Satyrnalium

It's because the Greeks could not have an authority, a emperor over their heads that there was never any great Hellenic empire, other than the one Macedonia set up by conquering them all, except Sparta....it is this that explains why Sparta never has one kind....and why Sparta and Athens never could get along, unless an external threat showed up.

It's because of this spirit that the Vikings could never establish a great empire.
This Daemon, people born of another bloodline an ever relate to, and can only understand in relation o domination, subjugation, a one King.
It is why the Greeks could never establish a Mafia.

It is why democracy could only have been invented in Athens.
Visiting the nation will not make you understand it.
Reading books on, it may make you know, but not understand.
It is why post-modernity can have the effect it has, and pagan whites can idly sit by as they are being exterminated.
It is the Pagan spirit that had multiple gods and not ONE.
It is the Dorian spirit that had no walls.

How the wave becomes a particle:

Wave = vibration....oscillation is how we define its multi-dimensional effect.
Vibration defines oscillation within the limits of human perceptions - within a four-dimensional reality.

When we observe we do it through a medium.
Visual sensual awareness uses light.
Light is the fastest oscillation we can process. What lies beyond it, in speed, or rhythm of vibration we interpret as void/darkness (black).
What lies close to the extreme speed we interpret as brilliance, white.
Decreasing the speed, or rhythms we begin to discriminate variations of vibration - colours.

Light interacts with the wave, the oscillation.
The event of the interaction we interpret as a point in space/time.
Wave collapses, noetically, into a singularity - abstraction.

Light's speed is a shrinking of dimensions....its movement is the increase of possibilities, at the cost of all other possibilities.
Movement in space, means the increase of dimensional possibilities, at the expense of others.
When I move towards a direction, I am increasing my possibilities for interacting in those dimensions, and decreasing it in all others.
Speed of light is an extreme of this.
It's dimensional effect is so focused, relative to our own, that it does not interact with all patterns, and it does not affected or has an affect on them to the degree a slower pattern would. So light can pass through, and partially interact.
This means that when we see a phenomenon, using the medium, of light, the pattern, the oscillations we call light, does not fully interact.....some passes through the other oscillation, some bounce towards many directions (scatter), and some bounces to the eye.
This we interpret, and process, as colour, form, texture.

To put it another way....
Speed: movement in space (possibility), means oscillation is reduced within some dimensions and increased in others.
The faster the pattern, oscillation, moves, the more extreme the dimensional range of effect.
Its attraction/repulsion possibilities increasing within some dimensions of space (possibility range) and decreasing in all others.
Speed of light is the extreme, where the oscillation/vibration of light can only interact in a very obsessionally focused direction...so fast that the totality of dissensions of a phenomenon such as a stone, cannot be interacted with...but only those of its focus.
Affect meaning attraction/repulsion...or its harmony relative to the other oscillation.

This partial interaction is what is reflected and then interact with our sense organ, and is interpreted into neural pulse, transmitted to brain where it is processed and interpreted as colour.

From my presentation of patterned and non-patterned Energies interacting, relating, it follows that meaning is the map of these matrices of inter-relating.
Judgment is the evaluation, the transference of these external relationships into an internal map - phenomena interacting translated into noetic map - abstraction.
The noetic is not guaranteed to be accurate, correct, or precise....but has a degree of accuracy, for two reasons:
1- World is Flux - dynamic, and the interactions and the degree of interactions changes.
2- The mind translates and in the translation sacrifices details, either because it does not perceive them, or because it cannot integrate them into its mental models.

Truth, is therefore, a subjective interpretation of inter-relating phenomena (patterns).
Patterns are oscillating space (possibility) which create events, such as when two patterns interact, and these events are translated into neural pulse.
Along this process data is lost.
The process itself is one of abstracting into a 'thing' what is fluid, fluctuating, dynamic.
Abstraction is the reduction of multi-dimensional possibilities, or four-dimensions in the case of the human species, into a binary code.
This is a simplification/generalization....called abstracting.


We can mention here the reason why the body is more wise than the mind.
Body is an extension in multi-dimensional space/time, cutting away into four-code, or four-dimensional space/time....this is what the form is - the skin representing this separation.
The mind is half of that, as it works on binary logic.
What is sacrificed is perception to achieve clarity...or to produce awareness.

Body sacrifices multi-dimensional space/time to become a four-dimensional organism.
It organizes itself in accordance to four dimensions, even if it is affected by more.
The mind sacrifices two of the four dimensions to focus awareness.
Without this focus, this reduction, self-consciousness is impossible.

Consciousness is awareness in four-dimensions, focused outwards into a multi-dimensional world.
The reduction of multi-dimensional space/time into four, so as to begin the process of self-organizing which is what an organism is.
Self-consciousness is a further reduction of this into two-dimensions - the either/or of binary logic, so as to make self-consciousness possible: I/other...good/bad...Dualism.

Philosopher = hybrid - part artists, part scientist.
An artistic mind, a philosophical one, can integrate the body's four-dimensional extensions and the minds two-dimensional codes - mind/body synthesis.
He can do so without confusing this as world, which is multi-dimensional, but remaining clear as to where body ends, and how far the mind can go without confusing its metaphors as being literal.

Mystification is the exploitation of the base mind, the un-sophisticated brain, to insinuate into the unknown what is contradicted by the physical 0 body cannot lie.
The brain's binary code and its reduction of all into abstraction, enables it to fabricate any synthesis, and then project it outward, as idea, which is not validated by experiences, the body, but presented as the hidden, or the immanent.
In effect he mind proposes a world the body contradicts, or that contradicts the body.
Physical reality is a hindrance to be dismissed using clever mental tricks.
The unknown dimensions are used as a validation of what the mind fabricates - justification using the negative.

