evolving social behavior, the fight/flight mechanism had to be repressed so as to make it possible. Love, an evolution of lust, was that mechanism. Love is a state of inebriation, of madness. the love-stricken one only sees the positive in the loved one. It also facilitates the bonding required to ween offspring out of the uterus...for those organisms with larger brains. It makes bonding, and the risks and costs to the parent, tolerable. It's function is to become aware, to smell, one's own genes in the other.
A primitive form of this bonding is observed in inferior species, such as ducks and chickens where imprinting ensues immediately after it breaks out of the egg. This imprinting is not rational, it is automatic, instinctive. A young duckling can imprint, bond, with another species, a dog, a man, a horse. The same imprinting works in humans.
Love is a chemical inebriation, an effect upon the brain, which facilitates the copulation and gestation period but also the later weening period. Fear is more visceral, primal. This is why in human text, religious dogmas, love is presented as the antithesis of fear.
Imbecile, no need, no creation. We procreate automatically, we are driven by lust to act in ways that makes reproduction possible, whether we know it or not...like in animals, of your kind. That man can choose to reproduce or not is a wilful intervention upon this automatic behaviour.
It is mortality, our death, that forces us to want to reproduce. If we were immortal we would feel no need for it. Social behaviour would be superfluous for a being who was not vulnerable to the environment. Schooling, herd behaviour, evolving herd psychology, is a reaction to predation, you imbecile. The fish or birds or buffalo do not gather together because they love each other. They gather in accordance with similarities, brought about by genetic cooperative methods (heterosexuality) which result in a degree of uniformity, which are then bonded, later, with the chemical reactions to them.
Moron emotions evolved to aid the organism in their need to survive. But because the organism, when it is not sophisticated, like you, has no idea about mortality or death or survival, the mechanism is automated using hormones. This is why Dawkins speaks of the "selfish gene" you retard! The organisms automatically produces the chemical effects required to produce a required behaviour. One does not convince a fish to spawn, you idiot ...it does this automatically, genetically. Same with memes...for the common moron, like you, thoughts are automated, emotional reactions to particular words, images, are ingrained and made visceral. You don't know why you think certain things, but you do... you cannot justify it....you simply know. Like with your clan of dim-wits. You don't know why love is not a reaction to fear or why creation is not rooted in need, but you feel that it is not so. You cannot explain it you just feeeeeeeeeel it. You do not know why appearances do not matter, or why man is exempt form genetic types, breeds, races, you just feel it to be so. You cannot offer an alternative to how species splinter off from a common ancestor or how intelligence evolves, if it is uniformly distributed in a population, but you have this feeling inside of you.... You do not know why sexual types are exactly the same, why they evolved to specialize but miraculously remain equal in potentials in all areas, but you feel it in your bones.
Imbeciles, like you, need to mystify love, offering zero explanation as to why it evolved. You assume it was because the universe loves you, it is benevolent it is there to give you pleasure. Like with the other moron Only_Humean on ILP, you demand absolute evidence when what is presented confronts your sense of ease. But you do not do so when what is presented buys into your bullshit. Then you are more lenient more open to suggestion, to a hypothesis.
Moron, a position is judged as being more or less plausible. it is judged on the power of the argument, and the evidence it sites. Offering no alternative is not an alternative which is more plausible.
I bet you cannot name one creative act which cannot be traced back to a need. Fear is simply an automatic (re)action to the non-fulfillment of a need. It is the reaction to the possible threat of a taking away of what is needed.
The environment confronts an organism. It both births it and threatens it. The relationship is antagonistic, as the organism is forced to adapt or die. The universe does not give a shit.
Confront - To come face to face with, especially with defiance or hostility
As soon as we align ourselves with the demands of our environment, it no longer threatens us. The environment doesn't perpetually change the rules.
Due to this, after we're well adjusted, the relationship between us and our environment isn't defiant or hostile.
The demands of our environment is a stumbling block, a hurdle, which our species has overcome quite well, at least in capacity to do so. We still choose to defy the environment.
