Ego Death - Epiphanies.

Primal Rage wrote:

Is that intended for Lyssa or myself? I'm going to assume it's aimed at me as Lyssa never mentioned anything about her supposed love for humanity in any shape or form.

I'm not sure if I would state that I love humanity, per say. Yes, I'm of a humanitarian disposition, but to say that I love all humanity is a bit of a stretch.

If a robot is made to look like a human, a "replicant", has two arms, hands, legs, feet, one body, torso, neck, chest, etc. can walk upright, speak and listen, then how is this robot not a human?

Define humanity?

Humans are a species, i.e., organic entities that were brought about by evolution. Robots are artificial, man-made and non-sentient as of now. If AI is to become a reality, then it would be a distinct form of sentience from that of the human animal, for obvious reasons. Sure, it might be able to be just as conscious as a human, but still not human; humans aren't made of the same substance.

So "humans" are different than robots due to organs and sentience?

How are monkeys different than humans?

Not sure where this going, but I will continue with it.

Monkeys are a different form of primate. Their anatomical structure and consciousness are distinct from that of the human. Simple.

Drug users use that term ego death, when they use strong psychedelics like Ayahuasca, or mushrooms. They have the same life life alterning enlightment experience, as does christians who say they were touched by holy spirit. The ultimate emasculation, which is total surrender to otherness, the ego death.

Vrilseeker wrote:

Drug users use that term ego death, when they use strong psychedelics like Ayahuasca, or mushrooms. They have the same life life alterning enlightment experience, as does christians who say they were touched by holy spirit. The ultimate emasculation, which is total surrender to otherness, the ego death.

I wouldn't call my experience a form of emasculation haha not even that of the psychedelic ego-death. I wouldn't even call it a surrender to otherness; I feel like I'm more in tune with my true nature. It's more of a ' death' of a false ego or perceived self, if you will.

Lyssa wrote:

Primal Rage wrote:

Another somewhat personal topic, so be forewarned...

Ego death?

From brutal selfishness to Xt. altruism?

And Nietzsche said,


"Extreme positions are not succeeded by moderate ones, but by contrary extreme positions."

How true.

However with time it is certain. to mellow.

Primal Rage wrote:

Not sure where this going, but I will continue with it.

Monkeys are a different form of primate. Their anatomical structure and consciousness are distinct from that of the human. Simple.

Incorrect, the monkey has a similar anatomy to the human in that both have two arms, legs, hands, feet, one body, torso, neck, head, etc. One of the primary differences between monkey and man is walking upright. Another primary difference is body hair.

You mention that consciousness is "different" between monkey and man, how? And this is "simple"?

If it's simple, then it should be easy to explain. How is human and monkey consciousness different?

Primal Rage wrote:

What is this love then? I suppose it's just a natural overflowing of good intentions.

What prompts this "natural overflow"? Why does it occur, and when?

Does this natural overflow by chance, occur, Naturally? Like "Just because"?

Quote :

What do you think?

I think I'll save my energy since in two months, you will change your position, Again, no?

Maybe you will declare Schmoe your Christ and Saviour... I only wonder if "eulogy" here gave you His permission to do that?

I also wonder, if there's been an ego-death, who is the one talking from your head?

All PeopleS?

@Primal,,, do you even know the meaning of Om?

A, U, M - for starters has to do with the inner allignment of the three states - the sub-conscious, the consciousness, the daemomic projection - the "linker", the self-conscious.

It is the direct-ion of the Ego 'I affirm the I that affirms", and the "peace" that is born out of such victory of being self-directed, raising of oneself from oneself.


So much for ego-death... and selling yourself to some enslaving altruism.

Stuart. wrote:

Lyssa wrote:

Primal Rage wrote:

Another somewhat personal topic, so be forewarned...

Ego death?

From brutal selfishness to Xt. altruism?

And Nietzsche said,


"Extreme positions are not succeeded by moderate ones, but by contrary extreme positions."

How true.

Is there anyway to avoid the pendulum swinging from end to end a few times before it settles? (Asking in sincerity.)

Heraclitus, (esoteric)Socrates, Nietzsche, Blake all said, the road to excess is the palace of wisdom.

There is a difference between swinging the pendulum to extremes, and letting the pendulum swing you to extremes.

Æon wrote:

Primal Rage wrote:

Not sure where this going, but I will continue with it.

Monkeys are a different form of primate. Their anatomical structure and consciousness are distinct from that of the human. Simple.

Incorrect, the monkey has a similar anatomy to the human in that both have two arms, legs, hands, feet, one body, torso, neck, head, etc.  One of the primary differences between monkey and man is walking upright.  Another primary difference is body hair.

You mention that consciousness is "different" between monkey and man, how?  And this is "simple"?

If it's simple, then it should be easy to explain.  How is human and monkey consciousness different?

Monkeys are conscious, but not self-conscious like Humans. I say this is simple because we both already know that there is a difference between monkeys and Humans, and we both know, essentially, what makes us different.

Apes are self-conscious, dude.

Humans and apes are different in degreeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!
Just as human from human differ in level of self-awareness, and intelligence, and imagination, so too does the average chimpanzee, or gorilla, or bonobo, or orangutan, differ from the average human in degree of potential.