World is represented as 'illusion', or as hiding a motive, or as insufficient.
Body's wisdom, judgments, are inadequate to gratify the mind's idea(l)s.
Body has to be put in states of numbness or chemical invigoration, because its natural state does not suffice to bring forth the hidden dimensions - body lies, it withholds the truth.
It has to be surpassed, or the mind has to go beyond it.

When mind contradicts the body it is nihilism.
Dismissing the physical is what nihilism does, replacing it with binary dualism, or by fabricating alternate realities, meanings, that do not correspond to relationships in the real world.
Mind can lie...body cannot....but the nihilist accuses the body of lying to accommodate its fabrications.
It does so to propose meanings the body cannot validate, because they exist only in the mind.

Conflict between the real and the ideal.
Mind deals in ideals....body deals with the real.  

When one is not in-tune with the other, we call it schizophrenia....or nihilism.

What is body?
Presence, becoming apparent to a conscious mind.
It is sum of all past - sum of all nurturing is nature.
If the past is disturbing or does not abide by the mind's ideals, it is selectively embraced, or completely rejected.
We'll find selective sampling of reality by the nihilist, to give his delusions the semblance of realism - a good lie must be partially true, otherwise it becomes too obvious to be convincing to the weak, desperate, mind.

We witness this selective sampling in Abrahamism....most evident in Christianity where Paganism is sampled...or when reality is sampled, giving its projected fabricated abstraction, its mono-god, the form of a man....pretending to be realistic when its fabrication has no reference outside minds.
It sampling of paganism is meant to give credence to its anti-nature, anti-realism, anti-world dogma.

Nihilism uses this form of deception to put on the mantel of realism, while it is proposing abstractions that have no reference to reality, or may even contradict, annul, reality as it is experienced - it clothes its abstractions in science jargon, or it uses pagan symbols/words to hide its anti-nature idealism.

I've used the metaphor of the seesaw, or the Trojan horse to represent this methodology of deceit.
Seesawing is a way of alluding exposure. When its spiritual superstitions are challenged it hides in scientific jargon, and then when the pressure is off it returns to its superstitions.
This is why nihilism uses ambiguity...it is never direct and clear. Always vague, mystical.
clarity is anathema to it.
Connecting symbols/words to reality, the noumena to phenomena is disarming to it.
For its mystifying 'magic' to have a psychological effect, to be transmitted from mind to mind, like a virus, a memetic parasite, it must take the form of metaphor without clarity.
Nihilism uses metaphors that allude to pagan spirituality, but lack the references to natural phenomena.
Metaphors are used to hide, not to bring to light.
They hide their plagiarism, and their motive - their references to Abrahamic religious Scripture.  

Saul corrupted Jesus' revolution against organized Abrahamism...and created a new kind of pharisees, a new Church.
Irony of ironies.  
The one who preached that the mono-god could be found everywhere, in the heart, the mind in fact, of the believer, was made into a symbol to construct a Church where believers must gather to find him.
Is not Nietzsche being corrupted, as we speak - made into an icon, like Jesus, of the idol representing ideas he spoke against?
Irony of ironies.
Blasphemy of blasphemies!!!

His philosophy was a series of psychological insights, to reveal the essence of man.
Even his 'eternal return' was a psychological test of validating your life and your choices - live life as if you were to relive it eternally.
That's a psychological testing.
Did not Hinduism speak of return, and cycles?
The overman was a psychological type that has overcome the resentment of his own nature as ordering and chaos - the overcoming of the resentment of chaos that gave man free-will...but also made him mortal, and able to become aware of his mortality and imperfection.
His will to power was also about man and his striving....his passion - a metaphor about life and only life.
A metaphor about Energies....using literati imagery, artistic innuendos - like an oracle's decree.  
He said nothing new.  

Nietzsche did not invent a new philosophy...he affirmed an ancient one...and rejected Schopenhauer's solution.
He was a psychologist, offering nothing different from ancient pagan, and Hindu insights.
He said it himself - a diagnostician....of a mental, psychological, dis-ease called nihilism.
Zoroastrianisms was the first symptom of cultural fatigue and surrender to necessity, what Socrates learned from Zalmoxis and returned to Athens a changed man...something the Jews stole and morphed into their own versions of slavishness.
A dis-ease brought on by the absence of frontiers, and population pressures.
Disease thrive in such environments - viruses go viral, parasites multiply, spreading from host to host, because of the closeness, proximity, and no way out, no open spaces.
Reduction of possibilities increases probabilities.
We can find in Heraclitus all we need...if not for the scarcity of what is left of this thinker's thoughts, and the poetic prose he used to deliver them to us...something Nietzsche also adopted.

What is the secret?
That the common man is both necessary for the maintenance of a complex social system, and unable to think beyond Dualism and the mind/body conflict - has no ability to appreciate what art is, but only to be controlled and corrupted by art - as Plato knew.
Common man gives himself to art, having to ability to create.
The real world cannot be revealed completely to the man of no spiritual strength because he will go mad, or will become decadent, as Socrates discovered upon his return to Athens after the war.
In short...philosophy is not for the many.....not even for the few intelligent ones, because it requires a special combination of wisdom, intelligence and a strong will, a powerful constitution.
It requires men so alien as to seem monsters to the average human.
All others are oblivious, or will be broken by its insights....made into reckless hedonists, or power-hungry charlatans, or shameless hypocrites, looking to glory to absolve them of their nature.