Wise Satyr wrote:
Necessity is the mother of invention, you imbecile. We create because we need, because we must survive, because the universe confronts us.
Need is relative to a goal. Not everyone's goal is survival. For some, being creative, social, having fun and engaging in new activities/experiences, problem solving are one's goals. In this case, survival is just a means to an end, and usually a happy byproduct of these activities.
We don't need to survive. We don't need to orient all our activities towards survival. We don't need a bridge across a river to survive, we could use a boat, or swim.
The universe/environment is uncompromising and unrelenting. It's us who choose to fight it, as opposed to adjust to it. Once we adjust, there's no threat to the basics that enable our survival. After we adjust, we're not confronted.
Wise Satyr wrote:
A God needing nothing would have no reason to act, unless there was a need: boredom, you imbecile, is a need. A need produced when the brain, evolved to facilitate survival, finds itself in a state of inactivity.
One can enjoy the process of survival and surviving, it needn't be an act of fear. Not everything that enables survival is based in fear, only if non-surviving is extremely fearful to one.
You're not differentiating between needs and wants. If an act isn't compulsory for the attainment of your objective, regardless of how preferable, it isn't a need, but a want.
A God could be motivated by wants, even though it doesn't need to move at all. This God may want to move, because it enjoys movement; it values movement intrinsically.
Wise Satyr wrote:
Fear is simply an automatic (re)action to the non-fulfillment of a need. It is the reaction to the possible threat of a taking away of what is needed.
That's a bullshit definition. Only cunts would define fear is such a sweeping manner. It implies the common connotations of fear, when it really has nothing to do with it. Manipulative language, 101.
I gave everyone a fair definition of fear, and since you can't illustrate to the ladies & gentleman that love and it's results are products of fear, you just change the definition of fear to encompass all motivation.
You've outdone yourself, wise Satyr.
For everyone else, though. Let me repeat the earlier definition:
Fear - an unpleasant emotion caused by the threat of danger, pain, or harm.
Wise Satyr wrote:
I bet you cannot name one creative act which cannot be traced back to a need.
Building a bridge is a creative act which is not based on need, rather, efficiency.
However, my argument would only be contingent on proving that not all creativity is based on need, if I agreed with your definition that all need is fear, which I do
Wise Satyr wrote:
Imbeciles, like you, need to mystify love, offering zero explanation as to why it evolved. You assume it was because the universe loves you, it is benevolent it is there to give you pleasure.
I didn't mystify love. I gave lots of examples as to the positive effects of love, and how it would indeed further enable our survival, not by means of removing threat, but by caring for self/others, empowering self/others, surpassing current limitations, and motivation/joy in surviving, among other things.
I'll happily repeat my previous quotes in regards to love:
JS wrote:
Love is an emotion that inspires one to embrace, protect and perpetuate the things that you direct this emotion towards.
As I said to Satyr, if one is seeking to be numbed, it's because on is already in pain. If one does not live in fear, as there are many out there who do not, they don't need to be numbed. Yet they still embrace love, why?
Because it's not simply a numbing agent.
Let me repeat what I said to you in the Power thread:
Love motivates one to preserve what one attributes love to, it also motivates one to adjust and grow in order to maximize the relationship between self and the loved.
Also, as referred to at KT, one may love a process such as being creative and inventing. One's love motivates one to produce or aid in the production of technologies and systems that raise the living standards and well being of all around them.
Love promotes reproduction. It not only encourages the reproduction, but the raising of one's offspring. The will to let one's children stand on one's shoulders, to reach higher than the self could. To give them more.
These are a few examples of what love does. If you remove fear from the equation, there's still no motivation for these actions, therefore, love serves an independent purpose other than to overcome the affects of fear.
That isn't some mystical shit, man. Pretty straight forward observations.
apaosha Daeva
Gender : Posts : 1862 Join date : 2009-08-24 Age : 37 Location : Ireland
In my opening posts in this thread, I explained how I came to be an anorexic.
Yes I know. It was pathetic.
