Know Thyself
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Know Thyself

Nothing in Excess
 
HomePortalSearchRegisterLog in

Share
 

 Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : 1, 2, 3  Next
AuthorMessage
fizzarolli

fizzarolli

Gender : Male Posts : 10
Join date : 2021-12-03
Location : Calgary

Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Empty
PostSubject: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia EmptySun Aug 21, 2022 1:24 am

Hi Satyr,

I just posted in a thread at ILP involving myself, iambiguous, and Maia (https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=197767&p=2882755#p2882755). I was reminded of my (failed) intention to explore KT back in December of 2021 and decided to rekindle that, so here I am. I've gathered that you, iambiguous, and Maia have had some interesting history here and I've always been curious. I've heard stories of rage and drama, of romance and betrayal, of back stabbing and murder... ok, maybe not murder but definitely drama... and I'm damn curious. So I was just wondering... can you link me to some of the more juicy threads here that exemplify just this sort of drama? What are some of your more memorable debates you've had with Biggy? With Maia? And might as well throw in any other infamous ILP characters, like MagsJ or WendyDarling... any classic debates with them come to mind?

Thank you in advance. You are truly a gentleman and a scholar, truly.
Back to top Go down
Satyr
Daemon
Satyr

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 30864
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 56
Location : Hyperborea

Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia EmptySun Aug 21, 2022 7:32 am

fizzarolli wrote:
Hi Satyr,

I just posted in a thread at ILP involving myself, iambiguous, and Maia (https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=197767&p=2882755#p2882755). I was reminded of my (failed) intention to explore KT back in December of 2021 and decided to rekindle that, so here I am.
I think recent members and my interactions reduced your anxiety.

fizzarolli wrote:
I've gathered that you, iambiguous, and Maia have had some interesting history here and I've always been curious.
To be honest...as I always try to be, I've had longer, more interesting histories with other internet members than those two.
Iamretarded is, uninteresting -  broken record that eventually frustrates and you toss it away never to play it again.
Maia didn't stay around long enough - don't know why....don't much care.

The majority thinks philosophy is something other than what it is.
Anything from a self-help manual, to a personal account and justification.

fizzarolli wrote:
I've heard stories of rage and drama, of romance and betrayal, of back stabbing and murder... ok, maybe not murder but definitely drama... and I'm damn curious.
Have you?
Women tend to inflate everything....as it suits them.

fizzarolli wrote:
So I was just wondering... can you link me to some of the more juicy threads here that exemplify just this sort of drama?
Nope...
Iamretarded posted here for a while....until she began to shit in every thread the same crap - copy/paste - converting this forum to another ILP: a place to socialize and posture and banter.
I locked him in the dungeon we had back then.
From there he began an endless campaign of taunts, meaningless declarations, insults, victory proclamations.....infantile shit. That lasted a while.
Then we moved to a new forum and I rearranged this forum to act as a foyer. In effect, this entire forum is a Dungeon for the other....in Hyperborea.
I'm its dungeon master. Let's role play!!!
I'll be a Satyr...

fizzarolli wrote:
What are some of your more memorable debates you've had with Biggy?
All dialogue with her is meaningless and worthless. she has an agenda - undermine, frustrate, declare victory...taunt....repeat endlessly.
This is anti-philosophy.
She thinks she's making devastating "points"....and all she offers are declarations and inane, repeating, taunts....and feeble attempts to psychologically manipulate.
She's really terrible at it, making her an entertaining clown.
Not a gifted female.
Nothing memorable about her.
Yet, in her mind, I've established permanent residence in her head. In her mind I am memorable.
For me she's another one of the myriads of mediocre morons populating the internets....and I enjoy her performances on ILP where she can't shit in my forum and reduce it to what she's done to ILP and will do to PN - along with others.
She may deny responsibility - in fact she will - but this is a case proving how free-will participates in determination.
She chooses to behave the way she does - posting the same responses as if nobody said anything; refusing or unable to read another's responses; insisting (irony of ironies) that you adopt her method and undefined terminology accusing some vague Randean Objectivists, of something having to do with their refusal to change their views (again, irony of ironies), contradicting her own stated convictions concerning determinism in the process; using terms she refuses to define, as if this will help her in her plan to "change the world" (see her signature...it's all projection) when, in fact, such refusal conceals her inability to comprehend and makes all dialogue meaningless (talking at each other not to each other), viz., if we all used terms and refused to define them then....what would happen to our conversation?
She's a walking psychosis, having to do with her altruism - hypersensitivity - having suffered multiple traumatic disappointments, until she broke and was taught a vengeful form of her original ideologies which she religiously employs to undermine all those that frighten her.
Undermining is her MO....learning it from others - 'cause she's not that bright; the method is postmodernism.

Nothing much to her. Once I deciphered her she became too simple to hold my attentions. I like head cases but this one is bland - shallow.

fizzarolli wrote:
With Maia?
I had little contact with Maia.
She came; she saw; she went away....why?
I don't know, don't care.
If you're asking me to speculate, I would say that she came to philosophy thinking it was a place she could reinforce her established beliefs concerning paganism.
She's one of those New Age pagans....believing that nature is benevolent, fair, kind, or, at least, that nature balances vice with virtue.
She refuses to look into race and why nature produces them, as a way of understanding current events and nature itself.
She only wants to tap into nature's energies, without understanding what they are; energized, empowered...so the negative is detrimental to her subjective objectives.

fizzarolli wrote:
And might as well throw in any other infamous ILP characters, like MagsJ or WendyDarling... any classic debates with them come to mind?
Marj and I go back a long way.
She has issues with those who peer into her psyche and tell her who she is; she feels violated, 'raped'....don't know what in her past caused this or if this is genetic.
Not enough info. Her physical state, making her averse to certain environmental toxins may be manifesting an aversion to certain ideas which are toxic to her mental/physical chemistry, i.e., intolerable, cannot be processed, causing her psychosomatic imbalances, and distress...
She ain't for philosophy. Too fragile.
She loves banter, like most females.

WendyDarling is a reincarnation of an older member, and she comes and goes......always trying to proselytize me and my members.
I think she considers it her sacred duty.
There's also that feminine thing - erotic - of testing males, as a way of evaluating their value to her.
You know....pulling at their hair, poking them, insulting them, challenging them....hoping they will overpower her (change her).
Her positions and focus speaks of a desire to be changed for the better, which in her conscious mind, registers as a method of improving her already established convictions.
Always looking for weaknesses to exploit...
Helping me, in the process.

fizzarolli wrote:
Thank you in advance. You are truly a gentleman and a scholar, truly.
Am I?
Others would call me something else.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
http://satyr-s-sanatorium.forumotion.com/
Satyr
Daemon
Satyr

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 30864
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 56
Location : Hyperborea

Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia EmptySun Aug 21, 2022 9:48 am

What interests me is your motives for asking.....and, how many on ILP can engage the iamreatrard knowing how she will respond and how futile it is.
What drives you to continuously b eat on a dead horse?
What's your angle?

I've posted on her methods and reasons, and there's no breaking through that thickness.....especially when considering her age.
Her obsession with moral issues and convictions indicates the source of her life's trauma.
She wanted to change the world, for the better, and she failed repeatedly. her expectations were continuously dissapointed...so she denounced all ideologies as being "equally meaningless and subjective" so as to excuse her own past naiveté.
Her loss of trust in her own choices and judgments are now to be idealized and collectivized.
all must be pulled into her mind-trap - where she fell and couldn't get out - because she no longer wants to get out - this hole is her burial ground.
She wants vengeance against those who didn't fall into the mind traps she fell into and got stuck.
Her refusal to takes guidance - seeing that her predicament is of her own making - and her insistence to remain there, speaks of vengeance.
Resentiment....
There's no curing that....not at her age, and her health situation.
Her last mission is to avenge herself against a world that failed to produce the ideals she once considered inevitable - from Abrahamic Christianity to Marxism and now postmodernism...a nihilistic thread; a linguistic continuum.
When corned she returns to the mantra....and then begins again.
Zero Progress.
I'm convinced she's below average IQ. she doesn't understand what is being said...as she didn't really understand Heidegger and his Dasein.
For her dasein means, subjective - thrown into existence as a tabula rasa...and then programmed by others with intent.
So, in a "no god world" the intent of god is replaced by the intent of men.
She can fathom no alternative way.
and it's all within Abrahamism.....she still believes.
look at her positions on free-will.
Man has no agency....so if god is dead and he had agency, then....the universe replaces god's will with causality.
God's omnipresence and omnipotence and omniscience with universal order - god's creation myth is replaced by "why something and not nothing?"....the question itself implies the answer.
Why: reason, motive...he has not overcome Abrahamism....not even Marxism was outside this nihilistic self-referential mand-trap.
Her a-morality is distinctly moral in the Abrahamic ethical sense.
She can't think outside the nihilistic paradigm...if not absolute oneness then absolute nothingness.
She wants to pull the world in, before she surrenders to the nothing.
Her language is her hole.
She learned this from postmodernism...because she's too simple to invent something like this.
You tell her what she's doing and she continues doing it....stubborn....
Her definition of objectivism - which she never provides - exposes her....
Her fulminating fanaticism is also a projection.
Objectivity is not Randean Objectivism, and objectivity is the antithesis of fanaticism.
Subjectivity is fanatical....and she's the perfect example.
She believes that anyone who refuses to change his mind, based no her infantile reasoning and methods, is stubborn....as if we all change our minds for no reason at all....or we "uoght to" to signal our "openness" to her idiotic perspective. Whoever resists is labeled an "objectivist"...Ha!!
You ought to respect her idiocies and even be swayed by them to prove to her that you are not a "fulminating fanatic"....see the psychological bullshyte?

She complains that I banned her....when i simply prevented her from crapping all over this forum....and then holds me responsible.
But....in a no free-will universe, why am I responsible for what I do?
Has it not been determined for her to not be able to post here?
We can hope that this determination will change...but I have on agency, according to her, nor me....her.
She says she's a-moral and then holds "objectivists" as reprehensible on what grounds?
Moral ones?
Ideological ones?
Rational ones?
Do they have free-will and can they choose to not be who they are and do what they do?

If they are deplorable based on rational grounds then why does she not attack their reasoning?
She can't.
She has no clue.
She's trapped in her subjectivity and cannot objectively understand anything and anyone.
Her deficiency becomes a universal truth.....we are all equally unable to think objectively....see?
We are all equally trapped in our subjective views and our upbringing...because that's her life-story?
She can only understand another as a projection of herself.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
http://satyr-s-sanatorium.forumotion.com/
Satyr
Daemon
Satyr

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 30864
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 56
Location : Hyperborea

Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia EmptySun Aug 21, 2022 10:15 am

Oh, and one more thing...iamretarded and Marj are paranoid personalities.
It comes from being unable to read people - a rare thing among biological females - like Marj - but not so rare among emasculated males who adopt feminine methods - like iamretarded.
They now suspect I am behind every moniker that makes them feel a certain way - their feminine intuitions.

Recently a desperate soul became an ILP member, using the moniker Kvasir - a member here.
The real Kvasir assures me it isn't him.
Exploiting paranoia. Vindictiveness.
Ridicule? We'll see how talented this desperate degenerate soul is.

I have used an already registered moniker to get around my banishment but not more than once a year, between Christmas and New Year....
(my ILP banishment is of particular interest, given what is tolerated there...I can only suspect that my views were especially intolerable and undeniable, to those who own and run that shithole...one of which was Marj and was present when I was banned)
That moniker is a shared moniker multiple people use, but only I post...once a year.
The retard convinced herself that I invented most of the members here....again, her subjective limitations prevents her from understanding how anyone can believe the things we believe - especially females. So Lyssa is a particular thorn in his world-view....so she concludes that I invented her....
Ha!!!
This alone exposes the quality of mind we are dealing with.
Anyone can see from our styles that we are totally different people....and Lyssa is far superior to me in many respects. But she no longer posts here....and this is our loss.
She provided much content of quality.
Why she left...like with Maia, I can only speculate, and keep to myself....because she was a friend.