Plato called them 'philosopher kings'; those who would not seek to take advantage of their superiority, but instead, because of it, refuse leadership, or social positions of status, or recognition from the masses.  
Did not Nietzsche become a recluse?
Was not his opus, Zarathustra a man who lived apart from humanity, in a cave?
What of Schopenhauer, and Evola....Heidegger, and many of the great ones?
Did they seek to be worshipped and followed, or did they prefer solitude, and only spoke when things became dangerous?

A stone wills nothing.
It has movement, not motive.
A stone is not a singularity, not an organism, not even a unity.
It is an ephemeral congruence man discovers and projects into it himself, thinking the elements in momentary balance are intentionally holding on.

When we find a stone, among others, we separate it from the background and make it into a singularity, a one. Then we mistakenly consider this separation we created as being the essence of the stone - part of its essence.
If were to look closer and find a grain of sand on the stone, we would do the same - we could separate it from the stone, and think of it as an intentional singularity, a one.
We are the discriminating element.
We, as organisms, differentiate and distinguish - and then we project ourselves into that which we distinguished, as different, and separated and then abstracted.

Only life has intent - meaning a movement towards a specific objective. Life can focus its aggregate energies.....lifeless matter/energy cannot.
All else moves along the paths-of-least-resistance, where resistance is determined by the congruences aggregate patterns, in relation to other patterns; creating a range of effect - a field of attractions/repulsion: sum total of their combined relationship of harmony/disharmony.

When harmony exceeds disharmony there is ephemeral congruence....disrupted only by a force exceeding the sum of its harmony - attraction in excess to repulsion.

All opinion is based on interpretation.
Interpretation is an evaluation of patterns, phenomena, and how they relate - meaning.
Interpreting interpretations is to seek meaning in text - the codification of another's interpretations.
This, by itself, is not a validation.

The interpretation is validated directly from world....by converting the interpretation to action, applying theory....by observing another doing so....and third by a theoretical juxtaposition of the interpretation's meanings with the world's interacting patterns.
The three methods are presented in a sequence of highest, most reliable, to lowest, least reliable.

The third is the philosophical spirit...and it requires a particular type of mind, psychology, to produce meanings called wisdom, that others can then validate on their own using the three methods.
So rare is this type that true philosophers are rare, and sometimes worshipped as gods, or admired as idols, heroes, or icons to be emulated.
It is by no means pleasing to belong to this type....as it requires self-critique, exposure to truths most cannot endure, perception of details (data influx) that require long periods of isolation to recuperate from....and so on...a strong resistance to emotions and to physical/mental needs/desires...more possible with old age, more rare in youth, and a strong sense of pride and integrity, refusing to submit and to self-deceive, placing nothing above clarity.

Spirituality is a way of relating to world.
A method of coping and adjusting to what is.
Its esoteric theoretical components can be taught to others who wish to find a method they cannot produce by themselves.
Spirituality is always theoretical and noetic, because it refers to mind, and mental models, and its connection to past (nature).
Therefore mythologies pass on to the present generations of successful coping mechanisms.
Spirit refers to the continuum of memories connecting the individual to his past; he being its manifestation, or this past made present, whereupon it is called 'soul'.
These terms are so ambiguous, so insinuating and metaphorical that they can mean anything for anyone.  

In this case I connect them to experience, or I bring them into the real, as I've attempted to do with many other words being hijacked by Moderns and degenerates, each for their own psychological reasons.
Spirit/Soul is demystified and brought 'down to earth', where each individual can relate to it on their own.
Moderns prefer that these words, as well as many others, remain mystical, because then they can manipulate them in any way satisfies a particular idea(l), or a goal.
They do this, as I have repeatedly explained, with language in general.
To do otherwise would place the standard outside their control, and expose them to a world and to themselves in relation to others within the same world.
Far easier to manipulate concepts when the words have been disconnected from a world that is indifferent, unconscious, and does not yield to human semiology; far easier to construct an alternate reality when this reality is selectively ignored; far easier to philosophize when the words used are detached from their references and converted to pure noetic constructs with only an emotional trigger, or a reference to another's mind, or to text.
Such method are useful, in he short-term, to placate and to sooth anxiety/fear, to replace need with a comforting abstraction....but that is its only utility, and in the long run it has to confront its own metaphors, defensively excusing failure.

Other words can be used, approach the same concepts with slight nuanced modifications, such as the words 'ego', 'self', 'I'....
What matters is that the words refer to the same phenomena, and are not used to refer to mental fabrications that replace the phenomenon, which is most often the case when dealing with how Moderns apply language.
Of course their motive is not mine.
I wish to clarify and harmonize my subjectivity with the fluctuation objective world, whereas they want to use language to hide, or to deny, reject, in other words to cope with a world that is displeasing to them....and in most cases terrifying.
Anxiety/Fear dominating their thinking, forcing them to explain any reminded of this as being rooted in fear.  
They have many other coping mechanisms, such as drug use, entertainment distractions, fantasy, and the most addictive natural coping mechanism the effects of 'love'.
Love triggers a series of psychosomatic processes, experienced as well-being, a mental state of madness, blindness, numbness to the underlying anxiety/fear.  
We can witness this in other organisms, and the mother's defence of her young. Her behaviour exceeding her normal automatic reactions.
Biochemicals associated with 'love', are rooted in the libidinal reactivity of lust.....ergo Freud's commentary on sex find validity when we realize the connection.
There are many forms of love, referring to the degrees of this biochemical effect.
Effects ranging from paroxysm, the madness of lust, to the parental, calmer, boding, of association that replaces the dominance hierarchy, found in heterosexual lust/love (eros), with imprinting.
Lust/Love begins with the physical harmonization where the lovers begin to move, gesture, in unison....and in some cases if the imprinting is deep they begin to lookalike, after a period of time.
Harmonization is also part of this psychological merging, where one's identity is synthesized with the other's - one getting 'lost' in the loved one.
This evolved in the parental instinct. The parent sees itself in the offspring, and identifies with this partially alien organism.
Parent sees himself/herself externalized and yet, at the same time, not absolutely - an element of strangeness is present, due to the impossibility of absolutes, for one, and due to the synthesis with another genetic lineage - merger of memories.
For the child the identification is smoother, because it lacks its own experiences to distinguish it from the parent.  
Children imprint and imitate what they see, and the first thing they see and recognize as another being is the parent.
Lover's harmonization, mirroring, becomes for the child imitation of mannerism, language, habits etc.
This is accentuated by the fact that it also shares the genetic memories that produced these particular habits and mannerisms, as well as the environment, unless some dramatic shift has occurred.
In modern environments this dramatic shift does occur.
in the past it was smaller, but as techniques/technologies take over, they are accelerating.
The same mannerisms, habits, reactions to world are imitated within a slightly modified environment - generational shift.

