Observations and Thoughts too short for their own threads - 1

When you meet me, I'll seem....

Awkward, Polite, Attractive, slightly Anxious, sporadically Humorous, and Socially Inept, late with Witticisms, I won't seem "all there". Most of all I'll remain easily forgettable. You won't remember me because, chances are, we won't have something essential in common. We won't share Philosophy in common.

My social interactions only use 1-5% of my brain, my mental capacity. Whereas the average person uses larger percentages, 25%, 50%, or more. The average person is devoted and "assigned" to connecting socialization with cognization. Most people "think" socially.

Because of this, it is rare or never that I'll "expose" myself to others, probably never in person. Even among those who "know me" best, don't know me well enough. My ego and identity are hidden from view, socially and within civilization. My nature does not belong in civilization. Civilization is stunting, suppressing, and restrictive. What I, my mind desires, is freedom to think and speak. There is no such outlet within society.

You must understand that I have libraries inside my skull, mountains of books and words of wisdom to speak. But no audience. No listeners. Instead my wisdom just amasses with nowhere to flow out to, no minds to receive it. I've tried the internet, forums, to no avail. There are no receptive minds, I guess, anywhere in the world.

I resign myself to the tradition of philosophers. Philosophers do not, and probably cannot, speak to their own age and era. Philosophers do not speak nor commune with the "right now", modern age. Instead the words, thoughts, wisdom of philosophers, the world's greatest thinkers and geniuses are "sent off" to some distant future, time, or place. Philosophy is received....a year from now. A decade. A century. A millennium. Only after such time passes does another philosopher appear, to receive what was left behind, so long ago. Philosophers' thoughts are timeless in this way.

So instead any current, present, or "Modern" philosopher must remain, utterly, alone. Solitary confinement. The philosopher is one who lives within society and civilization as a prison. Philosophers, though, are best fit, thrust unto the wilderness and frontier lands. Philosophers can train for an army or military engagement. Philosophers can be molded into great warlords, conquerors, and explorers. But until such time comes, a philosopher in a cage, must only continue to accumulate wisdom, knowledge, truth.


Perhaps it is normal that philosophy is blocked, and cannot flow, accumulating and amassing, without release and recycling.

My current solution is to find some outlet, paper, electronic, a journal, a forum, some place to donate all these ideas that I can trust, and believe will be left standing, or read and passed along to the next location. This thread, this forum, is just one step to the next location. Where will the next steps land?

It's difficult to give away wisdom blindly.


Who knows who receives it and why, to what end? Wisdom can be a great power, tool, and weapon. Dangerous in the hands of a child or some flawed soul who wants to wield it for dark purposes. But, so what? The point of artistry, which embodies much of philosophy, is to create for the sake of creation. Like the scientists who create nuclear arms and other powerful weapons. They exist to create, not to dictate the ends or usage of their creations of war. Crafting a sword to wield is often times different than wielding and swinging it, the difference between physical art metallurgy and the warrior's lifestyle, martial arts, constant training and battles. The blacksmith specializes in creating steel. The warrior specializes in swinging it. It's rarer that anybody, any single soul, any individual can encompass all things. No individual certainly has the time to master them all.

But philosophy attempts to master all knowledge, all truth. Philosophy is an infinite curiosity and thirsting for more knowledge, along with the discrimination and intelligence to distinguish what is true from what is false.


So yes it's dangerous to give away wisdom, for free, to strangers. But you must, and you will. You have no choice.

Memory is limited in life. A human brain, any one person, can only remember so much at a time. After adolescence, into adulthood, any individual's brain begins to solidify. Some persons have superior memory than others, a mental specialization. Some people can remember more, others left.

When a philosopher's or thinker's brain is full then it must overflow, and donate knowledge, somewhere, anywhere, to anyone.