Lyssa wrote:

Primal Rage wrote:

What is this love then? I suppose it's just a natural overflowing of good intentions.

What prompts this "natural overflow"? Why does it occur, and when?

Does this natural overflow by chance, occur, Naturally? Like "Just because"?

Quote :

What do you think?

I think I'll save my energy since in two months, you will change your position, Again, no?

Maybe you will declare Schmoe your Christ and Saviour... I only wonder if "eulogy" here gave you His permission to do that?

I also wonder, if there's been an ego-death, who is the one talking from your head?

All PeopleS?

I'm not sure, exactly, why I am like this...I need to do more contemplation on that one, I suppose.

Of course I know what OM means, Silly. It is the sound of the Universe. You, probably, know more about it than me as you are located in India.

What enslaving altruism have I sold myself to? I'm not a Christian nor a Buddhist nor of any religious order. I want to be a humanitarian because it arises from within not from without, that is to say, because of some moral obligation from God or ideology.

Perpetual thinks I sound ridiculous because I want to help out orphaned kids that lost their parents in war, and you think I've gone off the deep end into slavish altruism....  

It's natural that when one is faced with a life-threatening circumstance that one would want to feel gratitude towards what helped him deal with it.

That aside, the idea that you know yourself better than another, is blatantly false.
The example I give is an extreme one, used to demonstrate my point using hyperbole so as to clarify it.

An ape knows itself , of itself, less than a human who studies apes, does.
If being born as self were enough to deal with identity, or self-knowledge, then there would be no need for the Know Thyself command, and it would be valueless.

Primal Rage wrote:

Lyssa wrote:

Primal Rage wrote:

What is this love then? I suppose it's just a natural overflowing of good intentions.

What prompts this "natural overflow"? Why does it occur, and when?

Does this natural overflow by chance, occur, Naturally? Like "Just because"?

Quote :

What do you think?

I think I'll save my energy since in two months, you will change your position, Again, no?

Maybe you will declare Schmoe your Christ and Saviour... I only wonder if "eulogy" here gave you His permission to do that?

I also wonder, if there's been an ego-death, who is the one talking from your head?

All PeopleS?

I'm not sure, exactly, why I am like this...I need to do more contemplation on that one, I suppose.

Yea, you do that.

And after months of listening to Satyr's videos on Humanitarianism, of whatever stripe, come here justifying it like you never learnt a thing. Who cares?

Quote :

Of course I know what OM means, Silly. It is the sound of the Universe. You, probably, know more about it than me as you are located in India.

Silly. As if Shankara had the best knowledge of the Vedic ethos just because he was in india... brilliant logic.

And oh, you can continue to obssess and fish for my location and I will tell you again the same thing I have told you before, you are free to imagine howevet you want me,,, since there is that little software thing called "TOR" and I can be anywhere I want to be...

get it retard?

Ta...

Primal wrote:

Am I a secular-humanist? No, I don't think so. I still feel morality, ' good and evil ' are contrived. But I'm going to be more of a conventionally so called " good person " because it's what my heart genuinely desires.

Your heart desires to help people you haven't even met, that you don't know anything about on a personal level? This sounds quite sentimental and sentimentality happens when the heart is silent and emotions are, for some reason, not felt.

Could be emotional exhaustion for example.

Lyssa wrote:

Primal Rage wrote:

Lyssa wrote:

Primal Rage wrote:

What is this love then? I suppose it's just a natural overflowing of good intentions.

What prompts this "natural overflow"? Why does it occur, and when?

Does this natural overflow by chance, occur, Naturally? Like "Just because"?

Quote :

What do you think?

I think I'll save my energy since in two months, you will change your position, Again, no?

Maybe you will declare Schmoe your Christ and Saviour... I only wonder if "eulogy" here gave you His permission to do that?

I also wonder, if there's been an ego-death, who is the one talking from your head?

All PeopleS?

I'm not sure, exactly, why I am like this...I need to do more contemplation on that one, I suppose.

Yea, you do that.

And after months of listening to Satyr's videos on Humanitarianism, of whatever stripe, come here justifying it like you never learnt a thing. Who cares?

Quote :

Of course I know what OM means, Silly. It is the sound of the Universe. You, probably, know more about it than me as you are located in India.

Silly. As if Shankara had the best knowledge of the Vedic ethos just because he was in india... brilliant logic.

And oh, you can continue to obssess and fish for my location and I will tell you again the same thing I have told you before, you are free to imagine howevet you want me,,, since there is that little software thing called "TOR" and I can be anywhere I want to be...

get it retard?

Ta...

No, I don't (fore)see myself changing my views in the coming months. And I don't recall Satyr mentioning anything about regular humanitarianism. Yes, he did talk about secular-humanism often, but, of course, humanitarianism and secular-humanism are not the same thing.

In regards to the India thing, I thought it was already well established that you are a resident of India...I believe Satyr and Apaosha both confirmed that in the Chatbox sometime ago. And is it not logical that one would probably have more knowledge about a given subject if one grew up in the place it originated? Seems logical to me.