In many respects KTS has become Satyr's blog/vlog.
My position is that less is more - quality over quantity.
So, I either get quality members or I prefer silence. I will not compromise to become like ILP...a den of dim wits socializing and calling it philosophizing.
I prefer to remain on the fringes of the internet....
Dealing with people is always frustrating, necessitating some self-censorship.
Anyone that challenges convectional thinking and understanding is forced to self-censor or be completely silenced.
Mediocrity is especially distracting and time consuming....forcing me to continuously state the obvious as if it were deep insight and novel.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
http://satyr-s-sanatorium.forumotion.com/
Kvasir
Augur
Kvasir

Gender : Male Posts : 3047
Join date : 2013-01-09
Location : Gleichgewicht

Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia EmptySun Aug 21, 2022 11:48 am

The Iamafreak, is a gruesome example of what happens when philosophy inadvertently, falls into the hands of the degenerate and insane. He takes philosophical skepticism to its logical conclusion. Like an experimental lab rat, frantically pressing a dopamine sensor, over and over, because it doesn't know any better, it has no self-control, no perceptual balance, and so death is its fate. Same with the subjectivist freak. Because he thinks philosophy should be about doubting anything and everything, including the possibility that he himself has an identity or a "self", or that he even exists, so he keeps himself, as Satyr has described, in a self-referential loop of absurdity, never reaching any possibility of any degree of truth, it keeps him in a perpetual state of self-annulling destruction. This is why he is obsessed with his "fractured and fragmented" concept of his self. He believes himself to be like aimless untethered particles, purposeless, suspended in space, not knowing where he is, who he is, or if he has any sense of self. He can not even think or utter anything, regardless of how trivial it is, without the intellectual retardation, disability, he has afflicted himself with of always asking if there is an "I" or a "self" that is even doing the asking or the thinking. And because, for him, there is no real "I" or "self" then no degree of truth can be possible, because he himself is only a mere construct of a mind, and so all truth becomes so as well.

A very sad and fucked up dunce, a village idiot. There is a veritable fear in him as well. Like he read existentialist philosophy and was scared shitless over the thought that existence was inherently absurd or meaningless, despite thinkers like Camus, Nietzsche, or Heidegger, providing positive life-affirming antidotes to it, because they had the ability to use things like virtue and morality as ordering mechanisms to keep consciousness fruitful and striving towards a purpose, towards meaning. For the freak, there is no capacity for balance. This is why the only existentialist philosopher he is attracted to is Samuel Beckett, that intellectual decrepit who wrote that shit-stain of a play "Waiting for Godot", which is an erotic tribute to the beauty of nihilism. Beckett is a self-destructive and degenerate extreme mind, who offers no alternatives to nihilism, no other choice, no other possibility for truth or beauty or values, and so this suits the Iamafreak. Things like, virtues, ideals, choices, principles, values, these are all part of his illusory self, you see. Only delusional constructs of his mind. He can't understand that they are meant as ordering tools, perceptual orientation directives that allow the mind to focus toward objectivity and truth and wisdom, and that despite nature lacking meaning itself, the courage to face it head on and create meaning and correctly attribute it to nature to understand it and thrive in it is what ideals are meant for. If there is no possibility for free choice, then consciousness itself would be a cosmic joke, as Satyr has pointed out concerning determinism, but i won't get into that, you can read his writings.


Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia EmptySun Aug 21, 2022 12:24 pm

Kvasir wrote:
This is why the only existentialist philosopher he is attracted to is Samuel Beckett, that intellectual decrepit who wrote that shit-stain of a play "Waiting for Godot",

It's fascinating that a play - especially Godot - could make someone so angry. I'm reminded of the reaction of American rednecks to the appearance of black people at the front of a bus or on television. "God damn Cletus! These two tramps don't do a darn thing, ain't nuthing happening!"

As far as I'm aware Beckett was not a philosopher... his art did the talking. And how incredible it was. Taking personal affront to the characters - as you did in the analysis video you posted recently - is bizarre to say the least. Like completely missing the point.
Back to top Go down
Kvasir
Augur
Kvasir

Gender : Male Posts : 3047
Join date : 2013-01-09
Location : Gleichgewicht

Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia EmptySun Aug 21, 2022 1:43 pm

Silas wrote:

It's fascinating that a play - especially Godot - could make someone so angry. I'm reminded of the reaction of American rednecks to the appearance of black people at the front of a bus or on television. "God damn Cletus! These two tramps don't do a darn thing, ain't nuthing happening!"

As far as I'm aware Beckett was not a philosopher... his art did the talking. And how incredible it was. Taking personal affront to the characters - as you did in the analysis video you posted recently - is bizarre to say the least. Like completely missing the point.

Considering your emotional and irrational personal reactions to Satyr and his philosophy, this response does not surprise me one iota.
The fact that my analysis has some undercurrents of pathos and impassioned conviction, you of course mistake for intellectual crudeness. This is an all too common behavior of emasculated minds like yours. And what's your challenge against the points that i make in my vid exactly? None. Only emotional childish reactions. I was angry. That's a pretty devastating argument.

Are you suggesting i should offer more respect to Beckett, because he was able, with some melodramatic flare, to seduce impressionable and gullible feminine minds like yours with rosy flowery poetics? Admittedly, for being a loony redneck, some of his poetry is agreeable with me, such as his spiritual understanding of the mercilessness of time and self-consciousness. Yes, consciousness is cruel, it forces us, as humans, to adapt our perceptions to the truth of reality, and the cosmic uncertainty, or perish in its wake. This is what Beckett wanted to escape, to mock and wail and howl against, helplessly, pitifully, as expressed in his characters. That part, i find to be degenerate, and disagreeable. So because he gained some collective recognition, from other weak and gullible minds like yours, makes him a worthy thinker and artist? Is that how you qualify and valuate genius or skill, based on herd accolades? Again, that doesn't surprise me.

His squeal play "Endgame". An even more degenerate and nihilistic shit-stain than Godot, that he doubled down on. An assortment of self-defeating, self-hating, decrepit characters, trapped in a dirty empty room, unable to leave it because of how resentful they are against nature and existence and themselves. A blind man, wailing and lamenting against the world, and two other freaks, confined inside trash bins; he treats humanity as the refuse, the shit-stain that he himself is. LOL! You honestly expect me, like you, to find "beauty" "power" and "strength", in such reviling art? That's why we here, refer to art like Beckett's , as "Fart", or modern art. Charles Bukowski also wrote some meaningful poetry, but it didn't make him any less of an alcoholic degenerate and probably closet pedophile. Charles Manson, also uttered some worthwhile truths about human hypocrisy and social duplicity, and even the psychology of the feminine. Did that make him any less of a mentally addled psychotic? Truth and reason does not discriminate which voice it comes out of, you idiot. Diogenes the Cynic, is the most ancient example of this. That's why you need to have values and discriminate which degree of truth is more superior than the other, and Beckett's is a degenerate nihilistic fatalistic shit-stain of a philosophy that one should learn from, with the purpose of rejecting it; because that's the innate teaching of nihilism, is to overcome it, dipshit, not succumb to it, or be helplessly seduced by it, unless you have a death wish, or are weak and cowardly and resentful.

Listen, if there's anything you should know about me, because i don't ever engage in exchanges like this because they bore me, is that what I'm drawn to, is anything having to do with strength, power, beauty, spiritual health and life-affirming wisdom. I'm against that which advocates, nihilism, fatalism, self-defeatism, existential melancholy, Nietzschean nausea, cynicism, unless only to learn from it, and to overcome it, to improve myself.

Yeah i know how closed-minded, unenlightened, non-progressive and dull this makes me.
That's why i don't post often. I'm no fun to anyone.

Back to top Go down
fizzarolli

fizzarolli

Gender : Male Posts : 10
Join date : 2021-12-03
Location : Calgary

Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia EmptySun Aug 21, 2022 10:55 pm

Satyr wrote:
The majority thinks philosophy is something other than what it is.
Anything from a self-help manual, to a personal account and justification.

In many cases, that's spot on--the self-help part especially; many people come to philosophy and go to great lengths to flesh out their own only as a means of working through their own issues; one finds that when they get better and feel more secure in themselves, they lose interest in philosophy.

Satyr wrote:
Have you?
Women tend to inflate everything....as it suits them.

Well, I'm being hyperbolic.

Satyr wrote:
gib wrote:
So I was just wondering... can you link me to some of the more juicy threads here that exemplify just this sort of drama?
Nope...

Sad

Satyr wrote:
Iamretarded posted here for a while....until she began to shit in every thread the same crap - copy/paste - converting this forum to another ILP: a place to socialize and posture and banter.

Biggy is a prime example of type who uses philosophy as a form of self-therapy. The fact that he plays like a broken record is a clear sign of this. It means he is ensnared by something that he has to fight against endlessly in the form of his thoughts on dasein. When he puts those thoughts to paper--or pixels on an internet forum--he is effectively reinforcing his defenses.

Satyr wrote:
All dialogue with her is meaningless and worthless. she has an agenda - undermine, frustrate, declare victory...taunt....repeat endlessly.

I'm torn between thinking he (she?) has an agenda vs. a neurosis--I don't know whether he knowingly plays a game with those he engages with or is suffering some kind of mental disorder; I'm leaning to the latter. And you're right--I believe it's brought on by trauma--either from his religious right-wing upbringing or some kind of PTSD from Vietnam--or both--but he has developed these immensely powerful defense mechanisms that he uses to keep himself in his self-built mental sanctuary where dasein is the order of the day. It's a very confined and narrow sanctuary with very little room for thoughts other than those on dasein, but that's the way he needs it in order to feel protected from the world outside, from thoughts and ideas other than dasein and his brand of nihilism.

Satyr wrote:
Yet, in her mind, I've established permanent residence in her head. In her mind I am memorable.

You are among a handful of characters that represent, in Biggy's mind, the stereotypical "objectivist pinhead". You are the poster boy, in his mind, for the "might makes right" philosophy.

Satyr wrote:
She's a walking psychosis, having to do with her altruism - hypersensitivity - having suffered multiple traumatic disappointments, until she broke and was taught a vengeful form of her original ideologies which she religiously employs to undermine all those that frighten her.
Undermining is her MO....learning it from others - 'cause she's not that bright; the method is postmodernism.

I don't think Biggy's altruistic in the least--but he is, in a sense, vengeful. His entire campaign is to get back at the right for being right about the left. If you follow his backstory, you know he was raised in a traditional right-wing religious household, and at some point in his youth, he rebelled against that life and became a leftist. He remained a leftist for a good 20 years (spent some time fighting in the Vietnam war) until his encounter with the abortion. Marry wanted an abortion. John was steadfast against it. And they expected Biggy to take a side. They were both his friends so he felt torn--"drawn and quartered" as he puts it--and it was in that moment when he realized he had no way to determine which side was right--the left-wing pro-choice advocates or the right-wing pro-life advocates. And so he had to renounce the left as well. But this wasn't a reversion back to the right. Instead, he found himself suspended in a kind of nihilistic limbo from which, to this day, he can't figure out how to escape. For the first time, it wasn't him against the left or him against the right, it was him against the objectivists on both sides. Yet he finds himself far more pitted against the right than the left. Why? Because unlike the left who he simply renounced, the right gets to say "I told you so." So he has to take a stand in order to make it clear that he is not crawling back to them--indeed, to God--who are, at least in his mind, awaiting his return so they can serve him the punishment he deserves for rebelling against them (which, in my mind, explains his obsession with God and his fate in the afterlife). So his statement to the right-wing objectivists is "Ok, I may have been wrong about the left--but you haven't figured it out any more than they have--so I challenge you to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that you've got it right, to demonstrate in such a way that all rational men and women are obligated to concede that you've figured it out." It's his way of remaining in limbo--a sort of revenge against the right-wing objectivists for saying "I told you so", a beginning to the construction of his sanctuary which protects him not only from right-wing and left-wing ideas but from the wrath of God which, in his (unconscious) mind, surely awaits him in the afterlife.