As a philosopher, the smallest hope you will have is that, at least, your knowledge and wisdom will be appreciated, by someone, someday. There is redemption in this facet of life and philosophy. It was not all for nothing. Not all was lost or forgotten. There was some small worth, some value, some meaning, to somebody. Something was remembered. Your words and wisdom may not have reached their final destination, but they took a turn on the path, through somebody else's mind, heard in a whisper, 1000 years ago, and new ideals sprout from them that you could never have imagined when you were alive. Because what exists today that would have been foreseen 1000 years ago? Could they have imagined, today?

The wisdom produced by philosophy and philosophers is simply, overflow. The mind and memory fills up, and cannot hold anymore water, and so the water spills over and whets the ground. Unforeseen consequences, vegetation, flowers, bushes and trees sprouting out. Life proceeds from the wastes of others.

A valueless idea, to you, may become invaluable to another.


Meaning and value,
Ebb and flow,
Rise and recede,
Come and go.

In order for mankind to "Progress" is to venture to the frontier, a conscious sacrifice of comfort, hedonism, and decadence.

Sleeping from a warm soft bed, to cold hard rocks.
Drinking from clean chlorinated water, to dirty moldy muck.
Eating from cooked and charred meat, to wormy and fleshy blood.
Living from family and familiar faces, to strangers in dangerous places.

How difficult is it to give up what the poorer and desperate classes of humans so readily fight and die to attain?

Merica.

That is all.

Females flock to the professions of "Nursing" and "Teachers" the fastest.

Why? Because nursing over others gives women authority over men who would normally dominate them (when healthy). Then a woman can lord over a man while he is ill. Because teaching over others gives women authority over boys (and girls) who would normally dominate them (when adults). Then a woman can lord over child while they are unlearned and inexperienced.

However a woman as a nurse or a teacher is an inferior position, one that precludes the loss of her own femininity, to birth children of her own (requiring a nurse herself) and educating her own biological children (negating the role of an external teacher).

Poor Kanye, I bet he never thought the song would ever come to an end when one chooses to dance with the devil, entering into the cycle of success approaching the destruction, convinced the selling of his soul would promise a first class ticket of a destiny to the dynasty, a special opportunity to go from the field to the house, a member of the family..or so he thought..He should of known there are no blacks upon the mother ship...ah, the swamps and the underground tunnels await him, perhaps a quick exit from the bloodhounds into a safe space with Huck, only to reassemble and plot a revolt on some Nat Turner shit is necessary..

A (mediocre / average) woman knows no loyalty; read Malleus Malefircarum (Witch Hammer) by Henricus Institoris to understand the psychology of women - she knows mainly carnal lust and subjugation.

Vorenus, maybe an actor, but they did depict a face classical to identify a soldier and a loyal Roman dog; restraining himself from women for 10 years due to his marriage pledge while his wife screws some ''good citizen'' in Rome.

The lust after victorious battle, having dominance and possessions (over women), you should think, because it erects the spirit and potentially one's cock to penetrate the realm of treasure , a man will have more difficulty restraining himself.
Nope, the bitch back home screws you over by screwing some common men in the home owned by her man to have her sheltered.

Cock sucking whores, how pathetic, no woman with dignity gets on her knees to suckle some sexual organ, but it is very typical in our Modern age; especially with all these nipple sucking Manchildren cucking themselves to the State, of course the women will follow.

Big breasts really are restricted within the West European populations, from Greece to Sweden - sexual attraction to this trait defines Western tit sucking men in need for some mother's milk.
And the Bantu populations have their attraction to asses beyond comfort; sexual attraction is not nessecarily helpful and evolutionary, at the point where big titties prohibit you from running, the evolutionary need and design gets in your way due to sexual fetishism and this exposes the need at cost of biological balance.

That is maybe the difference between Western and Eastern European branches, we are nipple suckers hence so Statist loyal like a Roman-tic dog (and the Chinese..? symmetric factory robots with little to no distinction between the genders) in need for some petting and the Eastern branches are less in need for comforting dependency at cost of health and legacy (though of course Orthodox Xtianity is Oriental anti-self, we all have different degrees of anti-self depending on the population it seems).