What each individual evaluates as good/bad determines the consequences of his future choices, unless he never applies his standard of evaluation and keeps it as an indication of his own theoretical quality.

Duchesne, Ricardo wrote:

Ind-Europeans were uniquely rules by a class of free aristocrats, grouped into war bands that were egalitarian rather then ruled by autocrats. A state is 'aristocratic' if the ruler, the king, or the commander-in-chief is not an autocrat who treats the upper classes as unequal servants, but is a 'peer' who exists in a spirit of equality, as another warrior of noble birth, primus inter pares. This is not to say that the leader did not get to enjoy extra powers and advantages, or that leaders were not tempted to act in tyrannical ways. It is to say that aristocratic cultures, for all the intense rivalries between families and individuals seeking their own renown, there was a strong ethos of aristocratic egalitarianism against despotic rule. A true aristocrat deserving respect from his peers could not be submissive; his dignity and honour as a man were intimately linked to his capacity for self-determinism.

-Faustian Man in a Multicultural Age

Contrast Aryan spirituality with Abrahamism and its authoritarian, singularity one-God.

This spirit is based on metaphysics as I described them.
The absence of an absoltue makes this spirit possible.
An absolute would be a de facto authority, an imposition upon free-will and individuality.
it is because of chaos that an individual organism stands before it alongside other organisms, as agencies of order.
Absolute order is another way of describing Abrahamism, and its version of a One-God.

Chaos, as I defined it, places the gods alongside man. Superior but agencies of order.
The Greeks did not worship their gods in a submissive manner. They tried to placate and trick them....gain their favour, and often challenged them.
This is the Faustian spirit of European culture.  

The anti-Faustian spirit permeates western civilization.....as a disease.
It underlies philosophy and its derivative, science.  
It presumes a singularity, or an ordered universe as a starting premise....and it reflects the Biblical declaration that 'first came the word'.....where language is the expression of noetic ordering.
There are two ways to approach this...one as a declaration of an intent - to impose order where there is none....or that there exists order which all must submit to.
Rejection of this is what results in post-modern nihilism, that begins by a selective rejection of natural order and then linguistically declares its own fabrications as more real than the real.....the ideal more than the real.

Here the separation of self from nature places it in an antagonistic relationship, that evolves into the notion of a absolute God existing beyond existence.
The Aryan understanding places man before natural order as the Greeks placed themselves before the gods.
First among equals, means the gods are first, and man an equal agency of nature, of ordering, in opposition to chaos.
This does not mean a rejection of the gods and the declaration of self as above them.
The Olympian gods, as the Greeks metaphorically understood them, were also fighting against chaos, I the form of Titans.

Without chaos, defined as randomness, there is no concept of 'first among equals', or of 'free-will' or of self-determinism.
There is an totalitarian authority, whether conscious or not, imposing a rule, in the form of linguistic commandment, in more primitive superstitious forms, or imposing laws we cannot overcome, or contradict.
There are indeed natural laws that can be understood by man, by finding patterns in the patterns, or by anthropomorphisizing them into deities representing natural forces.... and we can indeed conflict, barter and submit to them, but there is also randomness which defies all understanding of it.
As Kazantzakis described in his book Ασκητική, the gods are fighting alongside us, not against us, if we only pay them homage and we do not reject them.

The same relationship to the leader is found in all Aryan cultures...and more strikingly found in Sparta, with its two-kings.
It also underscored Democratic system, even though the principle of first among equals is never practised, particularly when it comes to shared risks.

I consider [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]  a more Aryan political system, in comparison to Democracy.
Democracy is a compromises forced upon the Athenians due to their decline.
Yet, how they practiced it and how we do in modern times, is different.

Details = patterns, or congruence of patterns 

The amount of details that can be assimilated into a cohesive abstraction (mental model) is an indication of its sophistication, as well as that of the mind that produced it, but it does not suffice.
It is not easy, but easier, to construct an abstraction from perceived details by arranging them in any way that satisfied a desired outcome.
The only difficulty, in this method, is the creativity required to not only fabricate a cohesive, self-consistent model, but also to sell it to an audience of less creative minds by redefining the words to adhere to self-consistency.
The trick to convince an audience is ancient. The creator must make this rearrangement of the perceived as flattering, comforting, or hopeful as possible. 
Depending no what type of audience he is attempting to attract will determine the underlying message of his rearrangements and redefinition. 
With no independent standard the creator is free to improvise and to sharpen his skills, or to gradually improve them, unlike a mind that is not interested in attracting an audience but only in the world itself. For the latter the world is the independent standard that limits the observer's abstractions, and directs the synthesis of data into cohesive mental-models. 
What is perceived is never considered illusory, or false...but only a simplification/generalization that requires improvements to be found in the world itself. 