You have a lot of psychological problems. Over on ILP I noticed you go into detail about your personal history too, you like talking about yourself. You were bullied and sexually abused in kindergarten, apparently, and it affects you greatly enough to still be talking about it.
In light of all that I think it is quite clear why you are what you are.
Were you bullied often as a child? Did it continue into your teenage years? Are you bullied even now, perhaps by coworkers?
Would you say you have a victim complex? Do you often see yourself, or rationalize yourself as being, a sort of anvil upon which the world smashes itself against.... a receiver of suffering, an endurer of suffering? If so, why is your perspective so passive, so reactive? Why are you always on the receiving end?
In your interpretation of your time spent being attacked, how often were you beat up? Were you ever seriously injured? Did your father worry for you and hope that by sending you to martial arts class you could better defend yourself against the people bullying you?
How do you respond to sympathy? Do you enjoy it? Or does it shame you? Or do you find it useful?
A picture is developing here. Please co-operate in <-expanding-> it for me.
Where was your breaking point? When did you become so overwhelmed by life and the struggle of life that you were forced to re-evalute the struggle itself negatively? What drove you into your state of ressentiment?
How did defending yourself from others come to lack "respect"? Did you fail too often? Did your pride, that demanded you defend yourself from others attacks, grow to torment you? Did you then start denying it, because you could not satisfy it's demands?
Quote :
Everyone left my father. That's when he was left to face himself, which he couldn't stand. Eventually he changed the way he looks at the world, and came back to me, and conceded that what he did was wrong, and that he has no idea how I managed to become such a good man with the father and mother I had.
How does that make you feel?
Quote :
Satyr seems a lesser version of who my father was, and I see through all his bullshit.
All he can do is attack, because he can't stand looking at himself.
I presume you do not see the attack inherent in this statement, or at least hope that I do not.
If an attack is based upon fear, why then do you attack Satyr's motivations for stating the positions he has? Why do you also then ignore the justifications given for these positions and instead focus on the underlying psychology behind them?
Are you afraid of confronting the reality of your own fear as the basis of all your actions?
Satyr describes fear in this context as the base emotion from which the others derive. This is not done to excuse his own fear, it is not done to provide an emotional reward and a flattering perspective on self (which is your own motivation and therefore the way in which you attempt to understand others).
It is done in an attempt to describe reality as accurately as possible. One's emotional reaction towards reality is not consequential. What is desired is knowledge, not comfort.
You may find this irreconcilable to your own peculiarities.
_________________ "I do not exhort you to work but to battle; I do not exhort you to peace but to victory. May your work be a battle; may your peace be a victory." -TSZ
You made a judgement, a subjective judgement, that is was pathetic.
I made a judgement that my actions were courageous and brave.
You should say, 'In my ignorance, I think your illustration of strength is pathetic. I don't comprehend your strength'.
It's OK, I forgive your ignorance.
apaosha wrote:
Where was your breaking point?
I felt deep shame for what I did to others, and what I did to other animals. My father was the one who was bullied and afraid, that's why he began martial arts.
I started because it was exercise and would help me assert my will even more.
When I began, I realized the error of my ways, and stopped attacking others and perpetuating fear. I had the strength to resist being a coward like my father.
I am not a victim. I am a very lucky man, who enjoys his life. I have the wisdom to grow from the past and not live with hate in my heart.
I forgive the ignorance of those around me, because they're incapable of overcoming it themselves.
Satyr, for example, I forgive. He is a fool and I offer him alternatives. I do not hate him.
apaosha wrote:
I presume you do not see the attack inherent in this statement, or at least hope that I do not.
You must learn to differentiate between an insult and an attack. I insult Satyr, I do not attack him.
I illustrate a lack of respect for his opinions, and his 'strength'. I overcome someone far greater than him, and all I see is a weak child in a man's body. I feel no threat of Satyr, merely pity.
I don't want this pitiful man to drag the people around him under with him, so I offer him alternatives and hope that if he has any integrity, he'll at least live it, doesn't need to admit it.
apaosha wrote:
Satyr describes fear in this context as the base emotion from which the others derive.