And it appears that you get overly-defensive when one mentions something personal about you which, to me, indicates an insecurity of sorts.

Anfang wrote:

Primal wrote:

Am I a secular-humanist? No, I don't think so. I still feel morality, ' good and evil ' are contrived. But I'm going to be more of a conventionally so called " good person " because it's what my heart genuinely desires.

Your heart desires to help people you haven't even met, that you don't know anything about on a personal level? This sounds quite sentimental and sentimentality happens when the heart is silent and emotions are, for some reason, not felt.

Could be emotional exhaustion for example.

I want to help people that have been through traumatic experiences, in particular, children who are orphaned due to losing their parents in war. I want to help those that need help - not just any person. I empathize with them.

Before I had my change of mind, I was suppressing my empathy/compassion in the attempt to become more ruthless, more tyrannical. But I realized the foolishness of my ways, and now am becoming more balanced and in tune with my nature.

A sentimental person thinks he's feeling.
There is a difference.

I know you don't want to help just anyone.
The emphasis was on the heart part.
The heart doesn't care about statistics and orphans who are only an abstraction for you as of yet, without a personal encounter.
Humanitarians are usually sentimental - so not about the heart.

Anfang wrote:

A sentimental person thinks he's feeling.
There is a difference.

I know you don't want to help just anyone.
The emphasis was on the heart part.
The heart doesn't care about statistics and orphans who are only an abstraction for you as of yet, without a personal encounter.
Humanitarians are usually sentimental - so not about the heart.

I've had personal encounters with troubled children before, so I wouldn't consider them to be some abstraction. I'd prefer the adjective compassionate over sentimental.

Primal Rage wrote:

I want to help people that have been through traumatic experiences, in particular, children who are orphaned due to losing their parents in war. I want to help those that need help - not just any person. I empathize with them.

Before I had my change of mind, I was suppressing my empathy/compassion in the attempt to become more ruthless, more tyrannical. But I realized the foolishness of my ways, and now am becoming more balanced and in tune with my nature.

Have you considered that your masculine overcompensation you displayed before this humbling experience of yours, was the reaction against a subjugation of your femininity?

Why do you believe subscribing to "humanitarianism" somehow exempts you from the self-annulling principles of other ideas like it?

Oh boy...

Well, give your self some time to ...think... about all of it - what you want to do.
Seems prudent.

stargazer wrote:

Primal Rage wrote:

I want to help people that have been through traumatic experiences, in particular, children who are orphaned due to losing their parents in war. I want to help those that need help - not just any person. I empathize with them.

Before I had my change of mind, I was suppressing my empathy/compassion in the attempt to become more ruthless, more tyrannical. But I realized the foolishness of my ways, and now am becoming more balanced and in tune with my nature.

Have you considered that your masculine overcompensation you displayed before this humbling experience of yours, was the reaction against a subjugation of your femininity?

Why do you believe subscribing to "humanitarianism" somehow exempts you from the self-annulling principles of other ideas like it?

Yes, I have. A lot of the machismo I displayed was very ' over the top', a compensation or way of snuffing out the feminine aspect of myself.

I wouldn't say I'm subscribing to humanitarianism as a sort of strict philosophy.  I suppose it's just a label, really.


To Anfang, I have done a lot of.....thinking.......about all of it. Many hours of silent contemplation, as prior mentioned.

Just one more step to egalitarianism.

Why "help" one person over another? Why help war ravaged children rather than a homeless bum? How is your "help" honest in anyway?

Æon wrote:

Just one more step to egalitarianism.

Why "help" one person over another?  Why help war ravaged children rather than a homeless bum?  How is your "help" honest in anyway?

I don't think I could ever be an egalitarian, not an honest one anyways. I don't think it's a necessary component of humanitarianism. I've helped out homeless people before, but I'd prefer to help out children as they are more vulnerable.

Primal Rage wrote:

Yes, I have. A lot of the machismo I displayed was very ' over the top', a compensation or way of snuffing out the feminine aspect of myself.

And now it seems to be taking on a crusade of its own. What does this tell you?

Quote :

I wouldn't say I'm subscribing to humanitarianism as a sort of strict philosophy.  I suppose it's just a label, really.

If you recognize its simplicity, than this should illustrate to you its baseness, it being simply another offshoot of liberalism.

Are you now a liberal?

Primal Rage wrote:

but I'd prefer to help out children as they are more vulnerable.

Now you're exposing yourself.

What makes you think children need your "help"?

Primal Rage wrote:

In regards to the India thing, I thought it was already well established that you are a resident of India...I believe Satyr and Apaosha both confirmed that in the Chatbox sometime ago. And is it not logical that one would probably have more knowledge about a given subject if one grew up in the place it originated? Seems logical to me.

I never said Lyssa was form India. I told you that if Hinduism and eastern philosophy interested you that you should speak with Lyssa.

I guess I can understand why you jumped to that conclusion.

Besides, even if she does live there, who cares?

I just thought about Ted Kaczynski's manifesto and how he describes the motivations of liberals to find a worthy cause, a purpose, because many natural expressions, avenues, are blocked off these days.