Though East European women are as much of whores as are the Western women, just different manifesting degrees of whoredom. Depends on the men.

All women desire to strike at a man's manhood; the slut through selecting upon a man's size of cock or how much he can drink; for Moderns find their ''masculine spirit'' in a glass of beer. And the Noble woman selects based upon worthiness in mind and body, this strives a man to greatness, to prove himself to be more than just some mediocre cuck making way for bigger cocks than his own.
A Noble woman inspires Man to cultivate his manhood (in accordance to potential) in spirit, deeds and endurance; that too is a strike at one's 'manhood', just a different degree and angle.

And then you have those who simply do not care, they are either impotent cucks or belong to the greatest of Man.

The love of the average person begins when his dick erects or her vagina starts to tingle, and so there it also ends. When copulation has reached, the interest in another too ends, their love consists of immediate gratification and depending on the gender, desired absorption and penetration.
The average woman is promiscuous in order to sample as much as she can (biological root) but due to Modern techniques won't have any consequences such as incurable diseases or pregnancy, hence this behaviour is propagated as mere "fun" instead of considering / developing a more refined taste.

This explain why the penis is shaped (harpoon) in correlation to female nature (scraping out semen from the vagina of potential others she mated with) and of course the nature of men of outcompeting each other.
Such a bitch woman has no specific taste for future consideration to settle, no loyalty to taste and building / maintaining of relationships - her need and thinking end in the immediacy of her vagina's gratification. Disloyalty and high probable promiscuity is in her nature, hence women are the first to be attacked through propagated ideals (mind-fucking) and when captured, assimilated into the new tribe because they more easily let go from their former values and (slaughtered) men as it is in their promiscuous nature to accept foreign elements (pregnancy too is tolerance for a foreign organism growing inside of her stomach).

The only loyalty a woman can have is through fear of man. But the Modern State protects her from being possessed, meaning, the State possesses the women and her ideals (construction of family unit).
Hence Modern family units consist merely about ideals (of shared pleasure) or else to consider anything else then children to nurture (dogs, a gold fish) and if they have children, the State will nurture them and the father is merely father through his dick, the development of the mind will be left over for the State / media to be shaped.


The 14 words I have never used with the use of 88 (rather never sympathised as I use neither in codes), for in as much it depends on the men to continue their stock, so it depends on women too, in a lesser degree though.

Women are hardcore if need to be; it all depends on the values the men give. Really, a woman would not mind massacring foreign men or deformed babies, if only the men made it acceptable and mind fucked her into believing it is right. A woman, or any partner, is a reflection of another and the women mainly of men; or in today’s Modern world, of the media and State ideals.

Now I have released my disdain - I just hate disloyalty and Moderns declaring ''love is sacred'' which most understand (feeeelz) through dick and vagina.

How to fell a tree


First of, a tree usually has a centre of mass which is leaning towards a particular direction. This happens because trees are not perfectly round in their cross-section, they may not have grown perfectly straight upwards and the most impact is due to the branches and their asymmetrical arrangement around the tree depending on the light environment of a particular site.

If you want to fell a tree in a direction which is different, even opposite of its natural inclination to fall then wedges or even pulling ropes are required in more extreme scenarios.

The first thing to do is to observe the tree and the surroundings and to determine in which direction to fell the tree. If the tree is almost centred in its mass then any direction can be achieved rather easily.

First you cut a notch in the tree, facing in which direction you want the tree to fall. By doing that you make it easy for the tree to fall in that particular direction, you arrange for a particular direction to be favourable to fall to.
The tree will not always fall perfectly in the direction of your created notch, to estimate the actual direction of the fall, to make it more precise, the centre of mass has to be taken into consideration. If the tree is leaning more towards one side then it will have a tendency to fall somewhat in that direction and the notch has to be made with that in mind, to compensate for that.