Please reference my last post to see the shortcomings of Satyr's description of 'fear'.
Satyr Daemon
Gender : Posts : 37359 Join date : 2009-08-24 Age : 58 Location : Hyperborea
My explanation as to why love evolved and why it evolve as a sophistication of lust, and why it could only have evolved after fear/anxiety, remains unchallenged.
As usual the simple mind only focuses on the immediate and can only provide superficial explanation based on the immediate. He defines things without seeking to know from where they come and why. They just feel like this and like that.
He feels ...it feels unpleasant ...why? Because he feels threatened.
Nothing more is required. This feels bad ...this feels good ...this is causing one and that is causing the other. Why think on it?
_________________ γνῶθι σεαυτόν μηδέν άγαν
perpetualburn
Gender : Posts : 955 Join date : 2013-01-04 Location : MA
"there is no reason to be alive if you can't do deadlift
Quote :
On 16 January 1993 Jón Páll Sigmarsson died of a heart attack. He was deadlifting in his gym in Iceland when he suffered the heart attack, caused, it is thought, by a traumatic aortic rupture which was related to a weakened heart, a problem that was known to exist in his family.
perpetualburn
Gender : Posts : 955 Join date : 2013-01-04 Location : MA
The possibility then presented itself of breaking down one type of “false order” and creating another in its place, of turning back on itself this obstinate formative function and resetting it in a direction that better accorded with one’s own aims. This idea, I decided, I would immediately put into action. Rather than “idea,” though, I might have said the new purpose which the sun provided me with each day.
It was thus that I found myself confronted with those lumps of steel: heavy, forbidding, cold as though the essence of night had in them been still further condensed.
On that day began my close relationship with steel that was to last for ten years to come.
The nature of this steel is odd. I found that as I increased its weight little by little, the effect was like a pair of scales: the bulk of muscles placed, as it were, on the other pan increased proportionately, as though the steel had a duty to maintain a strict balance between the two. Little by little, moreover, the properties of my muscles came increasingly to resemble those of the steel. This slow development, I found, was remarkably similar to the process of education, which remodels the brain intellectually by feeding it with progressively more difficult matter. And since there was always the vision of a classical ideal of the body to serve as a model and an ultimate goal, the process closely resembled the classical ideal of education.
And yet, which of the two was it that really resembled the other ? Was I not already using words in my attempt to imitate the classical physical type? For me, beauty is always retreating from one’s grasp: the only thing I consider important is what existed once, or ought to have existed. By its subtle, infinitely varied operation, the steel restored the classical balance that the body had begun to lose, reinstating it in its natural form, the form that it should have had all along.
The groups of muscles that have become virtually unnecessary in modern life, though still a vital element of a man’s body, are obviously pointless from a practical point of view, and bulging muscles are as unnecessary as a classical education is to the majority of practical men. Muscles have gradually become something akin to classical Greek. To revive the dead language, the discipline of the steel was required; to change the silence of death into the eloquence of life, the aid of steel was essential.
The steel faithfully taught me the correspondence between the spirit and the body: thus feeble emotions, it seemed to me, corresponded to flaccid muscles, sentimentality to a sagging stomach, and overimpressionability to an oversensitive, white skin. Bulging muscles, a taut stomach, and a tough skin, I reasoned, would correspond respectively to an intrepid fighting spirit, the power of dispassionate intellectual judgement, and a robust disposition. I hasten to point out here that I do not believe ordinary people to be like this. Even my own scanty experience is enough to furnish me with innumerable examples of timid minds encased within bulging muscles. Yet, as I have already pointed out, words for me came before the flesh, so that intrepidity, dispassionateness, robustness, and all those emblems of moral character summed up by words, needed to manifest themselves in outward, bodily tokens. For that reason, I told myself, I ought to endow myself with the physical characteristics in question as a kind of educative process.
