Free-Will

In the chain of causality choice is part of the chain, unless you meant to argue that a choice is also determined and cannot be anything but what it was....in which case you believe in absolute order, or the totalitarianism of a one-god.
In such a case you can't say anything about anything, but only hope and pray, and endure.

When you attack another you are attacking god, or absolute order.
This is part of Biblical allegory, and they invented Satan...so what is Satan who can break god's will?
In communist context, is Satan the evil capitalists?
Is it the Nazis?
Is it objectivists?
Who are these satanic agencies and how do they manage to contradict absolute order, or god's will?
Who is exploiting them? Fate? Eternity? The universe?
What are they rebelling against and how, if it's all determined and they have no part in it, i.e., if they are not part of the causal chain?

Who are these imbeciles being victimized by?
Who or what is this evil victimizer they are being wronged by if it's all inevitable and could not have been any other way?
In Nietzschean contexts, as they understand it, are they going to relive eternally a life of being victims?
Victim's of what?
Eternity?
Should they not be saying "yay" instead of "nay"?

Postmodernism is mostly garbage, but correct in one important area: on societal Class and how 'Nihilism' relates to group-identities.


Nihilism is slave-ideology, the ideology of the Underclasses. Jews and Judaism, for example, spread destructive and damaging ideologies in foreign nations, but not in their own nation. This hypocrisy exposes Nihilistic ideologies for what they are. "Do as I say, not as I do". It is a moral hypocrisy, and this is the basis for almost all Nihilistic systems. In fact this is the reason for its self-destruction. Because it cannot stand on an Honest inquiry. Any honest inquiry exposes the hypocrisy and double-standard outright. Thus Nihilistic moral paradigms cannot withstand rational or reasoned inquiry for long.

Those with higher IQ can understand and accept this easily. However, those ingrained in such systems, often repeat the Lie because it helps them and their (political) group.


The connection between Slave-Dialectic, Nihilism, and Free-Will (the lack thereof) is a retaining value of Postmodern ideology. They got this right, but probably only this.

The Class and Caste of modern-postmodern populations, reflects their limitations, and thus their lack of free-will accordingly.

Freedom, applied to any class, quickly exposes the [political power] of that group. Those who are Victims, or worse, eternal victims, are the end-result of Centuries or Millenniums of Subjugation and Slavishness, extensions and evolution of the Slave-Dialectic. These lower cultures, castes, and people demonstrate this in their "(f)Art".

Art expresses the extent of where individuals and groups stand with accord to Freedom & Free-Will.

Postmodernism infiltrates Sports and Military:

How can anyone go to jail for Saint George Floyd's death when there is no free-will?
It was determined. Why punish the one who simply acted as our lord god's - the universe's - behalf?
Guilty of what?
Who are we punishing and for what, if all are unfree? Is it all not in accordance with god's will, I mean, is it not all universally determined?
Are we imprisoning, or punishing what has been determined, or are we incarcerating our lord god's will?

Are we holding the universe accountable to itself?
Madness.
The universe punishes itself for determining what it determined.
The universe is mad at itself, or simply mad.

Back to the Biblical tale we go, to find some solution to our conundrum.
Ah, yes...Satan. The fallen angel who had fallen as god willed it, to serve as a mediator so as to make Adam break the rules god made, as god intended, and then lose paradise as god knew he would because he willed it.
Almighty then.
The universe determined to reprimand what it has determined, as it has determined it, punishing itself for doing what it had determined.
But are men mad?
No, the universe determined it, so the universe must be mad, because men cannot do anything that has not been determined, including killing and punishing itself for killing.
In the first religious narrative it is Satan who tricks man, according to god's will, and man is fooled, according to god's will, and then punished for being fooled.
In the second man is ignorant, which was determined and then punishes his own ignorance as it has been determined, for being ignorant, as it has been determined.
This happens eternally, with no chance of breaking out of the insanity.
It's a circular padded room, containing a man in a straight jacked wrapped in a circular manner.
All of it for the sake of claiming innocence.
Christians begrudgingly surrender to self-cotnradiction to rescue themselves from the paradoxes they created - in effect contradicting their won descriptions of the divine absolute.
Secular imbeciles give themselves no such "out", giving themselves over completely to insanity. Their conception of the absolute divine is faceless - abstract - requiring no mystification, but only ignorance.
Ignorance replaces innocence, which does not require faith only acceptance. Christians have to prove their faith to the absolute divine - which has also been willed - but recovering Abrahamics need no such justifications, they simply claim ignorance and remain innocently in the bosom of the absolutely divine.
Their declaration of faith is a declaration of ignorance. all they truly, and absolutely know, is that they have no part in what has been determined, but know not how or why. Their culpability is illusory.
For example, Chauvin apparently was responsible for the death of Saint George Floyd, and Saint Floyd was apparently guilty of tryin to pass-on a fake dollar bill, but an enlightened recovering Abrahamic knows that both are innocent and could not have chosen to do anything other than what they did. Both are innocent of all charges - one paying for it with his death and the other with a lifetime of incarceration - depriving him of a freedom he did not have in the first place, just as Saint Floyd was deprived of a life that was not his.

The universe is having fun and enjoying itself entertaining itself. We can hope that we have been chosen - christened - to laugh along, and not be among those not chosen to laugh but to cry.

The demonstration of choice is, somehow, not an act of free volition but it is an act of inevitability.
So, why punish those who could to choose other than what they have?
Are we punishing inevitability?
Are we showing disapproval for universal determinism, and is this disapproval also determined?
A madhouse for the not-criminally insane - this type of insanity is approved because it reproduces cynicism and fatalism, the necessary psychology for postmodernism to flourish.
It seems that this too has been determined by the absolute one-god, now named universe, or simply order.