Once the notch is in place, the most basic technique is to cut the tree from the opposite side but to leave enough 'hinge wood' to stabilise the fall direction. If the tree is not sufficiently leaning naturally towards the intended felling direction then wedges are now being set and driven into the felling cut to lift the tree just enough to make it fall in the direction the notch is facing.

For safety it is recommended that you clear the immediate surroundings of the tree so that you can move around freely in case you have to evade the falling tree. Zones of danger are obviously the intended falling direction but the tree may also kick back with the bottom of its trunk when it lands so close, straight behind it is also a dangerous spot. In general you want to be rather close to the tree so that you can evade with a few steps quickly in case of emergency or be completely out of range of its felling radius; don't be somewhere in between those two.

Another element of danger is wind. Do not fell trees when there is too much wind unless you don't mind any felling surprises. And no hinge wood, no controlled felling direction.


[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
(make no small lateral cuts)

This may not only apply to felling trees.

@Anfang

This is an excerpt from Seven Roads to Hell, an American army airborne division account of some events of the second world war, which briefly describes tree felling as martial strategy.

Donald R. Burgett wrote:

Soon we began seeing evidence of the magnitude of what we were heading into. Huge trees lining both sides of the road had been hewn into, leaving deep notches in their trunks facing the road. Engineers had done this so that trees could be felled quickly, creating a criss-cross roadblock called am abatis that would stretch for miles in case the [Germans] were to roll unchecked this far.
Some of the trees had TNT blocks and Primacord fastened to them so they could be toppled instantly.Most were cut deeply with axes and saws and braced with wood wedges to keep them standing. All the engineers had to do was detonate the explosives or knock out the wedges and they had an instant roadblock.

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

The key is interlocking trees under tension. That makes them much more difficult and time consuming to remove than if they were separate.

@Fort
Even faithfulness or loyalty can be mis-carried into adulteration...

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

I had read a referrence about this like 5 years ago in the Essays of M. de Montaigne - it comes to mind quite often after all this time; glad I read it again and more descriptive though I remember in Montaigne's referrence that the king was so touched by this sight that he gave his word that the women may lower their men and children from their backs and have them walk for themselves without any consequences.

Back before I quit posting and participating at ILP with any serious effort, I noticed a very profound and dominating trend by the liberal advocates.

If you bring up the topic of rape, then you must be a rapist.

If you bring up the any "hateful" topic, then you must be a "hater".

If you cause any discomfort then you must be a "negative thinker".


Thus to introduce any unsettling idea among the herd, is also to cause the herd discomfort and pain. This is how they think and feel, how they "emote". It doesn't matter the direction of the idea, whether you wish to learn, to prevent, or to propose the subject matter. In other words, it doesn't matter whether you are an actual perpetrator of, or victim of, the topic. For them, the result and conclusion is the only thing of importance.

For the moderns,

If you witness a rape, then you are also, essentially, equivocally, a rapist.

If you witness a murder, then you are also, essentially, equivocally, a murderer.

If you think of evil or any "negativity", then you are also essentially, equivocally, the devil himself, "Satan".


This is actually how degenerate, perverted, and corrupt the "modern" (liberal) is. This is the lowly state of their modern reasoning.

Any introduction of a "negative" condemns you as the responsible agent of that negativity.

To breach and broach such "negative" topics, therefore, necessitates an accusation of guilt.

To discuss evil, to them, is also to be and embody evil.

The can never be any sense of genuine "innocence" in modern society or the ongoing process of civilization.

Because to even bear witness to any "evil" or "negative" act is to be implicit of the act itself. To witness barbarity, cruelty, pain, misery, etc. is also to partake in it. To be responsible (indirectly) of it. To view an internet video of a natural disaster is to be complicit in it. To the nihilist, there is no separation of viewing and witness it, to participating in it. To the modernist and nihilist, you are also "guilty" and responsible. This is how far they are willing to go to find a scape-goat, a willing (eternal) victim for their vindictiveness and revenge.