Like pieces of a jigsaw-puzzle, patterns are collected and connected into meanings, and those that cannot fit into a larger cohesive model are set aside, awaiting a missing piece to assimilate it into a bigger picture...and if ti cannot it remains a 'problem' for a mind with integrity, because the pieces that do not fit are threats to the entire model.  

What is far more difficult and honest, is to construct a mental model that is cohesive and that adheres to a standard outside the mind's control - natural order. 
More details would indicate more meaning, because meaning is the establishment of relationships that are validated by consequences.

Desperation forces the sacrifice, females have evolved to smell-out the lying man, desperate for a plunge into their eternal youth.
Plato offered a rule for rulers, to weed out the wannabees, from the gonna-bees. 
Rule of thumb, for a whipping...never trust the one who calls himself trustworthy. 
He's preparing for the deception, gauging the intended victim's willingness to participate in his own inevitable disillusionment.

Precedent is all you need to connect the dots.
A nice smooth line, across time. 
Stones in a rushing river.

Have you ever sat with a liar?
Every time you look away he touches you, demanding you pay attention to him; wanting to see if you are buying into the extraordinary claims he is making.

The honest man does the opposite.
He points away, outward, towards the world, when he speaks, asking you to see for yourself what he is verbally describing.
He never ends a sentence with 'believe me', nor does he care, too much, when you tell him you do not believe what he is saying is true.

Unable to be, the desperate, dependent, mind demands to be made, to be pronounced and named.

Feminization of Philosophy
Love of wisdom has become love of self.
Philosophy, for the modern, is psychology. 
A continuous social and emotional positioning.

Females are naturally immune to linguistic contrivances.
They've evolved an instinctive way to judge masculine claims attempting to impress them with hyperbole. 

Males are more vulnerable.
They have to develop a rational judgment by cultivating their own inherited feminine side and by judging their experiences unemotionally, seeking patterns in them to develop understanding and an appreciation of meanings. 
Understanding being the perception of patterns in the patterns, and meaning being the appreciation of how they inter-relate. 

Most males are prone to self-deception because they desire to overcome their own failings and be appreciated highly by members of the tribe they wish to associate with, particularly by females.
The majority have little to work with. 
Deceit is their only hope. 
The more they have to commentate, the larger the level of deceit, imposing the necessity for a larger pretence, a more extraordinary lie. 
Impressing females is far easier than overcoming genetic limitations. 

The conflict between the genders is this escalating development of male deception practices, compensating for genetic inferiority, and female abilities to perceive deceit. 
Hyperbole is the mark of compensation. 
The more extreme the pretence the more compensation is being attempted. 
Such males usually announce the intended image they wish to project, being unable to be it.
They declare it as a preliminary step which automatically also determines the intended target. 
They usually fail to impress higher-level females and settle for lower-level, more gullible ones - either females with an undeveloped intuition, or those more willing to ignore the exaggerations for their own personal pragmatic reasons.
   
Where such methods have more of an impact is with inferior-males.
Lacking the innate feminine ability to perceive deceit they are oftentimes joyfully deceived, with minimal costs, in relation to those accrued by females who would be similarly deceived.
Another reason for their vulnerability is the message the pretense sends to them - an inspiration, a hopeful example to be emulated so as to compensate for their own genetic insecurities.

The deceiver provides, to them, not only the deception, but also the method, creating a mentor/student relationship.

The transition from spiritual nihilism to secular humanism occurred when the Jews came in contact with the Greeks.
Up until then, in their wanderings, they had experienced theoretical nihilism. 
Theoretical idealism, detaching mind from body.
The Greeks introduced them to a form of abstractions that referred not to theoretical ideas but pragmatic experienced phenomena, anthropomorphized as deities. 
This was so powerful that the Jews had to adapt, and as usual stole the idea(l) incorporating it into their mystical occult esoteric bullshit.
This is what Jesus is.
It is the theoretical brought down to earth - made corporeal. 

Unfortunately, for them, he retains the theoretical traits of an idealized construct.
He could never 'live'-up to his fame, his idealization, so he had to be killed to retain in death the cleansing rites of mythology.
To this day nihilists can only worship the dead, or the absent, because presence shatters the naive idealism of their lies. 
We can see it in American movie personalities that manufacture then sell icons that are 'larger than life', and are then worshipped by millions of imbeciles as icons - now that Jesus no longer is enough to gratify thir needs. 
Like a child that idolizes a dead parent, the modern infanticized, feminized idolize those who are dead - see Nietzsche - or those who are not present, for one reason or another.
Presence is demystifying, it would break the magical spell of perfection, of an idea(l) presence...because no presence is ever perfect...ever complete, ever whole...
Men-Children tend to replace the absent absolute, as it was offered in Scripture, or in text, with dead figures that become sacred representations - idols.
 