Enlightenment is understood as coming to terms with one's own slavery - a state also determined by absolute order, now that the one-god has been discredited and pronounced dead.
Herd psychosis.
Surrender to an external agency - call it what you will: state, universe, order, one, whole, perfect, will, determined, Satan or one-God.

Will to Power is not about the individual, it seems. It is about the "primordial one".
It wills willing, in classic circular emoting.
It loves loving.
It hates hating.
It values valuing.
It lives living.
It thinks thinking.
It exists existing.
It knows knowing.  

We, mere mortals, must simply endure what has been willed. We proletarians of the soul must endure the exploitation that has been determined - unless it has also been determined that we resit...in which case all is not necessarily inevitable, but all is, after the fact, as it was always and eternally meant to be.

All producing a self-referential womb-like embrace, immersing the mind in an eternal return - binding it, like a baby to its mother's bosom.
A linguistic Gordian Knot.
Inter-Subjective solipsism.
It appears that something profound is being revealed when nothing but the ignorance of the speaker, and of those who hold him in high esteem, is being exposed.

The subject of Free-Will is where the connection between Abrahamism and modern secular forms of nihilism is clear.

The deniers of free-will are, most always, some version of recovering Abrahamics; religious zealots or their offspring, who have become atheists and think this makes them "enlightened" or "modern", because they've swapped terminologies and are using updated lingo and allegories with none of that "primitive" anthropomorphism.
Yet, they believe in the exact same abstractions concealed in new trendy packaging.

They are convinced that the universe is punishing/rewarding itself for determining what could not have been any other way - as they put it.
This is the paradox created by the concept of an omniscient, omnipotent, and benevolent one-god allowing "evil" to exist, or creating "evil".
Either this absolute's benevolence is not, or its omnipotence is not.

Moderns - under the effect of Nietzsche - have simply done away with the "benevolent" aspect of the absolute.
Their updated version is neither good nor evil - "Beyond Good and Evil" as it ere.
This is all they got from their new Christ idol.
Absolute universal order is not good nor bad...it just is.
A small step.

And of course, eternal life in Paradise has been replaced with "eternal recurrence" on this earth - living the exact same life in exactly the same way....forever.
And the overman is some version of the pious man, the chosen, christened man, who has been seeded with the "spirit of divinity" and knows what is going on - a Jesus type roaming the earth surrounded by ignorance, spreading the universal message that it is all inevitable and accepting god's will - yay saying - is the only pious thing to do - which, of course, has also been determined, so there's no choice at all, there's only fate, i.e., who has been "chosen" to be the "primordial one's" earthly representative.

We're on to something, no?

Now we can understand "Will to Power" as a will towards divinity, or salvation.
But it is all inevitable and determined so there is no willing, only hoping, praying, expecting...
Who can have power who has no free-will?
A capitalist can exploit the proletariat?
Is it he or divine order? Who is to blame when it has all been determined and could not have been any other way?


Christian's invented Satan to deal with the paradoxes of their own convictions. t/he Jews simply admitted that they were the benefactor's of divine grace - chosen to bring about god's End of Times - Armageddon.
The Muslims, imitating the Jews, embraced zealotry and declared themselves god's warriors, fighting to bring about the kingdom of god on earth - an inevitability, in their mind.
All messianic beliefs with universal claims, each convinced that they are the benefactor's of divine grace - the minions chosen - christened - to serve as god's will on earth.

Moderns need none of that allegorical crap.
They simply surrender to universal order - faceless, formless, i.e., pure abstraction: one or nil.
Not one and nil - the duality of God/Satan, or good/evil - they've "overcome" that with the help of Nietzsche and how grateful they are - but one or nil - two sides of a singular absolute concept.
Nil is the more powerful of the two concepts because it implies no effort.
oneness requires effort, nil just is: e.g., void, chaos etc.
All is void of substance, of meaning, of intent, of will....all is nil.

Power = nil.
The power of negation - easy peasy.
All it requires is denial, rejection, remaining uncommitted, unconvinced, equally sceptical to all and about all - particularly what threatens and hurts - awaiting the absolute one to prove you wrong.
Nil is a most formidable weapon.

And so it is that nihilists are divided into two distinct types: what I've called positive and pure nihilists.

The former become performers of surrealistic theater, reciting over-dramatic meaningless prose; role-playing the archetypical caricature of the divinely possessed, singing its magical spells, dancing its conjuring .powers.
The latter become cynical, pretending they are laughing along with the divine - at the world - when, in fact, they are laughing at the absurdity of their own convictions.

Both are clowns.

Post-Christianity

The Abrahamic foundation and infrastructure is the exact same. It only changed its terms, symbols, dress, paintings on the walls. The walls, floor, ceiling have not moved. And because of this, the Secularists have advanced their tactics to include all and bring all in "free of charge", well that's the lure anyway. The payments they exact upon Secularists and Nihilists, brought into the fold, is free-will.

You can have it all -- only if you will kneel.


When all the kneeling started happening in 2020, that was the sign for me, complete regression back into the Dark Ages. The West is no longer a 'free' country or stands for freedom, when these New Age (Post-Christian) cults demand for people to kneel.

So, when the mob arrives, who will kneel and who will not?

Let's take the postmoderns madness for granted, and simply follow its own "reasoning".

Who, then, is socially engineering racial and gender divisions if it is all inevitable and determined?
Is it not god?
No, it is the universe.
Is "injustice" universal? Could it even be called "injustice" if it is?
Who is to blame?
The capitalist who is powerful but has no free-will? The "Nazis", who are somehow held accountable for what they could not have been?
Who is the enemy, the "evil" ones, if it is all inevitable and could not have been any other who?
With whom or what are we negotiating? Why are we complaining if the world cannot be changed because it has been determined, and could not have been otherwise?