Beyond the educative process there also lurked another, romantic design. The romantic impulse that had formed an undercurrent in me from boyhood on, and that made sense only as the destruction of classical perfection, lay waiting within me. Like a theme in an operatic overture that is later destined to occur throughout the whole work, it laid down a definitive pattern for me before I had achieved anything in practice.
Specifically, I cherished a romantic impulse towards death, yet at the same time I required a strictly classical body as its vehicle; a peculiar sense of destiny made me believe that the reason why my romantic impulse towards death remained unfulfilled in reality was the immensely simple fact that I lacked the necessary physical qualifications. A powerful, tragic frame and sculpturesque muscles were indispensable in a romantically noble death. Any confrontation between weak, flabby flesh and death seemed to me absurdly inappropriate. Longing at eighteen for an early demise, I felt myself unfitted for it. I lacked, in short, the muscles suitable for a dramatic death. And it deeply offended my romantic pride that it should be this unsuitability that had permitted me to survive the war.
Quote :
The steel taught me many different things. It gave me an utterly new kind of knowledge, a knowledge that neither books nor worldly experience can impart. Muscles, I found, were strength as well as form, and each complex of muscles was subtly responsible for the direction in which its own strength was exerted, much as though they were rays of light given the form of flesh.
Nothing could have accorded better with the definition of a work of art that I had long cherished than this concept of form enfolding strength, coupled with the idea that a work should be organic, radiating rays of light in all directions.
The muscles that I thus created were at one and the same time simple existence and works of art; they even, paradoxically, possessed a certain abstract nature. Their one fatal flaw was that they were too closely involved with the life process, which decreed that they should decline and perish with the decline of life itself.
Quote :
To continue the metaphor, let us picture a single, healthy apple. This apple was not called into existence by words, nor is it possible that the core should be completely visible from the outside like Amiel’s peculiar fruit. The inside of the apple is naturally quite invisible. Thus at the heart of that apple, shut up within the flesh of the fruit, the core lurks in its wan darkness, tremblingly anxious to find some way to reassure itself that it is a perfect apple. The apple certainly exists, but to the core this existence as yet seems inadequate; if words cannot endorse it, then the only way to endorse it is with the eyes. Indeed, for the core the only sure mode of existence is to exist and to see at the same time. There is only one method of solving this contradiction. It is for a knife to be plunged deep into the apple so that it is split open and the core is exposed to the light—to the same light, that is, as the surface skin. Yet then the existence of the cut apple falls into fragments; the core of the apple sacrifices existence for the sake of seeing.
When I realized that the perfect sense of existence that disintegrated the very next moment could only be endorsed by muscle, and not by words, I was already personally enduring the fate that befell the apple.
_________________ And here we always meet, at the station of our heart / Looking at each other as if we were in a dream /Seeing for the first time different eyes so supreme / That bright flames burst into vision, keeping us apart.
Weight lifting is my life. It is not simply some lackadaisical hobby that I do on my spare time. It is a way of life, my life.
Many seem to think that it is something that only dumb brutes do. And others, like myself, view it as a metaphor for life itself. Life is resistance, domination, overcoming, conquest, and a becoming. It is filled with suffering and pleasures. The weight lifting gym is just that as well.
This is why I resonate with the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche so much. I believe that he would take kindly to modern powerlifters and strongmen as they represent the will to power in a conspicuous fashion.
“What is good? All that heightens the feeling of power, the will to power, power itself. What is bad? All that is born of weakness. What is happiness? The feeling that power is growing, that resistance is overcome.” - Nietzsche
The above quote is, precisely, what happens when I overcome and dominate the weights in the gym. At first, there is much suffering and resistance. The force of gravity is my eternal foe. When I overcome the force, a feeling of euphoric rage ( happiness ) overwhelms my body and mind. It is the feeling of power, the will to power.
I am always seeking to gain more power, to add more weight to the barbell. There is no absolute limit. I can gain infinite power. In society, we strive to dominate and increase our power just like in the gym. Many do it via monetary systems, social groups, sex, and intellectual activities. We seek to move up the latter of life, to become, to grow, to develop. There are many obstacles in our way and many sufferings, but we push through and conquer, we overcome.