This is how the judæo-christian was first conceived. As an agent of vengeance, also seeking that "higher power", the highest agency, to blame and attack for its own sense of powerlessness.

Weakness seeking any form of power and agency, a slave seeking a master, for revenge of its own inferiority. A deep sense of shame and infantile mentality, unable to blame itself for anything. Unable and unwilling to take responsibility for itself. Absolutely refusing to do so. Thus the nihilist seeks a "god" to blame, for itself, to revenge itself.

The conclusion of Nihilism, necessarily leads to the first conception of morality.

The slave-mind, the slave-dialectic, having absolutely deprived itself of responsibility, necessarily seeks out any vassal, any container, any soul, any "potential" source of morality, and identifies it as an enemy. Any "master", any morally responsible individual or thing, any noble creature, is to blame for the nihilist's weakness. Any other is a potential scapegoat for oneself.

Anything to escape the slave's inherent disposition.

Domestication, Emasculation, Feminization, Conversion from Carnivorous to Ominvorous to Herbivorous diet:

Results in the shrinking of an organism, down to 1/10th its "Natural" size, more or less.

Compare a lapdog to a wolf. Compare a house cat to a lion. The difference of size is undeniable and obvious. Thus you may accurately infer that the larger manifestations of species are akin to their "Natural" selves, "out in the wild". Within civilization, the advantage and benefit of large size maybe, and often is, inverted. Smaller sizes will be inverted to an advantage. Same with intelligence. Outside civilization, high intelligence is advantageous but inside civilization, disadvantageous.

Now apply this analogy to gigantic size of ancient "dinosaurs". Why were lizards, long ago, theoretically so large and encumbered? Why were trees larger? Were insects and other animals also larger, on average? It would then seem that, not only is humanity "domesticated", but evolution of all life and species is itself, innately, a long process of domestication. Such that today, the alligator, the crocodile, small desert lizards, are all a fraction of size of their ancestral form. Or that birds, falcons, hawks, have all "evolved" too from the large flying dinosaurs. Again, a fraction of their ancestral form.

Thus evolution is the actual, biological process of domestication, not only of humanity and human civilization, but of all animals and species on earth that share the (global) ecosystem, and therefore share a single (macroscopic) environment. If evolution coincides with domestication then the future ought to expect the same effects. This is not to presume that organisms will continue to get smaller, per se, but rather that organisms continue to adapt to evolved circumstances of the changed environment. Human civilization has become global, and therefore, forces adaptation among other creatures and animals as well.

After all, for proof, just compare the population of (domesticated) felines versus their cousins, lions, tigers, panthers, cheetahs, cougars, bobcats, (all predatory and carnivorous), etc.

The self of man must be complete expressed by the completed self spanned through all
of expression, a natural protection lies there in, especially when understanding the
other. the self must be complete in order to understand the other without
disturbance to the self. in order to complete completion, the will also must be spanned
during the act of self. the lower functioning man moves decidedly to a moment
undecided, then repeats the decision to indecision process, the higher man
may use this method if the will and self are continued, where all acts connected
without the continuation of the willed self, the man is left open and basic
easily manipulated and confused, or lives a simple life. hedonism also exploits this
opening.I call them the timefull men, where there is no absolute completion, so the self
is never truly complete only moving towards the ordering. The closer the man
is to understanding this, then the more timeless he becomes and the more control he
gains, there lies a comfortable comprehension, thus reducing the torment that those undecided
moments bring. the difference of genius and madness is to not lose control of the men within you.The difference of a lawful and unlawful man is his ability to relax women.to rise higher
than being an intellectual is to place the will into production by the directed self. there is
no knowing further than knowing but an entering into a space unaffected by human emotion, it is this understanding that enriches the genius in man and makes emotion a glorifying tool to be used.the man who has overcome women allows them into his life unaffected by their concern, buts acts as if he is, this allowance measures the goodness of men.