See, Paradoxes are the by-products of nihilistic word-games.
A consequence of linguistic inversions, detaching semiotics from their empirical referents.

Define concepts out of existence and you follow your own emoting/reasoning down to tis own "logical" ends.
See where you find yourself.
In madness; in a superstitious surreal world surrounded by floating words, unanchored to anything tangible; words with no substance and full of steaming hot...emotions, a cloud of obscurantism enveloping all in a comforting haze, forcing the mind to turn inward, into tis own abstractions, its own dreams
But for postmoderns insanity is preferable to the alternative - reality.

For many years I've contemplated free-will and the masses of humanity, and why Nihilistic and Fatalistic mindsets are so prevalent. Eventually I decided to simplify the matters. If morality is genetic, and hardwired, then it automatically makes sense why most people are Slaves and few people are Free. However the very term 'Slave' is taboo in Western Civilization, which immediately signals to me, that this is the right track forward. If 'Slave' is taboo, then why?

Why should people not speak the obvious, that, most people are Slaves, not free, nor do they want to become Free?

Western Civilization is built upon the premise of liberty and freedom. I posed these arguments on ILP in the "Advanced Freedom" thread. Only the user there "Silhouette" could really defend his Deterministic and Fatalistic ideologies to any substantial degree, and faltered in the end. Essentially all ILP could offer, in defense of their "free-will", is Victimization and Scapegoating, which is typical of Nihilistic-Abrahamic types.



They do not have free-will, and they would renounce any free-will they could possibly have, in order to remain in the coveted 'Victim' class. And this class is inverted. It ought to be shameful to be a victim, but rather they invert this moral-value and turn it into a Virtue. Which particular sect of Abrahamics does this most obviously and commonly? This answer should be obvious. Which racial-ethnic grouping survives and thrives of Victimization and inverting moral-values??

I then went further with my premises and postulations. If nobody could address my arguments seriously or philosophically, then simply continue the points forward.

That would mean, then, that Slave and Freedom are probably genetically ingrained and hardwired, and most people simply do not have the capacity to become 'Autonomous' (Free-Will, Free-Agency, Independent, Individual) to any significant degree. Rather the Heroes of Western culture and civilization are those who do exemplify free-will significantly. And this is related to Nobility, Aristocracy (Sons of Ariston), and Aryanism. Aryanism is simply the Persian/Iranian concept of the same meaning (Aristos).

Ages of mankind wax and wane between Nobility (hard times, austerity, create strong men) and Ignobility (soft times, abundance, create weak men). We are in the phase of "weak men creating hard times", in USA and throughout Western civilization.

When the coffers run dry, and they will, then hard times will set in, and class mobility will stagnate. Hence why I created the "Dark Ages" thread.

I also want to connect Aristocracy/Aryanism with Nietzsche's Master-Dialectic,

Opposed to Abrahamism/Nihilism with Nietzsche's Slave-Dialectic.


This is easily simplified.

Messages that uplift and inspire mankind, to become more, to strive, to accomplish feats and goals worth having, (Purpose in Life, Meaning in Life), are masterful dialect. Most people connect this to Jordan Peterson, who tries himself to uplift and inspire a generation of lost-boys and man-babies. This is different than Slave-Dialectic that seeks to disempower, disarm, and harm mankind in general, by promoting Victimization, by claiming that "being victims is holy, noble, virtuous, Good, etc". It's easy to connect who promotes these Abrahamic and Nihilistic conceptions.

Raise men up, or, Lower men down. Jordan Peterson makes the logical connection, that this is an individualistic notion as well, of the Individual, that a man tries to empower himself, or hates himself and is deeply ashamed of what he is (result of Infantilization and Nihilism). This is demonstrated throughout the rebellious political movements in the United States, as young men play-at being revolutionaries, when they are merely tools and pawns of their political overlords and corporations. Like how Coca-Cola can get away with branding itself and propagandizing the message "Be less white". Be ashamed of yourself and your ethnic/racial identity.

Hate yourself. It's a lie of course, because they don't want black or colored people to be empowered either. Rather it extends to all men, all men "hate yourself", "toxic masculinity", self-castrate and become 'trans' or you're a racist-bigot.

Suicide is evidence of how man can resist and contradict his genetic impulses.

Nihilism is another example, only in this case suicide is archived indirectly - the individual sacrifices individuation to ideology, remaining among the walking brain-dead, i.e., zombification.
As I've said before nihilism is the human will going insane, believing it is now god-creator, able to linguistically train itself to be and do anything; it is free-will or steroids, desiring to completely negate the past, via the physical, i.e., the presence of body.
In fact the will is not absolutely free - nor is it born free - but must work to liberate itself - gaining power without even becoming omnipotent.

The martial arts are another example of how through self-cultivation - training - an individual can control and direct the natural fight/flight mechanism.
All memes are, in fact, human attempts to control hardwired genetic impulses - requiring will-power, or a degree of becoming free from precedent.

The premise and hidden assertion of Nihilistic tendencies, is that "free-will is free" or "should be free".

And from this premise, free-will is equivocated as (political and societal) Privilege.

This is the aspect of Postmodernism and how it connects to many other concepts which are relevant throughout culture.


In reality, the opposite is true, free-will has great costs, pains, suffering, and sacrifice. This is the missing link. If Nihilists could understand or accept that free-will, especially as it relates to power, has infinite degrees of Cost and Sacrifice, then it would be common sense. People are only as 'free' as they could possibly aspire to be, and then demonstrate as proof, over lifetimes. The "demonstrations" are removed and replaced for hyperbole. Rather than prove free-will, it is about nihilistic dialogue, child's play at power, without proof or authenticity.

Connecting to the individual, it is very easy to see and determine, in my opinion, those who could become free versus those who cannot. It's as easy as attitude. Those who don't or can't believe it, those who have no ideals, aspirations, goals, dreams, no meaning, no purpose... cannot become free.