Note that in Judaism the idea(l) remains immanent...as with Spinoza.This is common with the Jews who have built an entire identity on the worship of the abstract, the theoretical...the inverted. 
The theoretical is seductive...because it can be, in theory, anything for anyone, at any time.
Spinoza presented it as an ambiguous immanence, and the Jews presented it as a, forever, coming Messiah.....rejecting the Christians infection by Hellenism that had to present an icon in the flesh, but absent, dead, idol. 
Note that, for the Jews, the coming of the 'true messiah' would be an end in itself. 
Jews live in mythology. It's the only way their inversions of the pyramid of natural hierarchies, could stand. 
They stole the image from the Egyptians, as well as the worship of the dead and of death. 
See star of David.
Can the Egyptian pyramid stand inverted, where the point is at the bottom and the base is on the top?
Only in the mind can such feats occur, and it is only in the mind where Abrahamism makes sense...as does Marxism, as does Frankfurt School modernism, as do the reinterpretations of Nietzsche. 
The dead cannot contradict the theory built around them.....as Saul knew when he appropriated Jesus as his corporeal idealization of the Jewish idea(l). 
What did the Marxists worship but some immanent, coming, ideal society, populated by ideal humans, acting in ideal ways - humans cleansed of their natural 'imperfections'?
Sold to millions of desperate, gullible, idiots.  
Hellenism as a representative of Aryanism, forced the Jews to adapt and adjust....as they later did with Marxism, and more recently with the Frankfurt School.
Jesus was forced upon the Jews, in opposition to their mythologies, fragmenting them into the three types I've defined and described.

Recall how in the myth of Heracles and Hydra one head is chopped-off and then replaced by two new ones. When Hellenism chopped-off the head of Judaism it split into two new secular forms - Humanism and Zionism
Secular refers to Nihilism forced to settle upon the earth, although unwillingly and tentatively. 
Christianity, which Nietzsche combated, was the tenuous adaptation of Abrahamic nihilism to Aryan pragmatism - the merger of two mythologies each with a different starting points and different motives.

The feminine is overtaken by masculine words.
She swoons, listening to him conjure his version of the absolute out of thin air, wanting to give it flesh and blood she spreads herself wide-open, lusting for what she’s never had.
Over time, eros frees her mind, returning it to its normal state.
She suddenly finds the entire affair amusing.
His words no longer grip her imagination, moistening, and softening her resistance.
His juvenile presentation of what is missing no longer inspires her.
She finds him charming, in a boyish way.
Lust may turn to love, if she discovers charisma in him – traits that can hold her interest, or parts she would like to propagate.
But he has lost his manly intimidation, and his mystery.
She thinks on her earlier state and is amused by her own naiveté, finally excusing herself by accusing her womanly desires, and her insatiable appetites for novelty, and the promise of power.

A pure agency of nature, woman holds chaos and order inside her.
Shifting, when unseen forces play with her spirit.
She can be inspired by masculine order, or find it embarrassingly infantile.
Her opinion of men changing.
One man may inspire her, triggering primordial processes that will inebriate her into lustful desire, while another leaves her cold and amused by his creative fantasies and artistry with language.
She may not know it, but she feels the absence in her womb.
Men may promise its fulfillment, but she intuitively knows she can never be entirely satisfied. She enjoys letting men try, and if she like one, she may even pretend.

The feminine submits to power, and randomness has an unequalled force.
It requires no maintenance but occurs from the interaction of order.
Randomness is a powerful master, and she submits to it, occasionally letting her masculine side resist, testing her boundaries.
When a man comes her way with similar promises she wants him to test his boundaries, knowing he will fail, but not knowing how fast, or how badly.
She craves order, and so is relentless in her search for the highest, the best, and the most resistant to attrition.
She wishes to give birth to a new attempt.
Once more testing herself, in combination with this other male.

When men make her promises for absolute order she wants to believe in them, but inside she feels that the promises will be broken.
Nevertheless, she rejuvenates the attempt, and is most amused by men bragging and fabricating ideals using words.

When a relationship is mistaken for the thing-in-itself, the effect is mistaken for the cause.

Unable to artistically represent fluidity using static forms, such as symbols/words, the mind compensates by settling on the observably dynamic aspect of interactivity.
So, the interactions of matter becomes a 'thing' called 'gravity', renamed 'force' to hind at its dynamic essence.
Because it is predictably consistent it is named 'law', and because we are certain that it will repeat it is qualified as 'absolute'.
The mind ascribes a rule, that applies to his own relationship with the repeating event.
A hedonist does the same with pleasure.
Focusing on his own reaction to particular events, he concludes that pleasure is a universal.
Christians do so with the 'word' love.

Gravity is the description of (inter)acting patterns - a way they inter-relate.
If we keep in mind that 'pattern' is another term for 'order' and for 'vibration/oscillation' and that by oscillation we mean space shifting its possibilities across its dimensions, in a random or regular rhythm, then we can define (inter)activity as how said patterns relate to each other - if their rhythms are in harmony or to what degree they are not.
This then becomes our understanding of attraction/repulsion, and attraction is what gravity implies.

To clarify the concept of oscillation....we have to rethink movement in dimensional terms, when we define space as possibility.
Movement would be the increase of possibilities in one or more dimensions, and a decrease in all the others.
Possibility would indicate degree of interactivity.
In this context probability means matter, or energy, or any pattern that is regular in its dimensional shifting or oscillating.

Keep in mind that existence means that which is dynamic, which is active.
All that exists is Energy, with a capital E to differentiate it from energy which describes a speed of rhythm, in relation to the conscious observer, which in this case is human.
Human with particular biorhythms - metabolisms.
Therefore all that exists is dynamic, only different in tempo and regularity.
Space/Time is Energy.
The dimensions are not static, but multiplying.
From the near complete point, the almost singularity, the cosmos explodes into multiplicity - dimensions increasing from 2, to 4, to 8, and so on....this is reflected in the concept of expanding space/time.
Space being an expansion of possibilities, and time the rate of expansion, or the measurement of movement in relation to it.