Satyr wrote:
What interests me is your motives for asking.....and, how many on ILP can engage the iamreatrard knowing how she will respond and how futile it is.
What drives you to continuously b eat on a dead horse?
What's your angle?

You asked me two questions there: 1) What are my motives for asking? And 2) What drives me to continuously beat a dead horse? I'll answer both.

I am asking [for links to your discussions with the ILP characters] because these characters keep bringing up their escapades into KT land and their encounters with you, and it makes me feel like I've missed out, like I'm not in the loop. It's tantalized my interests and made me curious, and so one day I told myself to stop wondering and go have the experience. So here I am.

What drives me to keep engaging with Biggy is that I'm fascinated by his psychology. His is different from most of the pinheads (as he calls them) at ILP--most pinheads are relatively simpleminded and exhibit the same tired old patterns, but Biggy is far more complex and mysterious and exhibits a unique pattern all his own. While I try to avoid engaging with him 90% of the time, I once in a while become curious about his psychology, wondering how he would react if I brought this or that up, if I challenged him on this or that front. For example, my latest thread with him was about the Trucker Protest in Canada (at least it was on the surface) which would be very interesting to engage with him about because not only did it represent a real world event currently (at the time) going on but I was trying to involve myself. So we didn't have to talk about hypotheticals and generalities, none of this "what would I do" but "what am I doing". And it would give me an opportunity to really look into my own soul for the things Biggy likes to draw out, look at what actually happens within me when I'm in one of Biggy's "conflicting goods" situations. But more to the point, when an opportunity arises, or when a question occurs to me, one about Biggy that I'm curious to know the answer to, I'll entice him with a new thread in which I invite him to discuss what I know he can't resist. We go a few rounds, I pull some information out of him, I learn what I want to learn (and not so much because of what he tells me but because of how he reacts), and at some point the well runs dry. That's when I have to figure out how to get out of the discussion--which isn't easy; my strategy is usually to cherry pick the quotes I want to respond to and letting go of the rest, and setting the bar higher and higher for myself on what's worthy of a response with each round, until I'm only responding to maybe a couple quotes, at which point the discussions is as good as over. This time, however, I couldn't bring myself to do that and had to use a different strategy--to face the music and throw in the towel overtly. I don't like doing that because it's not as graceful or dignifying but hey, it's lot better than wading through rounds and rounds of frustration and torture.

Satyr wrote:
Anyone can see from our styles that we are totally different people....and Lyssa is far superior to me in many respects. But she no longer posts here....and this is our loss.

Yes, Lyssa is another character I've heard much about--never posted at ILP as far as I'm aware--but I'm curious all the same.

But I suppose you don't have threads on her either. Ah, c'est la vie. I'll poke around, do some searching, and see what I can dredge up. Thanks for the responses.
Back to top Go down
Kvasir
Augur
Kvasir

Gender : Male Posts : 3047
Join date : 2013-01-09
Location : Gleichgewicht

Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia EmptySun Aug 21, 2022 11:12 pm

fizzarolli wrote:


I don't think Biggy's altruistic in the least--but he is, in a sense, vengeful. His entire campaign is to get back at the right for being right about the left. If you follow his backstory, you know he was raised in a traditional right-wing religious household, and at some point in his youth, he rebelled against that life and became a leftist. He remained a leftist for a good 20 years (spent some time fighting in the Vietnam war) until his encounter with the abortion. Marry wanted an abortion. John was steadfast against it. And they expected Biggy to take a side. They were both his friends so he felt torn--"drawn and quartered" as he puts it--and it was in that moment when he realized he had no way to determine which side was right--the left-wing pro-choice advocates or the right-wing pro-life advocates. And so he had to renounce the left as well. But this wasn't a reversion back to the right. Instead, he found himself suspended in a kind of nihilistic limbo from which, to this day, he can't figure out how to escape. For the first time, it wasn't him against the left or him against the right, it was him against the objectivists on both sides. Yet he finds himself far more pitted against the right than the left. Why? Because unlike the left who he simply renounced, the right gets to say "I told you so." So he has to take a stand in order to make it clear that he is not crawling back to them--indeed, to God--who are, at least in his mind, awaiting his return so they can serve him the punishment he deserves for rebelling against them (which, in my mind, explains his obsession with God and his fate in the afterlife). So his statement to the right-wing objectivists is "Ok, I may have been wrong about the left--but you haven't figured it out any more than they have--so I challenge you to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that you've got it right, to demonstrate in such a way that all rational men and women are obligated to concede that you've figured it out." It's his way of remaining in limbo--a sort of revenge against the right-wing objectivists for saying "I told you so", a beginning to the construction of his sanctuary which protects him not only from right-wing and left-wing ideas but from the wrath of God which, in his (unconscious) mind, surely awaits him in the afterlife.


He sounds like some sad tragic character sketch in a Jean Paul Sartre novel.

Back to top Go down
fizzarolli

fizzarolli

Gender : Male Posts : 10
Join date : 2021-12-03
Location : Calgary

Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia EmptyMon Aug 22, 2022 1:28 am

Kvasir wrote:

He sounds like some sad tragic character sketch in a Jean Paul Sartre novel.

Oh, he would love to hear you say that.
Back to top Go down
Satyr
Daemon
Satyr

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 30864
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 56
Location : Hyperborea

Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia EmptyMon Aug 22, 2022 8:23 am

fizzarolli wrote:
Satyr wrote:
The majority thinks philosophy is something other than what it is.
Anything from a self-help manual, to a personal account and justification.
In many cases, that's spot on--the self-help part especially; many people come to philosophy and go to great lengths to flesh out their own only as a means of working through their own issues; one finds that when they get better and feel more secure in themselves, they lose interest in philosophy.
And what brings you to a pretentious sounding discipline, such as 'philosophy'? What are you expecting to gain?


fizzarolli wrote:
Satyr wrote:
Have you?
Women tend to inflate everything....as it suits them.
Well, I'm being hyperbolic.
gib wrote:
So I was just wondering... can you link me to some of the more juicy threads here that exemplify just this sort of drama?
Nope...
When I reinvented/refurbished KTS there was a purging of garbage.
I don't like garbage in my house....nor faeces outside the toilet...nor chaos.

If these posts still exist, you must look for them yourself.


fizzarolli wrote:
Biggy is a prime example of type who uses philosophy as a form of self-therapy. The fact that he plays like a broken record is a clear sign of this. It means he is ensnared by something that he has to fight against endlessly in the form of his thoughts on dasein. When he puts those thoughts to paper--or pixels on an internet forum--he is effectively reinforcing his defenses.
If it were only that, then she would be among a 99.999% majority.
But there's more to her method...Madness? No....vengeance.
She's reprimanding her younger self in the form of the perpetually incomprehensible, to her, other.
She is admonishing herself - her younger more naïve self (can you imagine) - in her reflection through otherness; dismissing it as nothing.
She wants to disappear in and through another  [see her positions on identity (self) & free-will - by converting others into a collective version of herself] as she knows and understands herself - debating herself through time.
This is why whenever the other says something that goes outside her understanding she simply ignores it, as if it was never spoken...and carries on with the mantra....cut & paste.
Philosophy is, for her, a form of masturbation - she spills her seed without purpose....into the void of her handkerchief, already moist with her tears, waiting for her seed to sprout roots and blossom.


fizzarolli wrote:
I'm torn between thinking he (she?) has an agenda vs. a neurosis--I don't know whether he knowingly plays a game with those he engages with or is suffering some kind of mental disorder; I'm leaning to the latter.
Both....desperation leads to degeneracy, which increases desperation which leads to an inflation of degeneracy....a cycle...a hole.....Waiting for Godot in her a grave she dug with her own hands.
Using your terminology: her inherited proclivity towards neurosis attracted her to specific dogmas/ideologies and these multiplied her neurosis...
[See the Jews and their neuroticism concerning sex, i.e., Freud.]
Genes to Memes....then inverted (nihilism) into Memes to Genes.
Memes are gene specific; these memes (nihilistic dogmas) then attempt to semiotically convert their inheritance into a genealogy to justify and validate themselves.
So, in her case she wants to seed minds with her neurosis...make it ubiquitous, universal....a truth - normalize her neurotic naivete.
World = Humanity, for her.
She's trapped in Messianism, and linguistic nihilism, i.e., obscurantism, mysticism, ideology/dogmatism, absolutism. Therefore, she refuses to define the words she uses - admitting they are in her "understanding" which is never clarified, implying that all may adopt her emotional understanding of a term she refuses to define.
This, my friend is insane...and those who waste their time on her, like you, come close to becoming the same, or they may be sadistically toying with a sick mind.

A biological (he) but a mental/psychological (she)....which is ironic that she would be insulted by my assesment, given her postmodernism and her support for LGBTJEWQ++++ agendas. Why would she imitate and cast it as a defensive attack when pronouns are subjective, according to her own positions?
Isn't gender - and race - a social construct? Then why is she so offended?
HA!!!
A hypocrite...


fizzarolli wrote:
And you're right--I believe it's brought on by trauma--either from his religious right-wing upbringing or some kind of PTSD from Vietnam--or both--but he has developed these immensely powerful defense mechanisms that he uses to keep himself in his self-built mental sanctuary where dasein is the order of the day. It's a very confined and narrow sanctuary with very little room for thoughts other than those on dasein, but that's the way he needs it in order to feel protected from the world outside, from thoughts and ideas other than dasein and his brand of nihilism.
She's not creative, nor clever enough to have her own "brand of nihilism". She's been given postmodernism....as a reinvention of Marxism....which was a secular reinvention of Abrahamism. She's a parrot.
She remains true to the same bullshyte. She cannot find the source of her error because she's placed it outside herself.
Victim psychology...undermining confidence, undermining family, identity, language, until you produce desperation - desperation leads to...?
Degeneration.
She wants to "change the world" (humanity) to a state of degeneration so that her own will not stand out as inferior. She wants to disappear in uniformity....in the absolute degeneration of order into chaos. Mentally circumcised.

She will not define any word, because she wants to use them as mysteriously magical forces and because she wants to undermine language - philosophy's tool.
She's anti-philosophy. She's pro-ideology.
Anything that strives to become objective, she despises.
All must become uniformly subjective.


fizzarolli wrote:
You are among a handful of characters that represent, in Biggy's mind, the stereotypical "objectivist pinhead". You are the poster boy, in his mind, for the "might makes right" philosophy.
I know.
In her mind anyone who doesn't humour her, respects her, or is willing to make concessions to her absurdities - no matter how vague and unsubstantiated - or isn't willing to accept that all positions are equal, is an "objectivist". Objectivist, in her understanding - like with Dasein - is a replacement for the concept of 'Satan,' or 'evil,' or 'exploiting, selfish capitalist'...Ayn Rand's ideal.
Everyone is a follower of Rand....and I've never read a single one of her books and never will.
But it doesn't matter to her. She needs a bogeyman, an "evil" to make her the warrior of "righteous goodness".

Ask her to define this "objectivist"....she wont, because she knows this will expose her quality of mind.
She's associated 'objectivity' with "fanaticism" when it is the opposite. A fanatic is always subjective: self-referential, egotistical, self-indulgent, emotional, selfish even in his selflessness, self-interested, self-agrandizing in his feigned humility....
That she denies 'self' indicates that she's transferred her identity to a collective.
All this is inevitable....the universe will determine it in time.
Projection is her tool of choice...her weapon.
She outsources her identity, her mind, her consciousness, and her will....so she must reject free-will or her own agency.
How convenient.
So, her failures, the negative traumatic experiences were all not her fault....she had no participation in their determination. She's innocent...an innocent victim of evil objectivists - fighting on behalf of goodness, which is omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient, i.e., inevitable. She's been "chosen" to know what others can't: all is meaningless nothingness.
Her definitions expose her conventional understanding.

The mistake she makes, exposing her quality of mind: I'm not "might is right"....but "right is might".
See how she intentionally and hypocritically inverts everything?
RIGHT is MIGHT...She lives in a delusional world where might imposes what is considered true on reality itself. Reality is the creation of "might"...if not god then...humans.
That's not the entire story.
Reality isn't invented from nothing.
Have the clever and powerful imposed their views on the mediocre masses?
Yes.
But reality is not manmade - interpretations of reality/world are man-made and they can be evaluated in relation to world outside manmade environments.