Freedom is relative to purpose and meaning.

We do not doubt that when a man acts that he acts with intent - bestowing upon his activity the term "will" to represent this unknown to us intent. Those that do must offer evidence that it is not the individual who intends but some external agency - some hidden power.
Most men accept the evidence of their own senses so that when they see someone acting that this acting has a motive, an intent, that is entirely his own, and is governed by a willful choice.
But it is this choice which most doubt, claiming that it is unfree, not the product of the individual's judgment, but that some hidden agency that has determined it to choose and to not choose in any other way - and if the choice had been different then it is that choice which is given a divine origin. They refuse to accept the evidence of their own senses, perceiving a man active and though this activity exposing motive expressed through choices that may be traced back to judgments.
In this case they seek in the past contradictions to their perceptions in the present. They intentionally place the non-present above the present, instead of starting with the present - presence, interested as appearance.
Such minds are prone to also place the "beyond" or "above/beneath" before the perceived in the present, exposing their own intent, i.e., hidden motives; a motive they are willing to sacrifice anything to follow towards its projected destination, in the future, i.e., goal, objective.

It is evident that Desperate Degenerates have a selective and convenient, relationship with the past.
On the one hand they refuse it when it has to do with how races and sexes evolve and are become present, and on the other they wholeheartedly - absolutely, embrace it when it has to do with free-will, because the past, as I've also defined it, is what is referred to as the one-god....because it is immutable, unknowable, and determined.
In this case they fail to accept how the present - gradually falling away and becoming past - is the realm of the existent - present presence - and is what is being determined - determining - where free-will is free to the degree that it is free and willful, i.e., dynamic and intentional.
Suddenly the past becomes a totalitarian, authoritarian regime - one-god of Abraham - which nobody can do anything about but only accept and surrender to its omnipotence - accept his/her fate. Herd-psychoslogy - implying that they are this King of all corporeal king's favourite, loyal, servile minions (chosen, to speak his truth and to defend its integrity among the unbelievers) - perhaps they secretly expect a reward for their defence of their King of all kings, viz., a way of fooling the fates. But the reward is immediate, nonetheless, for their King is generous, and it rewards them with innocence. The eternal victims, of god? Perhaps of a satanic trickster, often named by one of its many names "capitalists", "objectivist", "fascist", "Nazi", "infidel" .....an evil agency of natural order/chaos.

Satyr wrote:

Consequences is the enemy for the nihilist. Tangible, physical, consequences, it cannot deny nor dismiss as readily as it does theory.
The act precedes the word. The physical organism - body - precedes the evolution of the mind.
Consequence is what theory can never evade in the real world.
As long as it remains theoretical - idealistic - it need not face real consequences. It is what separates the ideal from the real - the world of the dreamer from the world of the lucid; the subjective from the objective.

It is consequence leftist want to intervene in as a collective, adjusting consequences by sharing the negative costs, so as to preserve their ideals.
But, consequences accumulate over time; they cannot be evaded, they can only be postponed.
If evenly distributed and the costs if erroneous judgments are shared - Marxism, postmodernism - they simply multiply because individuals need not learn from their mistakes, nor adjust their choices, so they repeat the same errors in judgment, and are then imitated by their fellow desperate degenerate who are made bold by this collectivization of consequences, until the consequences accumulate to a level where not even sharing them collectively minimizes the severity of their impact.

Collectivizing consequences is why Desperate Degenerates often reject free-will. It inhibits the acceptance of evenly distributing consequences within their collectives.

Spengler, Oswald wrote:

If the Entropy theory is followed out to its conclusion, it results, firstly, that in theory all processes must be reversible – which is one of the basic postulates of dynamics and is reasserted with all rigor in the law of the Conservation of Energy – but, secondly, that in actuality processes of Nature in their entirety are irreversible. Not even under artificial conditions of laboratory experiment can the simplest process be exactly reversed, that is, a state once passed cannot be re-established.
Nothing is more significant of the present condition of systematics than the introduction of the hypothesis of ‘elementary disorder’ for the purpose of smoothing out the contradiction between intellectual postulate and actual experience. The ‘smallest particles’ of a body (an image, no more) throughout performs reversible processes, but in actual things the smallest particles are in disorder and mutually interfere; and so the irreversible process of entropy by taking the mean probabilities of occurrences. And thus theory becomes a chapter of the Calculus of Probabilities, and in lieu of exact we have statistical methods.

Time is irreversible – eternal return of the same is impossible – because all is not absolutely ordered, but chaotic energies participate in the emergence of the existent, which can never be precisely measured and, therefore, cannot be replicated.
What has been determined, and sensually observed and evaluated, is the product of innumerable conspicuous and inconspicuous interactions between patterned (ordered) and non-patterned (chaotic) energies which can never be accurately replicated; some of which are the consequences of willful choices that could have been otherwise – insignificant, in comparison to will-less interactivities, which simply follow paths-of-least-resistance, but ought to be mentioned in any thorough investigation of causality.
In the numerically more significant field of will-less interactivities, i.e., unintentional and un-motivated by an objective – the numerically superior and, therefore, more significant natural processes – are characterized by power relationships, determined by both ordered & chaotic forces (energies), determining presence, viz., determining what is existent in the present, and what may be interpreted as apparent by a willful, intentional, organism.
It is the chaotic which makes linear time irreversible, and the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle eternally applicable. Uncertainty, necessitates skepticism, revealing all scientific conclusions as no more than useful approximations, validated with every application.
Philosophy, like science, never reaches a final, complete, conclusion – cannot ever become absolutist, but must remain within the realm of probabilities; offering superior explanations for observable phenomena. Humility before the cosmos is the required demeanour for a successful thinker and scientist, i.e., theoretician, diagnostician.