Weight lifting is one of the most masculine activities there is. The masculine, as many of us already know, is characterized by domination and overcoming.
Why do I weight lift? You ask.
I do it because I am seeking to become the strongest version of myself. I love the feeling of power.
What motivates me?
Deep seated, unconscious rage. Before I perform a set of heavy singles on the deadlift, squat, and overhead press, I perform a ritual. I begin by pacing back and forth like a lion in a cage. As I do this, I focus intensely and start growling like a wild animal. I snarl and stare at the barbell - focusing my energies on the overcoming that is to come. I summon dark memories from my childhood, experiences of being bullied, misunderstood, abused, etc. I tap into my primal rage ( hence my username ). I walk up to the barbell and grip it tightly, and then in a burst of explosive rage and power, I press the barbell over my head vehemently. It takes all the energy in my being to overcome the force. I conquer it, staring into the mirror with the barbell over my head and a fierce look in my eyes. Victory! Power! Glory! It is one of the best highs ever.
After the domination of the barbell, the feeling of euphoric rage stays with me for about 5 minutes. It is a very emotionally overwhelming experience; essentially a divine experience. I feel cosmic power in my arms and fists. I want more! I want to exert more force and power!
This is why I don't recommend that people let go of inner anger. This energy can be used for one's transformation into a higher becoming. People always say, " Oh you should let go of anger and make peace!". Fuck that! Be angry, be furious! Dominate these energies and channel them into positive directions.
To conclude, life is a struggle. Nature is a world of war. Weight-lifting is symbolic of this cosmic battle. The gym is my church, my place of communion with cosmic power. I will continue in my endeavors to become the strongest version of myself. This is my life and my meaning.
Running/jogging/walking/cycling (any physical activity) are also immediate resistance, anti-gravitation: each step, stride, pedal, lift is an act of Willpower, or ascension above gravity and its forces which pull down or burden us. An archetypal interplay of contraction-rarefaction.
You'd probably appreciate Arnold Schwarzenegger's The New Encyclopedia of Modern Body Building. He had a modis operandi/reason for what, how and why he exercised and pumped iron the way he did, and wasn't just some nigger on juice throwing up weights with no rhyme or reason or technique, running through the motions because somehow theys make mah muszles growd.
Weight lifting is my life. It is not simply some lackadaisical hobby that I do on my spare time. It is a way of life, my life.
Many seem to think that it is something that only dumb brutes do. And others, like myself, view it as a metaphor for life itself. Life is resistance, domination, overcoming, conquest, and a becoming. It is filled with suffering and pleasures. The weight lifting gym is just that as well.
This is why I resonate with the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche so much. I believe that he would take kindly to modern powerlifters and strongmen as they represent the will to power in a conspicuous fashion.
“What is good? All that heightens the feeling of power, the will to power, power itself. What is bad? All that is born of weakness. What is happiness? The feeling that power is growing, that resistance is overcome.” - Nietzsche
The above quote is, precisely, what happens when I overcome and dominate the weights in the gym. At first, there is much suffering and resistance. The force of gravity is my eternal foe. When I overcome the force, a feeling of euphoric rage ( happiness ) overwhelms my body and mind. It is the feeling of power, the will to power.
I am always seeking to gain more power, to add more weight to the barbell. There is no absolute limit. I can gain infinite power. In society, we strive to dominate and increase our power just like in the gym. Many do it via monetary systems, social groups, sex, and intellectual activities. We seek to move up the latter of life, to become, to grow, to develop. There are many obstacles in our way and many sufferings, but we push through and conquer, we overcome.
Weight lifting is one of the most masculine activities there is. The masculine, as many of us already know, is characterized by domination and overcoming.
Why do I weight lift? You ask.
I do it because I am seeking to become the strongest version of myself. I love the feeling of power.
What motivates me?