She takes herself as a universal truth-sayer. She was forced to believe in absurdities and failed to break out of them; when she did she fell for other absurdities, related of the previous ones. She eventually lost trust in her own judgements...and with good reason, 'cause she's got shit for brains.
Having failed to find this non-existent oneness she's settled for the easier nothingness. Why?
There parity is certain.....if not in oneness then in nothingness she immerses herself in the collective as an "equal member".
All is reduced to nil, and there her inferiority vanishes.


fizzarolli wrote:
I don't think Biggy's altruistic in the least--but he is, in a sense, vengeful.
In her mind she is.
She wants to change the world...by undermining its confidence, its sense of self...so as to cultivate a psychosis that will be able to make desperate compromises.
Those that resist are "objectivists" and "fulminating fanatics".
Again...her every attack is a self-exposition. She tells you who she is and what her motives are in her signature, in her accusations, in her insults.


fizzarolli wrote:
His entire campaign is to get back at the right for being right about the left. If you follow his backstory, you know he was raised in a traditional right-wing religious household, and at some point in his youth, he rebelled against that life and became a leftist. He remained a leftist for a good 20 years (spent some time fighting in the Vietnam war) until his encounter with the abortion.
Yes, I know all that.
She was an Abrahamic; then a Marxist; now a postmodern....
She thinks she's matured, progressed....but she's remained within the same paradigm - her a-hole.


fizzarolli wrote:
Marry wanted an abortion. John was steadfast against it. And they expected Biggy to take a side. They were both his friends so he felt torn--"drawn and quartered" as he puts it--and it was in that moment when he realized he had no way to determine which side was right--the left-wing pro-choice advocates or the right-wing pro-life advocates. And so he had to renounce the left as well. But this wasn't a reversion back to the right. Instead, he found himself suspended in a kind of nihilistic limbo from which, to this day, he can't figure out how to escape. For the first time, it wasn't him against the left or him against the right, it was him against the objectivists on both sides. Yet he finds himself far more pitted against the right than the left. Why? Because unlike the left who he simply renounced, the right gets to say "I told you so." So he has to take a stand in order to make it clear that he is not crawling back to them--indeed, to God--who are, at least in his mind, awaiting his return so they can serve him the punishment he deserves for rebelling against them (which, in my mind, explains his obsession with God and his fate in the afterlife).
Trapped in absolute binaries - nihilistic paradigm.
Her mind is entombed in Americanism and its political binaries: Democrat vs Republican, Communism vs. Capitalism, Left vs. Right....and both are within the same paradigm.

Like I told her, and she simply ignored:
Value, and morality, is determined by the objective.
Abortion, for example, depends on what kind of human one wants to cultivate...not universal truths.
Morality requires no god. It evolves and then man adds to it his own addendums, according to his ideals, viz., according to what kind of human he idealizes and wants to cultivate, e.g., Spartans practiced infanticide - because they had no Ultrasonic, CT, or MRI scans, because they wanted to cultivate a warrior system.

Abortion is now used to equalize women with men - intervene and "correct" nature's injustices that "impose upon women" the burden of impregnation and gestation and child rearing, that puts a cap on their promiscuity - female sexual power - and how many error judgements they can make.
Iamretarded wants to collectivize all negative consequences. The only way, she believes, she can accomplish this is to undermine those with good judgement, with superior judgement, make them lose trust in themselves, so as to force them to concede to a moral collective.

Her ideology, her moralism, is uniformity.


fizzarolli wrote:
So his statement to the right-wing objectivists is "Ok, I may have been wrong about the left--but you haven't figured it out any more than they have--so I challenge you to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that you've got it right, to demonstrate in such a way that all rational men and women are obligated to concede that you've figured it out." It's his way of remaining in limbo--a sort of revenge against the right-wing objectivists for saying "I told you so", a beginning to the construction of his sanctuary which protects him not only from right-wing and left-wing ideas but from the wrath of God which, in his (unconscious) mind, surely awaits him in the afterlife.
Yes...she functions within absolutes and absolutes are her excuse.
If not absolute certainty, then absolute uncertainty, for all.
There is nothing that is beyond her doubt....since it is an absolute shadow - nothing can escape it.
But that's not how life works.
Everything is probability.

She wants everyone to be happy and treated fairly....and this is romantic idealistic nonsense, concealing vengefulness.
She's not that different from Ecmandu and his "consent violation" obsession.
Sex is aggressive and involves duplicity.
Nature is unjust....not everyone gets what they want.
Romantic nonsense has become psychotic, after generations of Abrahamic and Marxist bullshyte. Alienation, disappointment in the god that was not, in a utopia/paradise that could never be.

Instead of correcting themselves and their world-view, they want to correct the world, or denounce it completely.
When in their youth they dreamed of changing the world to accord with their romantic idealism; then they "matured" and realized how naïve they had been, so they want to destroy, negate, a world that failed to be what they wanted it to be.


fizzarolli wrote:
You asked me two questions there: 1) What are my motives for asking? And 2) What drives me to continuously beat a dead horse? I'll answer both.
Quid pro Quo...


fizzarolli wrote:
I am asking [for links to your discussions with the ILP characters] because these characters keep bringing up their escapades into KT land and their encounters with you, and it makes me feel like I've missed out, like I'm not in the loop. It's tantalized my interests and made me curious, and so one day I told myself to stop wondering and go have the experience. So here I am.
Curiosity ...good.
You can see how I've now made my permanent residence in their mind....rent free.
Read my responses to you, and read my positions throughout this forum, and you'll understand why they cannot ignore, nor forget me.
Mediocre minds are used to confronting other mediocre minds....within their level of understanding.
To be precise ....iamretarded is prepared for the Republican, the right-wing fanatic, understanding them as "might is right" and all that.
I am outside this right/left binary.
I come at her from beyond her sphere of understanding....outside nihilistic binaries.

An example: look at this "might is right" accusation she flings towards me, when I've repeatedly corrected her that I am a "Right is Might". She's confused...cannot process the information ...so she ignores it...as she does anything that is over her head.
So, I put her in the Dungeon after repeatedly being ignored, and after repeated warning to not follow me around from thread to thread posting the same taunts, the same accusations....She ignored me, again....so there were consequences.
You can say anything you want about me or any subject, as long as you keep it in the right thread - is on-topic, otherwise you create another free-for-all ILP with arbitrary rules that only apply to some posters and not others.
What is the use in wasting my time on this fanatic?
She simply ignores and repeats...endlessly. Then she taunts, when you refuse to repeat yourself ad infinitum, in a hopeless situation.
She taunts until you engage her again and then she begins repeating the same shit, as if nothing has been said....no progress had been made.
I got no time for psychotics.

I repeated to her that Might is Right is what fascists, Nazis say...I am not saying this.
I say Right is Might.
She ignored it like I said nothing.
I corrected her on her conviction that I was a Randean, or on her understanding of objectivity...again... it's as if I had said nothing.
Back then she used to cut & paste the same shit:
"I was born in the belly of a fucking stupid whore....etc....blah blah..." [paraphrasing]
All to say that she was raised to believe certain things.
When you respond to this "...all is subjective and all are trapped in their upbringing" perspectivism, she simply ignores it and cut & pastes the exact same thing continuously, accusing you of being afraid of her "devastating points".

Why will I waste my time on that piece of trash?
What do I have to gain? Why would I care what she thinks or what defensive mechanisms she's developed?
Once I figured her out I lost interest in her...other than as another head-case....like Ecmandu...shit-Stain....Fixed, Parodites...and many others on ILP.


fizzarolli wrote:
What drives me to keep engaging with Biggy is that I'm fascinated by his psychology. His is different from most of the pinheads (as he calls them) at ILP--most pinheads are relatively simpleminded and exhibit the same tired old patterns, but Biggy is far more complex and mysterious and exhibits a unique pattern all his own.
What? Really? Complex?  Shocked
HA!!
Nope....she's older...and she's picked-up more tricks, that is all.
She's simpler than simple. Stubborn....not complex. A fulminating fanatic of nil.
Marj is more complex...so is Parodites.


fizzarolli wrote:
While I try to avoid engaging with him 90% of the time, I once in a while become curious about his psychology, wondering how he would react if I brought this or that up, if I challenged him on this or that front.
You certainly rattled her cage with this maneuver.
In her defensive, self-serving mind anyone who disagrees with me is banished....and you and others are here contradicting her convictions.
Again, her judgements appear to be...wrong. Another error in judgement like those she made in her youth.
This irks her.
She's affected by the audience, and that is why she keeps directing herself to the invisible, silent watcher.
She's a typical female.
In her mind the audience are on her side....and quantity defeats quality, because she doesn't even know what 'quality' means. Like once she denied 'beauty's objectivity'....all is beautiful for someone, she insisted.

But...watch how quickly she recuperates and carries on with the same performance. Only Godot will stop her.


fizzarolli wrote:
For example, my latest thread with him was about the Trucker Protest in Canada (at least it was on the surface) which would be very interesting to engage with him about because not only did it represent a real world event currently (at the time) going on but I was trying to involve myself. So we didn't have to talk about hypotheticals and generalities, none of this "what would I do" but "what am I doing". And it would give me an opportunity to really look into my own soul for the things Biggy likes to draw out, look at what actually happens within me when I'm in one of Biggy's "conflicting goods" situations. But more to the point, when an opportunity arises, or when a question occurs to me, one about Biggy that I'm curious to know the answer to, I'll entice him with a new thread in which I invite him to discuss what I know he can't resist. We go a few rounds, I pull some information out of him, I learn what I want to learn (and not so much because of what he tells me but because of how he reacts), and at some point the well runs dry. That's when I have to figure out how to get out of the discussion--which isn't easy; my strategy is usually to cherry pick the quotes I want to respond to and letting go of the rest, and setting the bar higher and higher for myself on what's worthy of a response with each round, until I'm only responding to maybe a couple quotes, at which point the discussions is as good as over. This time, however, I couldn't bring myself to do that and had to use a different strategy--to face the music and throw in the towel overtly. I don't like doing that because it's not as graceful or dignifying but hey, it's lot better than wading through rounds and rounds of frustration and torture.
She can't process ambiguity and nuances. She needs certainties....delivered in the form of a situation, like the trucker protest....but then she insists on absolute answers, otherwise you've reinforced her nothingness.
If you can't deliver absolute answers...you are an objectivist, validating her worship of absolute nothingness.

I told you...the absolute positive (1) disappointed her, traumatized her, and then she was told about the absolute negative (0), and there she found her omnipotent, perfect god....the nil.
All she has to do is find a flaw in any proposed positive....to validate her idealized nothingness.

This is another thing, about me, that confused her feminine mind.
She's used to absolutism. I reject absolutes - immutable, indivisible, singularity, the one; but I also reject absolute nil.
So, she doesn't know where to put me...so she puts me on the side she associates with her 'enemies'...and I become a "fulminating fanatical objectivist", and tells me that I believe in "might is right" when the opposite is what I believe.
I offer an alternative outside this absolute paradigm and she doesn't know how to deal with it - it is incomprehensible, to her.
A trick...
She grabs unto my refusal to adopt her bullcrap as evidence that I am fanatical; because changing your mind is evidence of humility and open-mindedness and willingness of make concessions - moral argument - .....no matter how absurd the other's positions are you must capitulate.
She's not really amoral. She doesn't practice what she preaches.

She accuses me of denying her access to KTS...but if all is determined how can I not choose to deny her access?
How can I choose to endure her nonsense and shitting in every thread?
Why do I have agency and she doesn't?
Why am I held accountable to her moral standards when she claims to be amoral?
If she is truly amoral then why is it shameful or wrong that I deny her access?
I never said I was a Christian and adhered to Christian ethics, nor did I say I was a proponent of all-inclusicirtty.
In fact I've clearly stated that I am a heathen, pagan, whatever you like to call it, and an elitist - both need unpacking.
She doesn't see anything I post...as if I posted nothing...and she continues on in her subjective understanding, proving the consequences of her delusion that there is no objective reality, no objective morality, no objective beauty.
In her either/or absolutist, binary, simpleton mind, objective means absolute, divine, total, complete...whole, when all it means is "independent from all subjective minds" - "indepedent from all perspectives"...and philosophy is about the striving to come closest to objectivity.