Yockey, Francis, Parker wrote:

Scientific theories reached the point where they signified nothing less than the complete collapse of science as a mental discipline. The picture was projected of the Milky Way as consisting of more than a million fixed stars, among which are many with a diameter of more than 93,000,000 miles; this again as not a stationary cosmic center, but itself in motion toward.
Nowhere at a speed of more than 600 kilometers a second. The cosmos is finite, but unlimited; boundless, but bounded. This demands of the true believer the old Gothic faith again: credo quia absurdum, but mechanical purposelessness cannot evoke this kind of faith, and the high priests have apostatized. In the other direction, the ‘atom’ has equally fantastic dimensions — a ten-millionth of a millimeter is its diameter, and the mass of a hydrogen atom stands to the mass of a gram of water as the mass of a post card stands to the mass of the earth. But this atom consists of ‘electrons,’ the whole making up a sort of solar system, in which the distances between the planets is as great, in proportion to their mass, as in our solar system.
The diameter of an electron is one three-billionth of a millimeter. But the closer it is studied, the more spiritual it becomes, for the nucleus of the atom is a mere charge of electricity, having neither weight, volume, inertia nor any other classic properties of matter.

Science can never be nihilistic because this field of interest – its object of study – is a world the nihilist altogether, or piecemeal, rejects and denounces as illusory. Science can only deal in hypotheticals, in superior probabilities, in more precise approximations, as must philosophy if it is true to its calling. Absolutes and absolutism is the realm of religions, of the worse kind.

Smith, Adam wrote:

The theory that can absorb the greatest number of facts, and persist in doing so, generation after generation, through all changes of opinion and detail, is the one that must rule all observation.

Guenon, Rene wrote:

Under such conditions, industry is no longer merely application of science, an application from which science should, in itself, remain completely independent; it has become the reason for, and justification of, science to such an extent that here too the normal relations between things have been reversed. What the modern world has striven after with all its strength, even when it has claimed in its own way to pursue science, is really nothing other than the development of industry and machinery; and in thus seeking to dominate matter and bend it to their service, men have only succeeded, as we said at the beginning of this book, in becoming its slaves. Not only have they limited their intellectual ambition – if such a term can still be used in the present state of things – to inventing and constructing machines, but they have ended by becoming in fact machines themselves. Indeed, it is not only scholars but also technicians and even workers who have to undergo the specialization that certain sociologists praise so highly under the name of ‘division of labor’; and for the ‘workers,’ it makes intelligent work quite impossible. Very different from the craftsmen of former times, they have become mere slaves of machines with which they may be said to form part of a single body. In a purely mechanical way they have constantly to repeat certain specific movements, which are always the same and always performed in the same way, so as to avoid the slightest loss of time; such at least is required by the most modern methods which are supposed to represent the most advanced stage of ‘progress’. Indeed, the object is merely to produce as much as possible; quality matters little, it is quantity alone that is of importance, which brings us back once more to the remark we have already made in other contexts, namely, that modern civilization may truly be called a quantitative civilization, and this is merely another way of saying it is a material civilization.
Anyone who wants further evidence of this truth can find it in the tremendous importance that economic factors take on nowadays, both in the lives of peoples and of individuals: industry, commerce, finance – these seem to be the only things that count; and this is in agreement with the fact already mentioned that the only social distinction that has survived is the one based on material wealth. Politics seem to be altogether controlled by finance, and trade competition seems to be the dominant influence in determining the relations between peoples; it may be that this is only so in appearance, and that these factors are really not so much causes as means of action, but the choice of such means is a clear sign of the character of the period to which they are suited. Moreover, our contemporaries are convinced that it is almost exclusively economic conditions that dictate historical events, and they even imagine that it has always been so; a theory has even been invented according to which everything is to be explained by economic factors alone, and has been named, significantly, ‘historical materialism’. Here also may be seen the effect of one of those suggestions to which we referred to above, suggestions whose power is all the greater in that they correspond to the tendencies of the general mentality; and the result of this suggestion is that economic factors have really come to decide almost everything that occurs in the social sphere. It is true that the masses have always been led in one manner or another, and it could be said that their part in history consists primarily in allowing themselves to be led, since they represent a merely passive element, a ‘matter’ in the Aristotelian sense of the word. But, in order to lead them today, it is sufficient to dispose of a purely material means, this time in the ordinary sense of the word, and this shows clearly to what depths our age has sunk.
At the same time, the masses are made to believe that they are not being led, but that they are acting spontaneously and governing themselves, and the fact that they believe this is a sign from which the extent of their stupidity may be inferred.

Supply & Demand market forces dominate the psyche of the mind that has abandoned the one-god of Abraham and replaced its absolutist comfort with the concept of an absolutist universe – no less authoritarian and unyielding, and no less able to absolve him of all culpability.
Science is harnessed to materialistic goals, evaluating itself and the world it studies in accordance with market values. That which is not marketable falls to the side, a victim of skeptical stringency, whereas what is made to be marketable overcomes all doubts and all misgivings.

Mencken, H.L. wrote:

Astronomers and physicists, dealing habitually with objects and quantities far beyond the reach of the senses, even with the aid of the most powerful aids that ingenuity has been able to devise, tend almost inevitably to fall into the ways of thinking of men dealing with objects and quantities that do not exist at all, e.g., theologians and metaphysicians. Thus their speculations tend almost inevitably to depart from the field of true science, which is that of precise observation, and to become mere soaring in the empyrean. The process works backward, too. That is to say, their reports of what they pretend actually to see are often very unreliable. It is thus no wonder that, of all men of science, they are the most given to flirting with theology. Nor is it remarkable that, in the popular belief, most astronomers end by losing their minds.

Heidegger, Martin wrote:

“When modern physics exerts itself to establish the world's formula, what occurs thereby is this: the being of entities has resolved itself into the method of the totally calculable.