This expansion of possibilities is what moderns call 'complexity', and name it chaos, because its increase makes calculations impossible beyond a certain point.
But that is not what I mean with the term 'chaos'.
It is true that as space/time expands and dimensions multiply, perceiving and interpreting interactions will become too much for a biological organ like the human brain. Machines may, for a while, compensate, but for how long?
Order, in this state is as good as absent, because the human brain cannot project the possibilities of ongoing interactions. For it, all is so complicated that it appears chaotic, and the brain interprets this as darkness.
This is part of the story.
The other part is that even in our more manageable present state much of existence is dark, because not all existence is patterned rhythm.
Most is random....and the brain interprets it as it would complexity, as darkness.

This is why darkness fills the spirit with anxiety and fear.
It is the unknown and unknowable.
It is what the human brain cannot process.

Back to oscillations...
Now that we've clarified what dimensions are, we can visualize osculation as space vibrating and covering multiple dimensions.....these dimensions increasing.
What we perceive and call phenomenon is being shared across multiple spatial dimensions.
The degree it is shared in them determines its movement, and the possibility of interacting.
So, we can now claim that as dimensions increase the phenomenon is being increasingly spread across them, and is perceived as fading in the four the human brain can process.
Oscillation refers to this dimensional spread of possibilities, and the possibility is that of (inter)action.

For this reason a fast moving oscillation, such as the energy we call light, can only interact minimally with matter, which is slower in its movement because it is interacting in more dimensions.
What we call 'matter' are patterns that oscillate across more dimensions and therefore appears in all of them as slow, massive, whereas energy and its speed means it is oscillation in the same dimensions but the possibility of (inter)acting are reduced to a minimum in all but a few, and this we perceive as velocity.
The faster the speed through space/time that more focused the probability of (inter)action...tending towards the singular, but never attaining it.
For this reason light has been used as a metaphor for the divine, or for clarity, as it indicates a focus of possibilities to near perfect probability.

On a pragmatic level, light represents the extreme edge of human perception - the minds's perceptual-event-horizon
It is the fastest pattern the mind can process, and therefore it is a medium, a mediator, between mind and world....particularly for a predator that must overcome the prey's own defensive measures, with quickness and depth of perception.
The prey's defensive stance must spread its awareness to accommodate all possibilities, whereas a predator can focus, gaining an advantage.

Attraction/Repulsion refers to the (inter)action of patterned and non-patterned Energies. It is the description of how phenomena relate to one another, or the degree of harmony between their patterns.
Patterns refer to vibrating, oscillating space, where space refers to possibility, and matter/energy refers to probabilities (patterns with a consistent predictable consistency).
Attraction/Repulsion are simultaneous forces defining the overall harmony between patterns.
Harmony = attraction.
Disharmony = repulsion.
Multiplicity means divergence, implying that there is no absolute harmony nor disharmony, but only a degree of either, depending from what direction you approach the issue. Psychology determines if you are measuring disharmony, or if you choose to measure harmony.
In either case, you cannot exclude its opposite, since when you measure you are recognizing the absence of an absolute, and only attempting to evaluate a degree that defines the interaction, or the relationship.
Judgement is the juxtaposition of abstractions that has already assumed the absence of a tautology.
Value is what utility we ascribe to the juxtaposition. Value, presupposes judgment, and judgment presupposes juxtaposition (comparison), and juxtaposition presupposes consciousness, and consciousness presupposes translation/interpretation, and that presupposes life – unities of patterns with motive based on accumulated memories – as distinct from non-living congruencies of patterned and non-patterned Energies that have no motive, no telos, and no memory (directing precedent).  
Degree is the concession to fluidity static models make (noumenon simplifying/generalizing phenomena to a degree equal to their inherent, innate potential to process data), and the concession the ideal makes to the real (translation/Interpretation), inavertedly admitting the absence of an absolute state.
Mathematically this same concession is symbolized by fractions, and infinite division.
In real-world conditions it is experienced as movement, or change – Flux.
In philosophical contexts the concession is symbolized by linguistic ambiguity failing to take itself literally, and literally failing when it does.
The attempt to avoid one failure leads to the other.  
Need/Suffering cannot be evaded, it can only be postponed.

Positive/Negative = the linguistic equivalent of 1/0 – Binary logic founded on on-off neurological methods; founding, in turn, dualistic abstractions – good/bad, edible/inedible, living/non-living, friend/foe etc.
The organism uses itself as the standard to then judge, evaluate phenomenon, by juxtaposing them with each other, in relation to itself.
The self, or what is known of it, is always the standard used to evaluate the alien, the unknown, other.
This, then, may develop into the coping mechanism of presuming self as being external (God), or that the world is made internal (all is subjective).
Self, or what is known of it, is projected outward, usurping all that is perceived as not belonging to it (world), or the world is absorbed into the self.
Objective = Subjective.
Subjective is the known self, usually a product of the ego (lucid self) absorbing the objective world into itself.
World is translated to accommodate the Ego.
Positive/Negative are judgments based on this accommodation – Abrahamic Nihilism.

To a more objective mind positive/negative refer to order/chaos, pattern/random, and/or harmony/disharmony.
The standard is placed outside the self, and the self is held accountable to this standard.
This is a more Aryan psychological methodology.
World is no longer reshaped to accommodate the ego, but the ego is reshaped, exercises, (Hellenic asceticism) to accommodate the world.
World is not juxtaposed with self, but self with the world.