See?
She's a hypocrite.


fizzarolli wrote:
Yes, Lyssa is another character I've heard much about--never posted at ILP as far as I'm aware--but I'm curious all the same.
She was a good friend and a private person who asked me not to speak about her to others.
So, even this is too much.
Her posts and threads are worth reading.

But if you want to believe, like the retard, that I invented Lyssa....please do.
It serves me better.


fizzarolli wrote:
But I suppose you don't have threads on her either. Ah, c'est la vie. I'll poke around, do some searching, and see what I can dredge up. Thanks for the responses.
Cool.
Thanks for giving me the opportunity to set things straight. She selectively reposts my views...because she's a liar and a hypocrite.
But she has been a good pet - a mule that once carried my words across the border.
Her infantile mind - constantly declaring herself victorious - could be endured....but it does distract and prevents any conversation from advancing to more mature areas.
When women and children are allowed in a symposium, no philosophical discourse is possible.
Everything is reduced to the lowest-common-denominator.
In the case of iamreatarded....retardation is inevitable where and when she participates.
[see ILP]

p.s., in case you find one of her "devastating good points, contradicting my actual positions" - the ones she "thumped" me with - feel free to challenge me by copying them in the appropriate thread...and I will respond.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
http://satyr-s-sanatorium.forumotion.com/
Satyr
Daemon
Satyr

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 30864
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 56
Location : Hyperborea

Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia EmptyTue Aug 23, 2022 2:26 pm

Why are you, really, here?

How would gib resolve the fact that we are all trapped in our subjective perspectives?
Are we equally trapped? Is there no way out?

What method does science or philosophy use?
How is knowledge and understanding even possible if we are all permanently trapped in subjectivity? How do we innovate and create?
How do we advance at all, if all is illusory and we are all trapped in our subjectivity, i.e., the crap we were programmed at birth, onward?

If the moron, on ILP, is correct, how is civilization possible?
Is it all part of determinism; has all this been inevitable, part of some universal plan - telos - god's plan?
Is man involved at all?

If the moron, on ILP, is correct, then how do animals develop comparable altruistic behaviours, and how do they adhere to gender roles, and why do they evolve breeds - comparable to human races?
What culture is determining their subjectivity?

If all is meaningless - meaning, without purpose - then what ought we to do?
Wait for a mentor,. a leader, a divinity...a charlatan? Why continue on, at all?
Isn't this why people turn to drugs and hedonistic degeneracy? Having lost traditions - a past - do they turn to fashion, trends, chemical means of redirecting their constantly accumulating energies?
The moron, on ILP, turned to postmodern insanity...what about you?
What's your coping method?

What about iamretarded do you find "complex"?
Do you see yourself in her? Do you see, in her, what you consider incomprehensible in yourself?
What about her do you relate with?

Inquiring minds want to know.
Quid pro Quo

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
http://satyr-s-sanatorium.forumotion.com/
fizzarolli

fizzarolli

Gender : Male Posts : 10
Join date : 2021-12-03
Location : Calgary

Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia EmptyTue Aug 23, 2022 10:41 pm

Satyr wrote:
And what brings you to a pretentious sounding discipline, such as 'philosophy'? What are you expecting to gain?

I was one of those mentally broken individuals who used philosophy as a form of self-therapy--first to prove my intellect, and then to forge a path out of a drug-induced psychosis that I inflicted upon myself--and once out of that, it became not much more than an occasional activity of leisure--not even to proselytize my own philosophy but just to pick apart and challenge others on their philosophies--like a Socratic gadfly--which is what I do today (a guilty pleasure). This is why I think I have the right to say what I said--about people using philosophy as a form of self-therapy--because I've been there myself--and it worked!--and since then philosophy has become less interesting to me except for occasions like these.

Satyr wrote:
So, in her case she wants to seed minds with her neurosis...make it ubiquitous, universal....a truth - normalize her neurotic naivete.

When I think about this thing Biggy is doing as a deliberate game he is playing with others, this is what comes to mind--he is trying to create confusion and uncertainty--he names himself iambiguous because ambiguity is the name of his game--it is why he never answers a question directly, never gives clear definitions, why he segues into tangents that trick the unsuspecting mind into thinking they are still relevant to the original theme, why he accuses one of not being relevant to this theme when he has nothing else even though he created the tangent in the first place, and so on and so forth. He is trying to be the complete opposite of an objectivist, trying to blur any vision of a clearly defined object the conversation aims at or revolves around, trying to blur definitions period (definitions are crucial to the objectivist for only with clearly articulated definitions can we agree on what we are talking about and what we are not talking about, which in turn allows us to have logical discourse that actually goes somewhere). To experience the confusion that he experiences and the subsequent frustration that it leads to is his goal--seeding other minds with his neurosis as you said--that is, if this is indeed a game he is deliberately playing.

Satyr wrote:
This, my friend is insane...and those who waste their time on her, like you, come close to becoming the same, or they may be sadistically toying with a sick mind.

I may be just that sadistic. But then again, it sometimes feels masochistic. Either way, I don't feel sorry for the guy. He's an unsavory character and is disingenuous to the point of being obnoxious.

Satyr wrote:
What? Really? Complex?  Shocked

Yeah, complex... at least, I find him complex. Most pinheads strike me as "childish" or "resentful" towards the world for not unanimously agree with them or heralding their genius all over the internet... Biggy, on the other hand, is much more intelligent and frankly, I think, suffers from a cognitive disorder (maybe high functioning autism?). It isn't just childish resentment from a simple mediocre mind, it is truly bizarre cognitive algorithms of a highly intelligent mind, patterns I have not see in other minds.

For example, the theory I proposed above: he has built a mental sanctuary around himself with capacity enough only to house his views on dasein and, like a fortress, fends off any alternative or novel views with psychodynamic defense mechanisms (one of which I find quite fascinating--obfuscation--the conversion of ideas into confusion so as to not have to consider them--compare this with ordinary vanilla denial used by most pinheads I've encountered). It is the only case I know of of a person barricading himself off from the rest of his mind--from all other thoughts and ideas he could allow his mind to entertain. Most pinheads barricade the thoughts and ideas themselves off--the ones they don't want--quarantining them so to speak--while allowing their mind to wonder where it may so long as it's not there--they don't typically quarantine themselves into a mental prison, especially one as narrow, ridged, and suffocating as Biggy's.

Satyr wrote:
Nope....she's older...and she's picked-up more tricks, that is all.

If the deliberate game playing theory is correct.

Well, I wrote this up only to find that you posted yet another response. I'd like to reply to it but I'm not prepared ATM. I will come up with something relatively soon (because they're good questions).
Back to top Go down
fizzarolli

fizzarolli

Gender : Male Posts : 10
Join date : 2021-12-03
Location : Calgary

Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia EmptyWed Aug 24, 2022 1:25 am

Satyr wrote:
Why are you, really, here?

Was previous answer not sufficient?

How would gib resolve the fact that we are all trapped in our subjective perspectives?
Are we equally trapped? Is there no way out?

I don't think we're "trapped" in subjectivity, I think subjectivity defines reality. I'm an idealist much in the vein of George Berkeley. Reality is no different than the materialists and the atheists believe it to be, only it is defined by our perceptions and experience.

What method does science or philosophy use? Empirical evidence and reason.
How is knowledge and understanding even possible if we are all permanently trapped in subjectivity? How do we innovate and create?
Hard to tell whether you're addressing me or Biggy. In any case, I don't take Biggy's "trapped" perspective. The world being subjective, to me, means we have more freedom than Biggy could ever suppose.
How do we advance at all, if all is illusory and we are all trapped in our subjectivity, i.e., the crap we were programmed at birth, onward?

To me, subjectivity isn't illusory. It means reality is determined by our perceptions and experience. This may require relativism but relativism should not be equated with anti-realism any more than Einstein's relativism means motion isn't real. The crap we are programmed with from birth is important, of course, but even if the world is thoroughly determined, I don't think of this as incompatible with free will (depending on how you define "freedom"). Freedom just means we are free to do as we please or as we intend, to strive towards are goals and meet them. You may say, yeah, but we're determined to strive towards our goals. I say, sure, but that doesn't change what striving towards our goals means; it means you move towards your goal because of your own intrinsic desires or intentions. As long as it stems from you, this is your will.

If the moron, on ILP, is correct, how is civilization possible?
Is it all part of determinism; has all this been inevitable, part of some universal plan - telos - god's plan?
Is man involved at all?

To be fair to the moron, it's not inconceivable that we can get civilization from a thoroughly deterministic universe, but I would disagree with the moron if he is saying man is not involved. This is a common mistake committed by the determinists. It is as though they think that the world being deterministic means we are somehow "outside" the world. It's possible to be a cog in the wheel and still turn the wheel. The wheel turns because of that cog. Does it matter that the cog is, in turn, turned by other wheels? That we don't feel the forces determining our behavior doesn't mean we, in turn, don't have an effect on the things we determine.

If the moron, on ILP, is correct, then how do animals develop comparable altruistic behaviours, and how do they adhere to gender roles, and why do they evolve breeds - comparable to human races?
What culture is determining their subjectivity?

Very good questions. I think here Biggy and I don't mean the same thing by "subjectivity" (if indeed Biggy means socially indoctrinated values and beliefs). By "subjectivity" I just mean experience, perception, mind--which all animals have (which everything has as far as I'm concerned).

If all is meaningless - meaning, without purpose - then what ought we to do?
For the record, I'm an anti-nihilist--I think there's meaning in everything.
Wait for a mentor,. a leader, a divinity...a charlatan? Why continue on, at all?
Isn't this why people turn to drugs and hedonistic degeneracy? Probably. Having lost traditions - a past - do they turn to fashion, trends, chemical means of redirecting their constantly accumulating energies?
Psychedelics and other mind altering drugs certainly revivify a sense of meaning in one's life--which many are desperate for.
The moron, on ILP, turned to postmodern insanity...what about you?
What's your coping method?

It's certainly not postmodernism. It was drugs at one point in my life, but I quit that a few years ago. Now I cope by striving for a better quality life--and it is a struggle but I've proven to myself that it can be done; there is the exception of atomoxetine, an ADD medication, but I'm not even sure it's doing anything (I plan to take all of September off it to see if I feel any different). So I cope just by striving... and hoping this works.

What about iamretarded do you find "complex"?
See my answer above. I can elaborate with other examples if you want.
Do you see yourself in her? Do you see, in her, what you consider incomprehensible in yourself?
What about her do you relate with?

I understand where Biggy is coming from with his thoughts on dasein (I hate using that word, and not just because it's not my term but because Biggy has seriously butchered its original Heideggerian meaning--I don't think he even knows what it means). Yes, we are like leaves blowing in the wind which can blow us in any which direction; and yes, I think you'd be a fool to assume that just because you have a rationale behind your positions on moral and political matters, that makes you rational and your opposition not--at least, as if your opposition doesn't feel exactly the same. I wouldn't go so far as to say one can't be more rational than one's opposition, but to assume so just because your rationale makes sense to you without giving it a second thought is foolish. But where Biggy and I are polar opposites is, as I said above, he is a nihilist and I am the farthest thing from. I think there is meaning in everything--literally, even in things like a screw driver; some meaning may be incomprehensible to humans but one ought not to confuse incomprehensible meaning with a lack thereof. I don't know if this saves me from the neurosis that Biggy suffers from, but I definitely don't live in a "fractured and fragmented" state in which I can't even identify my "I"--I feel whole, intact, that I know who I am (to a satisfactory degree of resolution); I don't live my life as if I'm in constant crisis, like I can't get over my existential angst. I accept who I am and I accept the world around me, fraught with "conflicting goods" and no escape from dasein as it may be.
Back to top Go down
Satyr
Daemon
Satyr

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 30864
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 56
Location : Hyperborea

Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia EmptyWed Aug 24, 2022 6:34 am

fizzarolli wrote:
Hard to tell whether you're addressing me or Biggy. In any case, I don't take Biggy's "trapped" perspective. The world being subjective, to me, means we have more freedom than Biggy could ever suppose.
Having told me your assessment of the retard - "smart and complex" - I wanted to see which category you fell into: are you a sadist, toying with an idiot, or are you of a kind, on her level, seeing in her positions challenging arguments.
Now, I know.
There's no other way to explain why anyone would waste their time on that retard and her hypocritical methods.
No insult intended but anyone who is not sadistic nor on her intellectual level quickly runs away in frustration, even if most don't understand why she is that way and may not fully comprehend her motives and methods.