And yet, what remains a secret to never be uttered in earnest, is that existence remains forever incalculable.

So it is that men that have been convinced - as they are readily willing to be so convinced - that there is no such thing as human nature by those who wish to exploit this denial in them, are the same kind of men who are easily convinced - by those who wish to enslave them with convictions - that they have no free-will.
For a slave in who the very idea of freedom is denied can never even dream of what it has denied, remaining forever a captive of his own mind.
Orwell speaks of it as newspeak, where concepts re negated by eliminating the words representing them, so that such concepts are forgotten in time - crossing over Lethe into the land of the dead, or the land of the living dead, in this case, i.e., zombies in postmodern proverbial jargon.
Words reversed in meaning - when no empirical anchoring prevents such inversions from exposing pretence, or genuine madness; words negated and projected into the surreal and the supernatural realms of the mind, until nothing remains of them but their manmade symbolic fleeing and their emotional baggage awaiting the next train out of their minds; destination...nowhere.

Even the meaning of the term "meaning" has been rendered meaningless by those who can only define nihilism within its linguistically corruptive paradigms.

Patterns within patterns.
Man perceives an underlying rule, i.e., law, governing patterns; a unifying pattern.
This only applies to patterned energies - order.
Since man, ass organism, can only perceive patterns - order - he is immersed in a universe of order, i.e., consistent, repeating, predictability - god, nature, universe = absolute order - a pattern determining all patterns.
He calls them God's Laws, or Divine Laws, or Natural Laws....
M-Theory = an all-encompassing theory to unify Newtonian and Quantum physics.

But not all is ordered.
Novelty attracts and terrifies.  
The unforeseeable, the incomprehensible, the uncanny.
That which necessitates consciousness.
Necessity = goddess Ananke.

Satyr wrote:

We do not doubt that when a man acts that he acts with intent - bestowing upon his activity the term "will" to represent this unknown to us intent. Those that do must offer evidence that it is not the individual who intends but some external agency - some hidden power.
Most men accept the evidence of their own senses so that when they see someone acting that this acting has a motive, an intent, that is entirely his own, and is governed by a willful choice.
But it is this choice which most doubt, claiming that it is unfree, not the product of the individual's judgment, but that some hidden agency that has determined it to choose and to not choose in any other way - and if the choice had been different then it is that choice which is given a divine origin. They refuse to accept the evidence of their own senses, perceiving a man active and though this activity exposing motive expressed through choices that may be traced back to judgments.
In this case they seek in the past contradictions to their perceptions in the present. They intentionally place the non-present above the present, instead of starting with the present - presence, interested as appearance.
Such minds are prone to also place the "beyond" or "above/beneath" before the perceived in the present, exposing their own intent, i.e., hidden motives; a motive they are willing to sacrifice anything to follow towards its projected destination, in the future, i.e., goal, objective.  
 

I believe that I have an answer to this.

The Slave-mind is projecting its own Servitude and Slavishness upon the Freely-willed individual. And this then rings true to those same Nihilists and Postmodernists. They believe, because they are dominated by wills above their own, that the Free-man must also be in the same situation and circumstance as them. They cannot envision or imagine, in their minds, a way-in-which the free-man is free, and so cast doubt upon him which represents the doubt within themselves.

They cannot imagine how one can be free. And so they project upon him, that "he is a liar", when there is a fundamental misunderstanding underneath. Because the slave cannot imagine the free-man, his free-will, or freedom itself, that his is primary limitation. He cannot understand the concept of free-will, so rejects it at its premise and core.


I studied and argued this at length in my "Advanced Freedom" thread on ILP.

The intellectual abilities of the slave-mind is profound. Slaves can be intelligent, yet Unwise. This is the distinction between intelligence and wisdom. Intelligence, by itself, does not earn or grant freedom necessarily. Slaves can become addicted to their servitude and masters. They cannot, or simply will not refuse the premises which bind them. They cannot doubt, their own doubt.

The varying methods which the Slave-mind employs are countless. But what they will never do, essentially, is refuse the core principles of their Servitude. In other words, it cuts through Secularism and back into the roots of Abrahamism. They will not doubt "God". They will not doubt "Science". They will not doubt "The Big Bang". They will not doubt anything at the bottom-level, that they are indoctrinated to defend. As you mention recently, the Secularization of Abrahamism in the West, confuses the average man and layman. The pleb believes because he no longer believes in "Creationism", but instead believes in Science and The Big Bang, that he is now Enlightened, and no longer Christian, or Jewish, or Abrahamic, and that he has "progressed beyond" his/her religious fundamentalism.

When it is not true. The ideas did not change in their content, but in their wording, their terms, their labels.

"God" redefined into another Word.


Essentially the history of Western Man, with accord to Free-Will, is still Biblical. It is the means by which Man has separated from "God", and how this is symbolized by the Fallen Angel of Lucifer/Satan/Devil versus God. How does any creature reject its Creator? Most are unwilling to investigate the core premises, and so, remain pawns to Secular Modern-Postmodern propaganda, indoctrination, and metaphysical systems of beliefs/memeplexes.

What is the core trait or substance that differentiates the Free-man from the Slave-man?

The Free-man is governed through Autonomy, while the Slave-man has none, and cannot even fathom the possibility of it.