Deep seated, unconscious rage. Before I perform a set of heavy singles on the deadlift, squat, and overhead press, I perform a ritual. I begin by pacing back and forth like a lion in a cage. As I do this, I focus intensely and start growling like a wild animal. I snarl and stare at the barbell - focusing my energies on the overcoming that is to come. I summon dark memories from my childhood, experiences of being bullied, misunderstood, abused, etc. I tap into my primal rage ( hence my username ). I walk up to the barbell and grip it tightly, and then in a burst of explosive rage and power, I press the barbell over my head vehemently. It takes all the energy in my being to overcome the force. I conquer it, staring into the mirror with the barbell over my head and a fierce look in my eyes. Victory! Power! Glory! It is one of the best highs ever.
After the domination of the barbell, the feeling of euphoric rage stays with me for about 5 minutes. It is a very emotionally overwhelming experience; essentially a divine experience. I feel cosmic power in my arms and fists. I want more! I want to exert more force and power!
This is why I don't recommend that people let go of inner anger. This energy can be used for one's transformation into a higher becoming. People always say, " Oh you should let go of anger and make peace!". Fuck that! Be angry, be furious! Dominate these energies and channel them into positive directions.
To conclude, life is a struggle. Nature is a world of war. Weight-lifting is symbolic of this cosmic battle. The gym is my church, my place of communion with cosmic power. I will continue in my endeavors to become the strongest version of myself. This is my life and my meaning.
And yea, finding the right motivators, sometimes primal, other times spiritual, in order to fuel and direct our Will into our physical activity: lifting or running on pure hatred, love, depression, obsession, anger, sadness, elation, relaxation, in order to let thoughts run their course or to take up as many thoughts as can pour in, meditation, or an inspiration/challenge to see how far you can push yourself beyond your therein conceived margins and parameters.
I haven't lifted weights in some months now; I had to take a break from it as I had tendonitis in both of my hands, and because of thyroid cancer. But since both of those are taken care of now, I plan on hitting the gym again, turning myself into a Greek God as of yore.
Thanks for the Arnold recommendation, I will check it out.
Yeah, lifting-weights was like a spiritual/religious thing for me; going to the gym was like going to a church, a place of spiritual solitude and communion with a higher power, or inner power. Boxing is another sort of spiritual activity for me.
I haven't lifted weights in some months now; I had to take a break from it as I had tendonitis in both of my hands, and because of thyroid cancer. But since both of those are taken care of now, I plan on hitting the gym again, turning myself into a Greek God as of yore.
Thanks for the Arnold recommendation, I will check it out.
Yeah, lifting-weights was like a spiritual/religious thing for me; going to the gym was like going to a church, a place of spiritual solitude and communion with a higher power, or inner power. Boxing is another sort of spiritual activity for me.
Yea, even regularity on the heavy bag is a viable option and all men would do well with it. Key to it and all exercise is control.
Incidentally, is that yourself in your avatar? A sort of Arnold chest going on there.
perpetualburn
Gender : Posts : 955 Join date : 2013-01-04 Location : MA
Is there anything worse than atrophy? I had to take time off because of an injury... my dead lift went from 450lb to i don't even wanna say... You can definitely dead lift regularly though and box...In fact, I think it gives you a big strength edge because a lot of fighters don't lift or have never really lifted... you just can't do a full bodybuilding type routine but can include at least power lifts... You lose the "shape" and aesthetic physique from bodybuilding but start to develop a more fighting physique
_________________ And here we always meet, at the station of our heart / Looking at each other as if we were in a dream /Seeing for the first time different eyes so supreme / That bright flames burst into vision, keeping us apart.
Is there anything worse than atrophy? I had to take time off because of an injury... my dead lift went from 450lb to i don't even wanna say... You can definitely dead lift regularly though and box...In fact, I think it gives you a big strength edge because a lot of fighters don't lift or have never really lifted... you just can't do a full bodybuilding type routine but can include at least power lifts... You lose the "shape" and aesthetic physique from bodybuilding but start to develop a more fighting physique
Yeah, setbacks suck....