This need to win "thump" contradicts your assessments. That's a child, not an adult.
Do you know how many times she declared victory here?
Her constant need for validation from some audience.....and how many they are....contradicts your assessment. That's an immature wo-man-child.
And what does she do when someone lashes out at her in frustration....at her infantile manipulative methods:
"Look what I made him do" or "Look what I've reduced him to" ...she taunts....
This is no adult. This is an adolescent psychology.
Stunted and/or traumatized into a defensive posture.
And this constant demand for "context" is a underhanded way of demanding a scenario, because her mind cannot think in broader contexts - which is philosophy. She wants gossip...reducing the situation to an emotional appeal.

She could not be tolerated here, nor those like her, because they lower everything down to their level....and their psychosis and needs/desires become central, dominant, derailing all dialogue.
Like I said....there's a reason the Greeks didn't allow children and women in their symposiums, except as servants and entertainment.

An experiment for you to validate on your own:
Study a group of males and how they interact. Then study the same group of males if a female is present, or a child....or a male that is retarded, or mentally disturbed.
The dynamic changes.
The same individuals belonging to the same intimate circle change their behaviour to accommodate, or to posture, or or whatever....their interactions are changed - each adjusts/adapts to a new factor.
Groups tend to lower themselves to a common-denominator if they hope to remain groups.
There are studies on group dynamics, explaining mass hysteria, and how individuals can be swept away by a crowd.

Another example: runners go out for a daily run. The slowest runner sets the group's pace, if they want to remain a group.
This explains ILP and America....with its all-inclusivity.
ILP is a representation of Americanism - a microcosm of a macrocosm.
If it remains true to its own convictions it condemns itself to extinction....and this is currently happening, viz. US is now pressured to remain true to its own principles....because it hadn't for generations.
It was duplicitous and did not practice what it preached - Marxists noticed and exposed the hypocrisy, forcing the US to become what it pretended to be on paper, in theory....and this is destroying it.
To be more precise, the US was declining and losing the strength/creativity to maintain its intersubjective masks - mask of collectivism promoting uniformity pretending to be pro-individualism; its plutocracy pretending to be a democracy (two party system, which was, for all intents and purposes a single party system); its salvation myth pretending to be freedom (see how many Americans don't even believe in free-will due to their biblical association of freedom); and separation of church & state; benevolent power that denied it was an empire (explaining all animosity towards it as a product of envy - victim status maintained when culpability is denied); its theoretical anti-racism and anti-elitism; that "all men are created, and are created equal....an Empire of Lies.
It's pretence is exposed, forcing it to make amends and these are killing it because its pretences are unrealistic - anti-realistic.


fizzarolli wrote:
To me, subjectivity isn't illusory. It means reality is determined by our perceptions and experience. This may require relativism but relativism should not be equated with anti-realism any more than Einstein's relativism means motion isn't real. The crap we are programmed with from birth is important, of course, but even if the world is thoroughly determined, I don't think of this as incompatible with free will (depending on how you define "freedom"). Freedom just means we are free to do as we please or as we intend, to strive towards are goals and meet them. You may say, yeah, but we're determined to strive towards our goals. I say, sure, but that doesn't change what striving towards our goals means; it means you move towards your goal because of your own intrinsic desires or intentions. As long as it stems from you, this is your will.
Are any two perspectives equal?
Isn't natural selection based on testing, selecting, which judgement - expressed through choice - is superior, or more accurate?

No matter what the retard repeats - without substantiating - there are certain cultural rules that are common.
Patterns underlying their patterns.
For instance...there is no culture which doesn't have some kind of rule limiting human sexuality.

There is no culture that has no rule against in-group violence.
There is no culture with a rule setting boundaries to inbreeding - incest.
There are no cultures with no rules - called morals or law & order.
There is no cultures that do not set rules governing ownership and adjudicating disagreements.
There are no cultures like that because culture cannot develop without rules - culture is about rules concerning sexual behaviour, food preparation, lifestyle...individual freedom, duties and rights...
There are no cultures without rules because nature imposes necessities - if you fail to abide by them or to set up rules that deal with these necessities you perish...or you never develop at all.
Cultures that developed and spread were those that successfully read nature and its necessities and created rules and imposed said rules successfully...

the idea that anything goes, or that you could have been raised to believe anything, is so idiotic....I can't even respond to it.
Nature - the world - is what imposes the boundaries of what perspectives will succeed and which ones will fail - and the duration of their success if they fail to read the signs and adapt/adjust to their necessity.
There is no argument here...you challenge nature you die.
The range of options must remain within nature.
This is why I say that nihilism must self-contradict if it hopes to survive in a world it dismisses or claims to create or negate.
It is why nihilism refuses to define its terminology or employs obscurantism and mysticism to conceal this self-decpetion.
Nihilists cannot be clear....this would expose their idiocy and their anti-nature delusions.
They must remain vague so as to adjust and then claim that they always believed what they had once dismissed; vagueness also conceals the contradictions in their own mind....saying one thing, thinking a second and...doing a third.

This is evident in the retard's positions.
She claims to not believe in free-will, yet holds me responsible for not permitting her to post and shit all over my forum.
She claims to be amoral, and uses moral reasons to impose her amorality as a universal truth, in regards to abortion or in regards to might is right.
She taunts others for 'wanting to change the world' and failing, and it is she that wants to change the world and has been continuously disillusioned by her repeated failures:
John Fowles wrote:
She was like a wo-man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with her impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small objectivist to convert or detest.
She claims objectivity is full of "fulminating fanatics" when it is the antithesis to fanaticism - why? because they do not yield to he emotional unsubstantiated bullshyte and are not forced to change their minds by her infantile methods and her absent reasoning.
Her only "argument" is "I was raised to believe certain things and I never stopped...so this must be a universal truth"...and she repeats it....as if it were a devastatingly indubitable "argument" - she calls this "Dasein" - as if we are all trapped by our upbringing and there's no objective way to break uot of this cycle.
She is the "fulminating fanatic" - from when she was a Christian, to when she became a Marxist, and now, as a Postmodern idiot.


fizzarolli wrote:
To be fair to the moron, it's not inconceivable that we can get civilization from a thoroughly deterministic universe, but I would disagree with the moron if he is saying man is not involved.
Really?
So, you believe civilization, and life, is part of a determined telos? Is life and civilization a universal end?
Is life and civilization inevitable?
Are all civilizations equal?


fizzarolli wrote:
This is a common mistake committed by the determinists. It is as though they think that the world being deterministic means we are somehow "outside" the world. It's possible to be a cog in the wheel and still turn the wheel. The wheel turns because of that cog. Does it matter that the cog is, in turn, turned by other wheels? That we don't feel the forces determining our behavior doesn't mean we, in turn, don't have an effect on the things we determine.
That's why they call them "hard determinists" to indicate their fanaticism.
They are no different than Creationists in their fervour and unyielding zealotry.
Ironic given what the retard says about "fulminating fanatics".
Postmodernism is becoming a religion.

Like I said....objectivity is the antithesis of fanaticism; subjectivity is always the source.

So...we - as existing beings with agency - participate in what is being determined, and are not innocent victims and helpless, impotent bystanders of our own existence.


fizzarolli wrote:
Very good questions. I think here Biggy and I don't mean the same thing by "subjectivity" (if indeed Biggy means socially indoctrinated values and beliefs). By "subjectivity" I just mean experience, perception, mind--which all animals have (which everything has as far as I'm concerned).
Yes...so we can say that there are two sources for agency - two memories, set of experiences that determine our behaviour, i.e., judgments and choices:
Gene/Meme = genetical, inherited via physical intercourse, manifesting a physical body; experiential, constructed via linguistic intercourse and interactions with environment - divided into first- & second-hand experiences - manifesting mind.
Mind is what can contradict the body's impulses - it can learn and adapt/adjust, increasing its survival probability.
This is free-will - choice.
Choice is action.....testable, falsifiable, empirical.
Choice is an expression of will.
The options available to this will determine its freedom.
Therefore man can break out of his upbringing and can sublimate and control his own natural impulses and limitations - otherwise there would be no evolution, no utility to knowledge and understanding. There would be no advantage to developing big brains, with high energy costs.


fizzarolli wrote:
For the record, I'm an anti-nihilist--I think there's meaning in everything.
Excellent...and so the retard will accuse you of being one of my "many inventions", or one of my "cult members"....because in her "intelligent complexity" she cannot understand how a shared, objective world inevitably leads to agreement.
Agreement, for this crypto-Marxist, recovering Abrahamic, always means coercion, because if all is subjective and we can all live in our private universe, then why live in a shared one, right?
Everyone OUGHT to live in their own reality, using their own language, and not bother others living in their private realities.

See, there ain't no objective reality, so there can be no right/wrong, so there can be no agreement, unless it is a product of force - "might is right," she repeats.
I say "right is might".
What's another way of saying "right is might"?
Survival of the fittest.

Bad judgments make bad choices; bad choices lead to negative consequences.....the severest being death.
The clown wants to collectivize this so that the negative consequences are shared, making those with good judgments beholden to those with bad judgement - essentially eliminating their advantage.
This is what underlies her obsession with abortion and her hypocritical dilemma.
In fact the moron is pro-choice....pro-Mary and her "right" to be given access and funding to deal with her poor judgement - erasing nature's limit to female sexual power and promiscuity. She wants the collective to step in and protect Mary from the repercussions of her whoring ways, or her lifestyle, or her poor judgements so that she can continue living as she is, indefinitely.
She believes Mary's plight is due to nature's injustices, and that men ought to step-up and step-in to return the universe to justice - again, an Abrahamic/Marxist notion.


fizzarolli wrote:
It's certainly not postmodernism. It was drugs at one point in my life, but I quit that a few years ago. Now I cope by striving for a better quality life--and it is a struggle but I've proven to myself that it can be done; there is the exception of atomoxetine, an ADD medication, but I'm not even sure it's doing anything (I plan to take all of September off it to see if I feel any different). So I cope just by striving... and hoping this works.
Which philosopher/philosophy did you use to help you?
How did you come across this philosophy/philosopher that made such a profound impact on your life?

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
http://satyr-s-sanatorium.forumotion.com/
Satyr
Daemon
Satyr

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 30864
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 56
Location : Hyperborea

Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia EmptyWed Aug 24, 2022 12:51 pm

Notice the hypocrisy, the lies. She even implies I was sexually interested in Maia....ask her when you get a chance.
Why?
So she can cover her arse. Did you follow her exchanges with Maia, and her vindictive reactions when she did not reciprocate?
I won't tell you more. Read for yourself, since you enjoy drama. It'll be enough.
Notice how she's changed her attitude since you came here.
Remarkably transparent.
Notice how she imitates and parrots, and projects.
Always projecting - unloading her nature upon others, hoping nobody will see what she is.
But you've begun to see, haven't you gib?...and that is why you are here.

One long, last thing...if you choose - freely - to participate in the "challenge" they've set-up to receive more undeserved attention, wasting weeks on their nonsense:
My contribution - all value-judgements and moral arguments have to do with an individual's or a collective's objectives.
Genes & Memes - where memes are extensions of genes, in healthy cultures, and contradictory in nihilistic unhealthy cultures, producing all kinds of psychosomatic ailments - some of which you see on ILP.

Let's use the metaphor of a map - a mental map representing a geography - to help us understand.