Satyr wrote:

Guenon, Rene wrote:

Under such conditions, industry is no longer merely application of science, an application from which science should, in itself, remain completely independent; it has become the reason for, and justification of, science to such an extent that here too the normal relations between things have been reversed. What the modern world has striven after with all its strength, even when it has claimed in its own way to pursue science, is really nothing other than the development of industry and machinery; and in thus seeking to dominate matter and bend it to their service, men have only succeeded, as we said at the beginning of this book, in becoming its slaves. Not only have they limited their intellectual ambition – if such a term can still be used in the present state of things – to inventing and constructing machines, but they have ended by becoming in fact machines themselves. Indeed, it is not only scholars but also technicians and even workers who have to undergo the specialization that certain sociologists praise so highly under the name of ‘division of labor’; and for the ‘workers,’ it makes intelligent work quite impossible. Very different from the craftsmen of former times, they have become mere slaves of machines with which they may be said to form part of a single body. In a purely mechanical way they have constantly to repeat certain specific movements, which are always the same and always performed in the same way, so as to avoid the slightest loss of time; such at least is required by the most modern methods which are supposed to represent the most advanced stage of ‘progress’. Indeed, the object is merely to produce as much as possible; quality matters little, it is quantity alone that is of importance, which brings us back once more to the remark we have already made in other contexts, namely, that modern civilization may truly be called a quantitative civilization, and this is merely another way of saying it is a material civilization.
Anyone who wants further evidence of this truth can find it in the tremendous importance that economic factors take on nowadays, both in the lives of peoples and of individuals: industry, commerce, finance – these seem to be the only things that count; and this is in agreement with the fact already mentioned that the only social distinction that has survived is the one based on material wealth. Politics seem to be altogether controlled by finance, and trade competition seems to be the dominant influence in determining the relations between peoples; it may be that this is only so in appearance, and that these factors are really not so much causes as means of action, but the choice of such means is a clear sign of the character of the period to which they are suited. Moreover, our contemporaries are convinced that it is almost exclusively economic conditions that dictate historical events, and they even imagine that it has always been so; a theory has even been invented according to which everything is to be explained by economic factors alone, and has been named, significantly, ‘historical materialism’. Here also may be seen the effect of one of those suggestions to which we referred to above, suggestions whose power is all the greater in that they correspond to the tendencies of the general mentality; and the result of this suggestion is that economic factors have really come to decide almost everything that occurs in the social sphere. It is true that the masses have always been led in one manner or another, and it could be said that their part in history consists primarily in allowing themselves to be led, since they represent a merely passive element, a ‘matter’ in the Aristotelian sense of the word. But, in order to lead them today, it is sufficient to dispose of a purely material means, this time in the ordinary sense of the word, and this shows clearly to what depths our age has sunk.
At the same time, the masses are made to believe that they are not being led, but that they are acting spontaneously and governing themselves, and the fact that they believe this is a sign from which the extent of their stupidity may be inferred.

Supply & Demand market forces dominate the psyche of the mind that has abandoned the one-god of Abraham and replaced its absolutist comfort with the concept of an absolutist universe – no less authoritarian and unyielding, and no less able to absolve him of all culpability.
Science is harnessed to materialistic goals, evaluating itself and the world it studies in accordance with market values. That which is not marketable falls to the side, a victim of skeptical stringency, whereas what is made to be marketable overcomes all doubts and all misgivings.

I will compare this phenomenon of Western Material culture and "Progress" (Progressivism), especially referring to Technological and Monetary advances ... to my debate against Silhouette on ILP. In that debate, it essentially proved to me, and these quotes back this up as well, that intelligence will not save mankind. It is not intelligence (IQ) that leads Mankind to freedom. That no matter how wealthy the West became, that no matter how powerful machines or war machines become, that all of this means nothing if the core-component, on the most fundamental level, is neglected.

Thus free-will is a rarer property of Nature and Mankind, and that those who are truly Autonomous in their nature, are not so through their intellect alone, that nobody can "think themselves out of a cage", rather freedom is most necessitated by one's Reason and Wisdom. And that a person does not need to be a genius to be or become free, but rather, have the state-of-mind that allows for the possibility of freedom. And I do not have answers to this. It is still a very profound Quality that sets apart the Free-man from the Slave, and the Master-dialectic from the Slave-dialect.

What the 19th, 20th, and Century up to now have all proved, is that Materialism will not lead to Freedom. This is, probably, the most fatal flaw and mistake of Western thinkers up to now. It is proved false by this point.


Furthermore, what is also proved, is that neglecting Freedom and Free-will, while remaining distracted, addicted, and enthralled to Materialism, only pushes individuals, societies, and the whole of Western Civilization further and further away from the ideal of Freedom, Liberty, and Free-will.

There have been two separate main metaphysical outlooks with regard to Freedom and Free-will between Western (New World) Civilization and Eastern (Old World) Civilization.

The West believed (although proved false by this point) that "greater wealth, technology, knowledge, and science" would lead Westerners and the world to Freedom and Liberty, and called Secularism and Scientism "Progressivism" which have all but Regressed backward centuries.

The East long ago surpassed this mistake, and realized centuries and millenniums ago, that it is not Materialism that can lead to Freedom and Liberty, but rather freedom is a spiritual matter that must be addressed through religious revelation. Easterners then used their religions, along with (Political) power, as means to develop their 'Freedom'. Thus, in Eastern nations, 'Freedom' or any free-will are processes by which those at the top of political and religious power, can gain access to.

Western Anglo-Protestantism was developed as a solution to Eastern Fundamentalism. The Protestants believed that they could become free "on their own", and without the Authority of a Priestly (Catholic) Order.

However today, in the West, right now, they are redeveloping a (Secular) version of this Priestly Order, which they quickly retreat and regress into political and societal Authoritarianism and Totalitarianism to achieve.


Any progress toward freedom or free-will is cast away, in a short-term gain for political power, which by definition will be short-lived. Because the Materialistic mindset did not change, and their is no greater goal or ideal which they have that can keep them in power, or even legitimize their political power.

Eastern Civilization, much Older historically, have already learned many of these spiritual lessons centuries ago, and so are much more fit and flexible to deal with the negative repercussions. So perhaps, as Western Civilization loses steam, willpower and fortitude, those in the East will quickly steal-away all Material gain in exchange for a more spiritual currency, based on the historical wisdom of how to adapt to such profound civilizational failures.