I was progressing rapidly on my deads, then I decided to try out a Jeet Kune Do class ( Bruce Lee's martial art ). Big mistake; he had us try wrist locks. I allowed my partner to try it out on me too many times. Next day, it became manifest that I had developed tendonitis.
I prefer the fighter's physique over the bodybuilding one; I find the lean, shredded look more aesthetic than the puffy, protein shake guzzling look.
My boxing trainer kind of has an old school mentality in regards to weight training; thinks that it is unnecessary, even antithetical. But personally, I've noticed that my punches felt stronger when I combined weight-lifting into boxing training. I didn't feel slower, or heavier. I felt like a lot more force was generated from my lats when throwing hooks.
Is there anything worse than atrophy? I had to take time off because of an injury... my dead lift went from 450lb to i don't even wanna say... You can definitely dead lift regularly though and box...In fact, I think it gives you a big strength edge because a lot of fighters don't lift or have never really lifted... you just can't do a full bodybuilding type routine but can include at least power lifts... You lose the "shape" and aesthetic physique from bodybuilding but start to develop a more fighting physique
Yeah, setbacks suck....
I was progressing rapidly on my deads, then I decided to try out a Jeet Kune Do class ( Bruce Lee's martial art ). Big mistake; he had us try wrist locks. I allowed my partner to try it out on me too many times. Next day, it became manifest that I had developed tendonitis.
I prefer the fighter's physique over the bodybuilding one; I find the lean, shredded look more aesthetic than the puffy, protein shake guzzling look.
My boxing trainer kind of has an old school mentality in regards to weight training; thinks that it is unnecessary, even antithetical. But personally, I've noticed that my punches felt stronger when I combined weight-lifting into boxing training. I didn't feel slower, or heavier. I felt like a lot more force was generated from my lats when throwing hooks.
Functionality should predominate. What good is all that extra muscle/bulk if it cannot be optimally utilized. Get someone with an understanding of basic biomechanics and trained in technique then he can render all that mass useless. Pound per pound, larger mass will always dominate if the opponent is not more skilled/learned. Most of the eastern martial arts were designed in response to their deficit in smaller structure; in this way, locks, traps, and then hips and waist, push-pull, used for power. Anyway, then there is inner power which manifests as a calm explosiveness: this will win a dire fight anytime. Look at knife acts in prison, for instance: the result is an exponential amount of stab wounds, as opposed to an apprehensive jab here and there. Never pull a knife unless you're willing to go all the way.
Functionality should predominate. What good is all that extra muscle/bulk if it cannot be optimally utilized. Get someone with an understanding of basic biomechanics and trained in technique then he can render all that mass useless. Pound per pound, larger mass will always dominate if the opponent is not more skilled/learned. Most of the eastern martial arts were designed in response to their deficit in smaller structure; in this way, locks, traps, and then hips and waist, push-pull, used for power. Anyway, then there is inner power which manifests as a calm explosiveness: this will win a dire fight anytime. Look at knife acts in prison, for instance: the result is an exponential amount of stab wounds, as opposed to an apprehensive jab here and there. Never pull a knife unless you're willing to go all the way.
It, really, comes down to what one's goal is; if one's aim is for mere aesthetics, then functionality is, basically, immaterial, and if one's aim is for mere performance, then aesthetics are immaterial. I train, primarily, for functionality, but I would be lying if I said I didn't take into consideration how I look. I see what you are saying, though. Training for performance has more practical value that spills over into daily life.
Henry Quirk
Gender : Posts : 335 Join date : 2014-06-03 Age : 61 Location : 'here'
You can work 'em in variety of ways (change up your routines) without sacrificing, for example, strength for endurance.
The snatch is not necessarily the way to go if you want size or cinderblock-crushing strength (or even eye-pleasing beauty), but if you want overall fitness (to walk, run, lug 50 lb. sacks, to climb trees etc.) snatches (and other big movements) are hard to beat.
I suppose when one is young (with a mind and eye for fleshy symmetry) proportions, visual balance, etc. play a role in how one lifts, but, when you're old and ugly and just tryin' to keep up with a frenetic eight year old, "functionality" is everything.