First, we must determine if the objective is realistic. Does it actually exist?
Is the destination a real place in the real world, attainable, or is it unattainable because it exists in our fantasies?
Does person A want to go to Guatemala, or Mozambique?
Does person B want to go to Gondor, or Mordor?
No debate over who is living in reality and who is in fantasy.

Second, you must evaluate the effort and if it is worthwhile.
Both evaluations of yourself in relation to this objective.
How much do you want to reach Mozambique, and what do you expect to find there?
Here, as well, fantasy can corrupt your expectations.
And, your constitution determining the effort required to get there.

Third, you must accurately evaluate the distance, effort, to get there - using an objective standard; a median; an average.

So, three criteria....the objective, the subjective, and the movement, energy required:
an empirically accurate evaluation of the destination, yourself, and the energy required to reach your destination.
These three factors determine value, and if the destination will be considered good or bad.
The consequences will be your data, helping you adjust your original evaluations in real-time.
This is where will & freedom come in. You must be adaptive, thinking on the fly...able to correctly identify your error and adjust it.

To put it in cultural contexts:
All ideologies/dogmas have their own ideals - their own idealized individual.
Is such an individual possible or impossible? To what degree is this ideal realizable?
Is it worth the effort? Have we over - or under-estimated the ideal? Usually we overestimate,  what we like or what flatters and promises to fulfill what we feel we lack, and underestimate what we dislike.
And can you make the effort? Here Know Thyself is crucial. As the self is usually overestimated - if we are sheltered or not tested - and underestimated if we have low self-esteem, due to trauma or failures etc.

Triangulation.
There is no universal answers.....only consequences.
No 'god' required. No 'might is right'.
There is only you and the world, or you and the map of the world in your head.
Success or failure, is determined by how well, how accurately, you've evaluated (judged) all three.

In the case of morality....these behaviours, we call 'moral' - because man encodes everything - were naturally selected because they offered a multiplying factor to individual survival and reproductive probabilities.
They are common among many species that have evolved cooperative reproductive and survival strategies...and are not unique to homo sapiens.
No god required.
Even self-sacrifice has a survival and reproductive motive....imposed upon organisms due to mortality - natural limitations on life.
Every culture adjust the same moral behaviours to their cultural ideals.
[see Mosaic Laws]
Genes/Memes
So, morals are naturally evolved - subsequently encoded linguistically by man - and ethics are addendums in relation to a culture's objectives, its version of an ideal man.
Not all idealizations are equal, since all must prove themselves in nature, in reality.
So, a culture may idealize a particular kind of man - existing in its fantasies - but such a man is unrealizable, or the pursuit of said unattainable ideals produce collateral psychosomatic effects.

Much needs to be unpacked, and it has on KTS.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
http://satyr-s-sanatorium.forumotion.com/
Maia



Gender : Female Pisces Posts : 226
Join date : 2021-08-16
Age : 31
Location : UK

Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia EmptyThu Aug 25, 2022 3:23 am

Wow, Oscar Wilde really was spot on, wasn't he?

Greetings, everyone.
Back to top Go down
Satyr
Daemon
Satyr

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 30864
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 56
Location : Hyperborea

Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia EmptyThu Aug 25, 2022 6:08 am

Maia wrote:
Wow, Oscar Wilde really was spot on, wasn't he?
About what?

Maia wrote:
Greetings, everyone.
Where have you been?

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
http://satyr-s-sanatorium.forumotion.com/
Maia



Gender : Female Pisces Posts : 226
Join date : 2021-08-16
Age : 31
Location : UK

Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia EmptyThu Aug 25, 2022 6:25 am

Satyr wrote:
Maia wrote:
Wow, Oscar Wilde really was spot on, wasn't he?
About what?

Maia wrote:
Greetings, everyone.
Where have you been?

When he said, in The Picture of Dorian Gray, and as I quoted on ILP:

+++There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about.+++

I've been well, all over the place, actually, including doing a lot of camping, but in terms of philosophy, I feel it's basically a dead end. Or at least, the sort of philosophy I usually encounter.
Back to top Go down
Satyr
Daemon
Satyr

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 30864
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 56
Location : Hyperborea

Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia EmptyThu Aug 25, 2022 6:44 am

Maia wrote:
When he said, in The Picture of Dorian Gray, and as I quoted on ILP:
+++There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about.+++
Yeah....the retard seems to think I was flirting with you....aggressively, and that's why you left.
In fact, her attempts to seduce you were more than obvious...employing that old method, don't know if you've experienced it:
A boy continuously reduces your self-esteem hoping that, at some point, he will bring a girl down to "his league".
The constant badgering, the constant harping on your blindness...as if it matters on-line.

This is her MO...undermine....subvert....lower....degrade....degenerate....reduce all to its lowest-common-denominator, where she can be included, and not excluded, as she often is.
Destroy the other's self-esteem, his confidence and trust in his own senses; lower everything to where she can compete.....this is what she does.
She's a duplicitous biatch!

For the record.....did I ever make sexual advances towards you?
Was there even a hint of me trying to seduce you in our exchanges?
The retard projects her own guilt upon others....her entire anti-objectivist polemic is a self-critique.


Maia wrote:
I've been well, all over the place, actually, including doing a lot of camping, but in terms of philosophy, I feel it's basically a dead end. Or at least, the sort of philosophy I usually encounter.
Inspirational philosophy"?
Empowering philosophy?
Positive philosophy?
You prefer to focus on the positive, the uplifting, the empowering...what they call "useful"?

I focus on the "negative" because that's where the world refuses to look - its a blind spot.
Nature is not good nor bad....it simply is.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
http://satyr-s-sanatorium.forumotion.com/
Maia



Gender : Female Pisces Posts : 226
Join date : 2021-08-16
Age : 31
Location : UK

Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia EmptyThu Aug 25, 2022 7:48 am

Satyr wrote:
Maia wrote:
When he said, in The Picture of Dorian Gray, and as I quoted on ILP:
+++There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about.+++
Yeah....the retard seems to think I was flirting with you....aggressively, and that's why you left.
In fact, her attempts to seduce you were more than obvious...employing that old method, don't know if you've experienced it:
A boy continuously reduces your self-esteem hoping that, at some point, he will bring a girl down to "his league".
The constant badgering, the constant harping on your blindness...as if it matters on-line.

This is her MO...undermine....subvert....lower....degrade....degenerate....reduce all to its lowest-common-denominator, where she can be included, and not excluded, as she often is.
Destroy the other's self-esteem, his confidence and trust in his own senses; lower everything to where she can compete.....this is what she does.
She's a duplicitous biatch!

For the record.....did I ever make sexual advances towards you?
Was there even a hint of me trying to seduce you in our exchanges?
The retard projects her own guilt upon others....her entire anti-objectivist polemic is a self-critique.


Maia wrote:
I've been well, all over the place, actually, including doing a lot of camping, but in terms of philosophy, I feel it's basically a dead end. Or at least, the sort of philosophy I usually encounter.
Inspirational philosophy"?
Empowering philosophy?
Positive philosophy?
You prefer to focus on the positive, the uplifting, the empowering...what they call "useful"?

I focus on the "negative" because that's where the world refuses to look - its a blind spot.
Nature is not good nor bad....it simply is.

+++Yeah....the retard seems to think I was flirting with you....aggressively, and that's why you left.
In fact, her attempts to seduce you were more than obvious...employing that old method, don't know if you've experienced it:
A boy continuously reduces your self-esteem hoping that, at some point, he will bring a girl down to "his league".
The constant badgering, the constant harping on your blindness...as if it matters on-line.+++

There was certainly nothing aggressive in our interaction before, at least that I picked up on, and it was nothing to do with why I left. I didn't really leave anyway, just tailed off posting.

To be honest, it's not always easy to be sure if someone is flirting or not, so I find it best simply not to mention it, to avoid embarrassment. Either way, I hope I've made it clear to everyone that I'm currently strictly celibate.

It doesn't bother me if people talk about my blindness but what does irk me, if only slightly (and in fact, it amuses me more) is when people use blindness as a metaphor for ignorance.

+++For the record.....did I ever make sexual advances towards you?
Was there even a hint of me trying to seduce you in our exchanges?
The retard projects her own guilt upon others....her entire anti-objectivist polemic is a self-critique.+++

No, you never did, at any time.

+++Inspirational philosophy"?
Empowering philosophy?
Positive philosophy?
You prefer to focus on the positive, the uplifting, the empowering...what they call "useful"?

I focus on the "negative" because that's where the world refuses to look - its a blind spot.
Nature is not good nor bad....it simply is.+++

I'm well aware, of course, that nature is neither good or bad. Morality is a human concept, given to us by nature, that is, by evolution.

I choose a positive frame of mind, but I'm not sure this has much to do with philosophy. It's a lot more about emotion, I think. The sort of philosophy that interests me is to do with perception, how we interact with the world.
Back to top Go down
Satyr
Daemon
Satyr

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 30864
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 56
Location : Hyperborea

Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia EmptyThu Aug 25, 2022 8:07 am

Maia wrote:
There was certainly nothing aggressive in our interaction before, at least that I picked up on, and it was nothing to do with why I left. I didn't really leave anyway, just tailed off posting.
Thanks for clarifying.
The biatch on ILP claims I was flirting and that's why you left KTS. That's why I call her a woman of the worse sort - gossipy, addicted to popularity, using lies to undermine...projecting her shame and guilt outward...projecting her responsibilities elsewhere.
She's a classic pretentious twat.


Maia wrote:
To be honest, it's not always easy to be sure if someone is flirting or not, so I find it best simply not to mention it, to avoid embarrassment. Either way, I hope I've made it clear to everyone that I'm currently strictly celibate.
On KTS we don't care about everyone's personal circumstances.
ILP is obsessed with gossip.


Maia wrote:
It doesn't bother me if people talk about my blindness but what does irk me, if only slightly (and in fact, it amuses me more) is when people use blindness as a metaphor for ignorance.
Yes...and in the case of i-am-retarded, she uses it to signal that you cannot do better than her...
This's why she constantly reminded you.
It's psychological manipulation.
Then, to cover her tracks, she accused me of being sexually interested in you....because she was, and is.

See how idiots lower everything down to their level?
They distract and make everything into crap....where they wallow like swine.


Maia wrote:
No, you never did, at any time.
Thanks...I appreciate it
Now we can leave the cesspool the retard wants to pull us into - her hole...you know where she is supposedly stuck.
Like all simpletons, she couldn't predict this....both you and gib coming to KTS...
HA!!!
It's priceless.
In her panic she must believe both of you are my sock-puppets.


Maia wrote:
I'm well aware, of course, that nature is neither good or bad. Morality is a human concept, given to us by nature, that is, by evolution.
Nature selected behaviours to facilitate particular survival and reproductive strategies.
What is manmade is how these behaviours were linguistically encoded, and how addendums, to these behaviours, were justified.


Maia wrote:
I choose a positive frame of mind, but I'm not sure this has much to do with philosophy. It's a lot more about emotion, I think. The sort of philosophy that interests me is to do with perception, how we interact with the world.
Yes, but to get there, you must first explore what prevents you from getting there, or how this desirable "there" is possible.

How to interact in the world is determined by both the positive and the negaitve....in relation to our needs and desires.
By focusing only on the positive you fail to deal with what stands in your way.

For me the "so called negative" is essential in determining what this "positive" could be, and how to attain it.
It helps in appreciating it, as it truly is, and not as I imagine it to be.