The belief that life has no agency reduces it to the level of a stone, or any kind of inanimate matter.
But positive nihilism reverses the narrative claiming that stones are as conscious - willful - as living organisms - rather than accepting the pure nihilist's position that all is will-less, and a man is no better than a stone.
This is my distinction between pure and positive nihilism.
Either/Or absolutism - complete ideological uniformity; multiplicity reduced to a singularity or a nullity.
Either one or nil dualism - binary.

Is positive nihilism also "pure nihilism" to you? And that "Nihilism" is negative nihilism?

"Pure nihilism" is what I call the honest straightforward kind of nihilism - they openly and proudly deny meaning, purpose, life, free-will, etc., and they shamelessly negate everything including themselves.
Essentially existence, for them, is an illusion, or a negative state, they want to escape but are too cowardly or uncertain of their own convictions to end it. Some try to pull the world down with them, as a form of vengeance against a world they find intolerable, unjust, unfair, cruel, or they find not enough for them to justify suffering etc., trying to convince as many as possible of how meaningless and illusory existence is.
It's a form of retribution, against those who do not feel the same. They want to avenge themselves against the ones who love life, existence, despite tis suffering.

"Positive nihilists" - like the name implies - are self-contradictory or hypocrites - most are self-decieivng deceivers - charlatans, who are usually fanatics, "overcompensating for a secret down" as a wise man once said.
Their version of nihilism comes with an absolute positive idea/ideal - delivered in the form of an ideology or a spiritual dogma that makes grand, extraordinary, supernatural, promises, e.g., happiness, power, eternity, sex etc.
The ideology/dogma proposes concepts that negate or annul or reject experienced existence, replacing the real world with an alternate, more seductive, more pleasing one - this hyperbolic positivity overcomes most skepticism.
This is the most popular kind of nihilism because the converts deny that they are nihilists, but then believe in ideas that contradict the experienced world - or existence - either totally (absolutely) or selectively - and if their foundational principles were to be true they would nullify the actual world; the latter are more numerous since within a selective acceptance of reality they can conceal their underlying world negating, life negating, motives. This method also offers the defence of plausible deniability since they can incorporate nonsensical ideas along with sensible ones, e.g., they can conceal mysticism, obscurantism occultism, beneath scientific jargon and rational beliefs, so that they can propose the nonsense and then, if pressured, retreat back to their rational empiricism claiming the scientific method as their own, accusing others that they've been misunderstood.
They usually speak in riddles, or using prose, allegories, metaphors - never clearly.
Most moderns are part of this most popular kind of nihilism - see Abrahamism, Marxism, modernism/postmodernism, viz., under the guise of a positive ideology/dogma they propose feel good, seductive, inspiring philosophies which are anti-life, anti-reality, anti-nature.

Peterson brings up a great point.
Greatness and Power.
Those who imitate greatness to gain power.
I can put this in the context of Nietzsche's Will to Power.....and point to all the charlatans who aspire to be him, by imitating him - idolizing him as a father-figure who they claim as a "kindred" spirit, a relative they wish they had.
But imitation fails unless the essence of the imitated is captured, so that the performer is able to adjust himself to changing circumstances - bringing it all back to free-will.
if the essence - the nature, the pattern underlying the patterns of the behaviour - is misunderstood, then the imitation fails.
Why?
Because the circumstances that gave birth to the idol are never the same. Imitating Nietzsche, or Jesus, or Buddha, or whomever, will fail if the performer dopes not adjust it to present day circumstances....otherwise the imitation is gaudy, a caricature, a bad plagiarism, an out of place and time performance that can only fail to produce the expected results.
Greatness, like talent, does not create to attain power it has it thrust upon it as it does what is in its nature to do.

A man-chilkd, for example, inspired by a famous great artists will fail, even if his imitation are spot-on, because he is motivated by the wrong thing.
His ambition is not the art but the power that is derived from it...and it shows.
His plagiarism, his imitation, will expose this ambition, because it is a mere copy of a spirit that cannot be embodied.
The secret is in memories.
It was said - by I forget who - that a philosopher is a man who embodies multiple personalities, drawing from each one the spirit of multiple world-views, he can then articulate and combine into his own, so that a multitude of people can then relate to, each from his own vantage point.
An imitator simply copies one, or two, unable to embody completely them, despite his talent for acting, but only to imitate them superficially.
The best actors embody the roles they perform drawing from inside them a connecting memory.
Bad actors only imitate superficially, repeating the same script as the icon delivered it, in the same tone, rhythms, volume, unable to tap into the underlying spirit.

Memory is the root of free-will.
Memory of experiences, versus inherited memories - memes/genes; reasoning and analysis versus impulse and intuition - mind/body.

Free-minded or Slave-minded,

There is a difference in the psychology of individuals and of the masses (sociology). Most people are Followers (slave-minded). Thus they will never desire to Overcome those who inspire them. They will never complete the Autonomy required for individuality. Thus when it comes to the matter of Nietzsche, any philosopher, any politician, any great leader in history, or even an inspirational person in anybody's life, the Idol is set above the capacity of the follower. This represents the concept of Authority and Authoritarianism.

There is a steep and severe difference of mind between the follower and the leader. A leader, on the other hand, is inspired, and because he is inspired, desires more than the masses which is to overcome those that inspired. This is an Embodiment of the inspirational people and factors. And it is a matter of pragmatism. People usually recognize inspirational people, such as thinkers or great athletes, and not be inclined to follow in their footsteps, but rather simple Adulation is enough.

So there is a large difference in the inspiration that one wishes to Embody, that one wishes to Overcome, or that one wishes to merely Admire.