Wouldn't a great philosophical question be how would one go about engaging a depressed brain?

Perhaps internalization would be a good start, or a much needed foundation.

The slavish submission of men is to fight the loneliness with no responsibility, as fear has brought out the feminine within that he wishes to run from through the other, by transferring his self, thus becoming a living sacrifice for a small price of company which lights up his presence through the satisfaction of the directed attention, bringing everything down to a central point into a meaningful purpose and continued joy.

Sometimes with the realization and remembrance that we are inside of a universe gives me slight feelings of uneasiness followed by a comforting joy.

It was only when reproduction was a given, that the social contract theory could be separated from its primary role of suppressing the females power. Instead it was shifted towards its purpose of suppressing the male's power of avoiding the "war of all against all" without fully understanding that the former was more important due to its influence on the latter.

How could Hobbes not seen that the only thing worse than a war, was an orgy.

Modern man says -
Climate change is bad.
Social change is good.

Climate change is bad because non-whites might suffer and animals may suffer.
Social change is good because non-whites are projected to suffer less and the environment will be protected as well.

The basis for this mindset is a morality which is predominantly based on avoiding harm and the virtue of care (self-less care in this case, including the reversal of being care-less about ourselves).
Secondly it shows a somewhat hidden moral superiority, hidden because the morality has become so predominant that moral contrast is easily lost and the claim to actual supremacy becomes obvious because it is implicitly assumed that the world agrees about those moral standards.

It's like - How to make someone defeat himself by exploiting their weaknesses which is done by using your opponent's strength against him.

Will the virility and vigor of youth be missed?

Age affects men, steals our vitality and youthfulness, robs of us our innocence. It's the loss of testosterone and adrenaline, simultaneously that occurs in mid age and adulthood. A newfound lethargy and laziness, no more sharp pangs, compulsions, and immediate need to compete against others. No more females to appeal to. No more women worth competing for.

Laziness, a welcome rest, enjoying the silence and stillness of a quiet life. This is a major benefit of age, wisdom, and maturity.

The "feminization" of a man is inherent and natural according to the process of aging. A man without virility, unbridled by the force of flowing testosterone, is very much like a woman. And so a man becomes "equal" with a woman and her sexlessness. She has no immediate need for sex, and without virility, neither does a man. A man who does not feel the immediate need to compete for, to fuck, to appeal to, a woman, becomes as desirable to her as she may to another male.

There's no rush anymore, no thrill, youth comes to an end. Testosterone and adrenaline subside. Men in older age reminisce more often, begin dwelling on a past, dwelling upon that vigor of male youth, which also attracts women in its own rite, however different than a man with no rush, no "need" to procreate.


Children and young adults cannot enjoy a proper 'rest' like an adult can, like experience and the passage of time eventually force, into submission. Into accepting physical, and mental, limits of the universe. There's only so much time in life. Adulthood is the stage of life in which realizing this (limitation of time) has utmost importance.

What ought you do with the limited time you have left?

How you spend your time, defines you. It is everything. It is all you have. It is all you can offer to anybody else.

Time is everything. Time has infinite value.

A leader is distinguished by excellence among his compatriots. A tyrant rules by decree.

Ethos wrote:

A leader is distinguished by excellence among his compatriots. A tyrant rules by decree.

Coercion/Conviction...a leader leads by example, inspiring the others to follow, to imitate, their envy, if it is present is converted to self-enhancement; the tyrant uses ploys to manipulate, threats, extraordinary promises, lies; the envy he inspires becomes bitter jealousy, wanting to pull the superior down, to level it all so that nothing stand out, is distinguished.

The leader tells his mates....you can see for yourself; he points, exposing, un-covering, clearing clouded eyes and minds; he is thrust in the role, does not choose it, does not want it, does not enjoy it.
The tyrant, the priest, makes himself the lens they must peer through to see the distorted view; he is nothing without this communal appreciation; he asks all to look at him - he points at himself.