On an organic level good/bad refers to edible/inedible, or useful/useless, invigorating/toxic.
Useless and toxic are included into the premises of undesirable – bad, and what can be incorporated into the organism, assimilated into its unity, is the good.
Abrahamic Nihilism projected this organic juxtaposition into a beyond, which was a reflection of the esoteric circumventing the experienced exoteric, into a theoretical reflection of the subjective as a mystical realm over or under the observable, the sensually perceptible – the apparent.
Good/Bad becomes good/evil to reflect this change.
Essentially the subjective does not usurp, but it circumvents the objective world.
The theoretically ideal cannot usurp the real, without facing the costs, the price.
It circumvents via proxies, and does so hypocritically, intuitively knowing that if it would apply its nihilistic theory it would not survive within the objective world for long.
Internalizing the standard is a method of avoiding detection.
Everything and anything can be justified when the standard is placed inside, or is projected in a beyond – is made subjective, or super-subjective.
The lie is hidden, relying on its trickery and linguistic seduction to exploit and manipulate.

Idea = noumenon.
Translated, and then interpreted reality.
Phenomenon converted to mental abstraction.
Ideal = projection of mental model as orienting objective.
Nihilism, having synthesized or inverted the real, projects an unreal ideal condemning itself to failure and unsatisfied desire, producing guilt, which has converted shame into a form it can place upon another and/or a form that can be cleansed away by a ruling, a communal decree.
Shame in Aryanism is the individual holding itself accountable to Self, where self refers to a continuum that goes beyond one’s birth.
Self = biological continuum held together by uninterrupted memory, with ego being the lucid presence, or the Self made aware of this continuum.
Ego holds itself accountable to its own past.
Abrahamism, spiritual nihilism, severs this continuum, casting the psyche adrift, and then offers itself as its salvation.
It converts shame to guilt, and sets the judge as a beyond the real ideal, represented by text (language) that can only be interested by the christened, the chosen.
Language is made occult; jargon only the initiated can decipher.
The christened ones are the ones that can interpret not patterns accessible by all, but the words of God – the higher judge. The ‘chosen’ are those who are his arbiter. The only ones that can read the mystifying, to the laymen, codes.
Master/Slave relationships goes through the handler – priestly class, or ‘chosen tribe’.
Reality is no longer accessible to the masses. The arbiters have made of themselves proxies – eunuchs in an imagined Pashas harem.
The practice of circumcision has a symbolism that exceeds some pragmatic necessities dealing with hygiene.

Nihilism produces ideas that are detached from reality, to one degree or another.
The degree determines the severity of the detachment and therefore it measures Nihilism’s dominance in the mind of the individual.
A gauge of how infected it has become, and how dependent it is on its adopted memetic parasite - symbiotic relationship = the mind is dependent on the parasite, and the parasite cannot exist outside its host.
As a consequence all projected idea(l)s have a degree of the surreal, the supernatural, the mythological to them.
Doomed to failure and the eventual disillusionment of the infected mind, that must hang on to its dis-ease, as an expression of its faith; its unyielding commitment to the promise of a reward in the beyond – justifying failure and the inevitable suffering it will produce.
This is comforting to minds that feel insecure about their own qualities. They have already determined that they are genetically inferior and that failure is a certainty, so projecting it as an inevitability rooted in metaphysics, with the promise of metaphysical success, which, conveniently, nobody will ever witness, is a way of excusing themselves from a past they are ashamed of, having judged it as inadequate.
This method converts their inevitable failure into an inevitable success in a hypothetical supernatural realm, a theoretical alternate reality, or it avenges itself against those who will succeed, or will not give-up trying to succeed.

The idea(l) as it is applies in Aryanism is a orientation symbol, projected and striven towards.
Not to be attained but to inspire and to identify the individual who strives in its attainment.

To will yourself towards the idea(l) begins with the admission that you are not it, nor in possession of it, but that you desire it (feminine) and/or that you want/need to be it (masculine).
Will is a product of superfluity produced by need.
The animal consumes, moves, acts, because it is driven by attrition towards what it is losing, or it lacks.
It's success implies its superiority, and it results in superfluous energies that then needs to be expunged, in the act of growth, pro-creativity and/or creativity.
The idea(l) is a representation of complete overabundance, or god, in the Abrahamic form, because in Aryanism gods were themselves wilful and characterized by organic desires and needs - superior but not perfect.

Kazantzakis, Nikos wrote:

What is the essence of our God? The struggle for freedom. In the indestructible darkness a flaming line ascends and emblazons the march of the Invisible. What is our duty? To ascend with this blood-drenched line.
Whatever rushes upward and helps God to ascend is good. Whatever drags downward and impedes God from ascending is evil.
All virtues and all evils take on a new value. They are freed from the moment and from earth, they exist completely within man, before and after man, eternally.
For the essence of our ethic is not the salvation of man, who varies within time and space, but the salvation of God, who within a wide variety of flowing human forms and adventures is always the same, the indestructible rhythm which battles for freedom.
We, as human beings, are all miserable persons, heartless, small, insignificant. But within us a superior essence drives us ruthlessly upward.
From within this human mire divine songs have welled up, great ideas, violent loves, an unsleeping assault full of mystery, without beginning or end, without purpose, beyond every purpose.

Philosophy becomes psychobabble when it shifts from an engagement of reality, the world, into an expression of the individual's reaction to the world.
The exoteric is absorbed into the esoteric, where words need no external reference, need no sequential adherence to natural order, if they carry an internal emotion, a passion, or the imagery of a mythology, an abstraction that has been disconnected from reality and exists autonomously.

Mythology was the representation of world, using allegory and narrative.
Now it is the inverse.
It is the myth that is represented by reality, and the world relates to the myth as a representation, an allegory.
Flipping of Phenomenon <>Nervous System <> Noumenon relationship into Noumenon <> Nervous System <> Phenomenon.
The symbol/word as an expression of the nervous system, no longer connects to world, but world, through it, is converted to a form that agrees with the mind's idea(l).
The mind does not adapt to world, but the world is adapted to the needs of the mind, to its already established conclusions.