We live in a naïve, degenerate western world in decline....most Americanized westerners prefer to only see the "positive", forcing me to remind them of the "negative".
They misconstrue this as my personal preference, because their opinions are founded on their personal preferences.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
http://satyr-s-sanatorium.forumotion.com/
Satyr
Daemon
Satyr

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 30864
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 56
Location : Hyperborea

Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia EmptyThu Aug 25, 2022 8:17 am

For example...if I ignore the twat, iamretarded, on ILP, and pretend she doesn't exist, then how can I study her methods and her motives, so that I can protect myself from twats like her in the future?
They are multiplying....and the west is going in-fucking-sane.
She's a posterchild of postmodern degeneracy. Living evidence of an ideological abstraction and how memes can turn against genes, using language as their tools and weapons.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
http://satyr-s-sanatorium.forumotion.com/
Maia



Gender : Female Pisces Posts : 226
Join date : 2021-08-16
Age : 31
Location : UK

Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia EmptyThu Aug 25, 2022 9:44 am

Satyr wrote:
Maia wrote:
There was certainly nothing aggressive in our interaction before, at least that I picked up on, and it was nothing to do with why I left. I didn't really leave anyway, just tailed off posting.
Thanks for clarifying.
The biatch on ILP claims I was flirting and that's why you left KTS. That's why I call her a woman of the worse sort - gossipy, addicted to popularity, using lies to undermine...projecting her shame and guilt outward...projecting her responsibilities elsewhere.
She's a classic pretentious twat.


Maia wrote:
To be honest, it's not always easy to be sure if someone is flirting or not, so I find it best simply not to mention it, to avoid embarrassment. Either way, I hope I've made it clear to everyone that I'm currently strictly celibate.
On KTS we don't care about everyone's personal circumstances.
ILP is obsessed with gossip.


Maia wrote:
It doesn't bother me if people talk about my blindness but what does irk me, if only slightly (and in fact, it amuses me more) is when people use blindness as a metaphor for ignorance.
Yes...and in the case of i-am-retarded, she uses it to signal that you cannot do better than her...
This's why she constantly reminded you.
It's psychological manipulation.
Then, to cover her tracks, she accused me of being sexually interested in you....because she was, and is.

See how idiots lower everything down to their level?
They distract and make everything into crap....where they wallow like swine.


Maia wrote:
No, you never did, at any time.
Thanks...I appreciate it
Now we can leave the cesspool the retard wants to pull us into - her hole...you know where she is supposedly stuck.
Like all simpletons, she couldn't predict this....both you and gib coming to KTS...
HA!!!
It's priceless.
In her panic she must believe both of you are my sock-puppets.


Maia wrote:
I'm well aware, of course, that nature is neither good or bad. Morality is a human concept, given to us by nature, that is, by evolution.
Nature selected behaviours to facilitate particular survival and reproductive strategies.
What is manmade is how these behaviours were linguistically encoded, and how addendums, to these behaviours, were justified.


Maia wrote:
I choose a positive frame of mind, but I'm not sure this has much to do with philosophy. It's a lot more about emotion, I think. The sort of philosophy that interests me is to do with perception, how we interact with the world.
Yes, but to get there, you must first explore what prevents you from getting there, or how this desirable "there" is possible.

How to interact in the world is determined by both the positive and the negaitve....in relation to our needs and desires.
By focusing only on the positive you fail to deal with what stands in your way.

For me the "so called negative" is essential in determining what this "positive" could be, and how to attain it.
It helps in appreciating it, as it truly is, and not as I imagine it to be.

We live in a naïve, degenerate western world in decline....most Americanized westerners prefer to only see the "positive", forcing me to remind them of the "negative".
They misconstrue this as my personal preference, because their opinions are founded on their personal preferences.

+++Yes...and in the case of i-am-retarded, she uses it to signal that you cannot do better than her...
This is why she constantly reminded you.
It's psychological manipulation.
Then, to cover her tracks, she accused me of being sexually interested in you....because she was and is.

See how idiots lower everything down to their level?
They distract and make everything into crap....where they wallow like swine.+++

As futile exercises go, "reminding" me that I'm blind is about as useful as reminding someone that they have a head, for example. And in any case, I'm proud of my life and what I've achieved, and I like who I am. That includes being blind.

+++Morality evolved behaviours to facilitate particular survival and reproductive strategies.
What is manmade is how these behaviours were encoded.+++

Yes, these innate feelings are channelled, and sometimes subverted, by culture and religion.

+++Yes, but to get there, you must first explore what prevents you from getting there, or how this desirable "there" is possible.

How to interact in the world is determined by both the positive and the negaitve....in relation to our needs and desires.
By focusing only on the positive you fail to deal with what stands in your way.

For me the "so called negative" is essential in determining what this "positive" could be, and how to attain it.
It helps in appreciating it, as it truly is, and not as I imagine it to be.

We live in a naïve, degenerate western world in decline....most Americanized westerners prefer to only see the "positive", forcing me to remind them of the "negative".
They misconstrue this as my personal preference, because their opinions are founded on their personal preferences.+++

I certainly agree that our civilisation is in decline. The question is, what should our response be? I've thought about this a lot, though probably more in spiritual terms than philosophical ones. One thing I'm sure about is that people need to find a sense of identity and purpose, and a connection with the land. The matriarchal civilisations of the past provide my inspiration for this.

On a more personal level I was recently invited to join a self-sufficient community of Pagans in North Wales. I'm giving it serious consideration.
Back to top Go down
Satyr
Daemon
Satyr

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 30864
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 56
Location : Hyperborea

Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia EmptyThu Aug 25, 2022 1:03 pm

Maia wrote:


On a more personal level I was recently invited to join a self-sufficient community of Pagans in North Wales. I'm giving it serious consideration.
That's one way....go back to the land..
It's the reason Timocracy is about citizenry of the landowners,,,,Hoplites.
Farming requires objectivity, humility, respect for nature and you own kind, and patience.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
http://satyr-s-sanatorium.forumotion.com/
Satyr
Daemon
Satyr

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 30864
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 56
Location : Hyperborea

Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia EmptyThu Aug 25, 2022 1:06 pm

No freeloaders and bitches using word-games to manipulate.
There's no denying the obvious when you depend on the land - nature - for your sustenance.
There's no nihilism there.

Everything is crystal clear when your dealing with nature.
No social constructivism when your life is on the line and your dealing with what is indifferent to your wellbeing.
If not...your dead.
Do or Die.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
http://satyr-s-sanatorium.forumotion.com/
Satyr
Daemon
Satyr

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 30864
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 56
Location : Hyperborea

Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia EmptyThu Aug 25, 2022 1:10 pm

Can you imagine what would happen to iamretarded if she dared to go on about "objectivists" and "fulminating fanatics" and about how "fractured and fragmented" she is, in a farming community.
They would tar & feather her and then hang her upside down in the town square.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
http://satyr-s-sanatorium.forumotion.com/
fizzarolli

fizzarolli

Gender : Male Posts : 10
Join date : 2021-12-03
Location : Calgary

Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia EmptyFri Aug 26, 2022 12:53 am

Maia wrote:
Wow, Oscar Wilde really was spot on, wasn't he?

Greetings, everyone.

Well, speak of the devil! It's the woman of the hour, la piece de resistance, the star of the show, the talk of the town, la tour de force, the one everyone's been raving about... Maia! Yeah girl, Mr. Wilde definitely hit the nail on the head.

Satyr won't link me to any of your threads here. Can you be a dear and do it for me? I'm unbelievably lazy to the point of being a burden on society. It's a handicap.

Anyway, this thread is growing like wildfire and I don't have the time to keep up. Hope you guys don't mind carrying on without me. I'll stand on the sides and watch (like a perv) so that I can at least heckle once in a while when something catches my eye.

Satyr, I do plan on responding to a few of your questions so I won't completely abandon you ('cause I know you were worried). I have yet to even begin my search here. Gyawd I wish I had nothing better to do.
Back to top Go down
Maia



Gender : Female Pisces Posts : 226
Join date : 2021-08-16
Age : 31
Location : UK

Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia EmptyFri Aug 26, 2022 2:13 am

fizzarolli wrote:
Maia wrote:
Wow, Oscar Wilde really was spot on, wasn't he?

Greetings, everyone.

Well, speak of the devil! It's the woman of the hour, la piece de resistance, the star of the show, the talk of the town, la tour de force, the one everyone's been raving about... Maia! Yeah girl, Mr. Wilde definitely hit the nail on the head.

Satyr won't link me to any of your threads here. Can you be a dear and do it for me? I'm unbelievably lazy to the point of being a burden on society. It's a handicap.

Anyway, this thread is growing like wildfire and I don't have the time to keep up. Hope you guys don't mind carrying on without me. I'll stand on the sides and watch (like a perv) so that I can at least heckle once in a while when something catches my eye.

Satyr, I do plan on responding to a few of your questions so I won't completely abandon you ('cause I know you were worried). I have yet to even begin my search here. Gwad I wish I had nothing better to do.

I can only assume that the thread in question is this one, though my own contributions don't start till p. 3:

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

I must say, though, that it bears little relation to all the hype, so you might be in for a bit of a disappointment.
Back to top Go down
Satyr
Daemon
Satyr

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 30864
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 56
Location : Hyperborea

Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia EmptyFri Aug 26, 2022 8:13 am

Bear with me....this is relevant to what iamretarded does....undermining, destroying self-confidence and trust in your owns senses, manipulating psychology to cultivate desperation that will make the spirit more inclined to surrender to degeneracy...she learned this from the neo-matrxists, that became postmodernists, as a natural progression of their nihilistic ideology...
Neo-Marxists pulled away from Soviet Communism - far too nationalistic, tribal, for them.
They became internationalists, adopting a new strategy, i.e., opportunism. Instead of waiting for the mediocre masses, i.e., proletariat, to rise up against their oppressors, their exploiters, they would participate in their institutions to increase their suffering, their poverty, until they were reduced to such a state of decrepitude that they would rise up with nothing to lose....
See, this is the key: nothing left to lose.

This is why the cunt of ILP kept on mentioning Maia's blindness, or keeps undermining language and trust in human judgements; this is why she is against free-will. This is her MO....her postmodern methodology.
The goal is to reduce all trust to the point where the mediocre masses are willing to make any compromise, implying that this is inevitable, part of some divine/cosmic plan.
Reducing options means reducing freedom, until the desperate mind is willing to settle for the insane.

Like a hungry man is willing to eat anything....a thirsty man is willing to drink anything.
This is the goal: decrease options so that a singularity is left, even if it is absolute nothingness.
Decreases options is a measure of power - make the mediocre mases powerless.

Let's give it a personal context so the cunt can understand....because the rest is over her head:
Hate to be cruel but in regards to Maia, the cunt's goal was to remind Maia of her blindness as a way of reminding he of her reduced options; the cunt wants to destroy her confidence, so as to make herself more attractive, as the only option left.
See?

I said this years ago, but nobody listened, except a few on KTS.
Watch the cunt's performance over the years.
The repeating mantra....
All of it undermining confidence in self - she denies self altogether; subvert trust in one's senses - all ought to turn inward, encase themselves in subjectivity because the world is illusory and your senses and judgements untrustworthy; cultivate desperation - world is meaningless and purposeless; undermine language - there is no objective truth, no way to objectively define words; cultivate schizophrenia, insanity - fractured and fragmented - implying mind/body dissonance, viz., my mind tells me one thing, but my heart, my emotions, my intuitions another.

The cunt believes this will increase the mediocre mind's impressionability; its willingness to compromise...sacrificing independence to a collective.
Those with bad judgement and those with good judgement are now equalized.
Mary's inability to evaluate men, or her desire to maintain a promiscuous lifestyle without suffering the consequences, her bad choices based no erroneous judgments, out to be mitigated by a collective, providing for her - free of charge - the technologies to not suffer the severity of the consequences of her poor judgement...
A self-serving motive, because the cunt is really asking this for itself, using Mary as a proxy.
She don't give a shit about this hypothetical dude, John - he's the rational aspect - but is entirely committed to the emotional, and to making Mary's feminine plight less problematic....indirectly asking this for herself.
This is why he must reduce it to a scenario where emotion factors in, and calls generalities "up in the clouds" where emotion is less of a factor, and has no personal context.
She wants to reduce the context to where where it becomes personal.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
http://satyr-s-sanatorium.forumotion.com/
Sponsored content




Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Empty

Back to top Go down
 
Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 3Go to page : 1, 2, 3  Next
 Similar topics
-
» Satyr
» Satyr
» Who is Satyr?
» The Satyr Lectures
» Satyr and Pan-experientialism

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Know Thyself :: AGORA-
Jump to: