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 : Previous  1, 2, 3
AuthorMessage
Satyr
Daemon
Satyr

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

Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia - Page 3 EmptySun Aug 28, 2022 9:44 am

Place is an evaluation of a relationship.
All is flux, therefore there is no static 'here' and no 'now'
Here refers to the mind's cutting away of dimensions - superfluous possibilities/probabilities, to construct a position relative to something - in this case the planet earth, rotating on tis axis and going around a sun which is also circling a galactic core, which is hurtling outward into space, i.e., possibilities.

Now is the temporal equivalent, referring to a segment of interactions, usually beginning with the thought and ending with its vocalization.

Here and now are dynamic.
There is no static here/now. Both are relative to the observer and, as I said, describe a relationship between him/her and world - usually using some consistent referent.

Now, being temporal, refers to change.
Here, being spatial, refers to probability for change.
Both necessitate a cutting away of space/time - abstraction - eliminating superfluous change and possibilities to create a manageable concept of space/time orientation.
Flux is this throwness, Heidegger spoke of.
He are in a state of constant movement - energy.
We are movement.

What differentiates life from non-life is that life moves wilfully, or can choose to move towards paths of more resistance, whereas non-living patterns and non-patterned energies (chaotic) always move along paths-of-least-resistance.
This has been called 'will to power'...since resistance describes a power relationship, viz., how much resistance you can endure and surpass, to attain your objective. The objective is the orienting focus of will.

This is why 'value' and 'morality' are meaningless if there is no objective.
The objective gives value and meaning to movement, and it is what is called purpose.
Purpose identifies the actor, the willful agency.

So, identity is the act. There is no 'thing' that act; you are the act, since you are in a constant state of acting.
The direction, oriented and focused upon an objective, is what distinguishes you from other actors.
The objective may be in reality - on a mental map referring to a geography - or it may be entirely fantastic, imaginary, existing only in your head.
I call the latter 'nihilistic objectives'.....and they depend on defining words, representing abstractinos, out of existence.
An example would be the retard of ILP....and that's why he is so useful to me.
She must place all abstractions, and the words representing them, outside space/time so as to then declare them all meaningless. She refuses to "bring it down to earth" and connect the words she wishes to undermine, to an existing referent....because this would disarm her subversive motives.
She refuses - like many others - to connect the words to actions, or words to world, which is, like I said, dynamic and constant interactivity - flux.
There are psychological motives behind this, which I will not get into....since I already have.

_________________
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 - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia - Page 3 EmptySun Aug 28, 2022 9:55 am

Maia wrote:

Yes, I have a very good sense of spacial awareness, for example, built from echo-location, and a whole range of other data. But if that's what's taking the place of a visual map of my surroundings, as I'm sure it is, then I find it very difficult to imagine how the extra, visual data could manifest. My sensory map, as it were, already seems to be full up.
I can only imagine.

Maia wrote:
Which is basically the unbridgeable gap I was referring to earlier.
I can attempt to bridge the gap, since I can use my hearing and try to eliminate the visual, but how can I transmit this to someone who has no visual contexts?
I imagine your state as me being in the dark.

There was a concept Harrison used - author of Silence of the Lambs - calling it "memory palace'.
Your memory palace is acoustic....dark.
Mine is illuminated. I can see further. Data comes to me from spatial distances representing possibilities, more uncertainties...yours are more immediate. Uncertainties are more difficult to estimate.
You gather data indirectly, acoustically - Hebrew method - through what you've heard. Some data is lost to you.
The quality of the source is also an greater issue for you. There's no personal data to compare it with. Everything is hearsay.
I see things I wish I can ignore.

I think of it as a spatial expansion of possibilities, where yours is smaller, using proxies to multiply its range, and mine larger but more distracting and disturbing.

_________________
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 - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia - Page 3 EmptySun Aug 28, 2022 10:08 am

Satyr wrote:
Maia wrote:

Yes, I have a very good sense of spacial awareness, for example, built from echo-location, and a whole range of other data. But if that's what's taking the place of a visual map of my surroundings, as I'm sure it is, then I find it very difficult to imagine how the extra, visual data could manifest. My sensory map, as it were, already seems to be full up.
I can only imagine.

Maia wrote:
Which is basically the unbridgeable gap I was referring to earlier.
I can attempt to bridge the gap, since I can use my hearing and try to eliminate the visual, but how can I transmit this to someone who has no visual contexts?
I imagine your state as me being in the dark.

There was a concept Harrison used - author of Silence of the Lambs - calling it "memory palace'.
Your memory palace is acoustic....dark.
Mine is illuminated. I can see further. Data comes to me from spatial distances representing possibilities, more uncertainties...yours are more immediate. Uncertainties are more difficult to estimate.
You gather data indirectly, acoustically - Hebrew method - through what you've heard. Some data is lost to you.
The quality of the source is also an greater issue for you. There's no personal data to compare it with. Everything is hearsay.
I see things I wish I can ignore.

I think of it as a spatial expansion of possibilities, where yours is smaller, using proxies to multiply its range, and mine larger but more distracting and disturbing.

Sound is pretty direct too, especially in echo-location. Its range is obviously not as good as light, though.

It may well be the only way you can imagine it, since it seems to be a pretty common idea, but in fact I don't see darkness. I have no field of vision at all.
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 - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia - Page 3 EmptySun Aug 28, 2022 11:11 am

Maia wrote:


Sound is pretty direct too, especially in echo-location. Its range is obviously not as good as light, though.

It may well be the only way you can imagine it, since it seems to be a pretty common idea, but in fact I don't see darkness. I have no field of vision at all.
How do you conceptualize the difference between an internet place, like a forum, and an actual place, like a city?

_________________
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 - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia - Page 3 EmptySun Aug 28, 2022 11:38 am

Satyr wrote:
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.

Oh, do you? I didn't say his arguments are complex, I said he is complex--you know, his psychology. I really think he has a mental disorder and I want to understand it better. He's a fascinating specimen, a shrink's wet dream (he's got you talking endlessly about him, don't he?). His intelligence comes through in the eloquence of his writing--he's well spoken--but sure, maybe he's as dumb as a sack o' dicks in all other departments, bringing his overall intelligence below average. But I have serious doubts you've measure his other intellectual aptitudes (did you give him a math test?) and, sorry to say it, he's a hell of a lot more eloquent than you, so...

Satyr wrote:
There's no other way to explain why anyone would waste their time on that retard and her hypocritical methods.

Oh, he is hypocritical. You got that part right.

Satyr wrote:
No insult intended but anyone who is not sadistic...

You don't think I'm sadistic? Well, I am insulted.

Satyr wrote:
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.

You're confusing maturity for intelligence/complexity. You can have a very intelligent child. You can have an immature person with an extremely complex mental disorder (in fact, immaturity is likely to be a symptom). I've never had the pleasure of being "thumped" by the Bigster because I don't rant or lash out in my responses. If I absolutely have to let it out, I'll do it in notepad first, save it somewhere, and come back to it when I've simmered down, and then refine and rewrite it until it comes off half assed intelligent sounding, witty, and on my game. Biggy can't get to me the way he gets to others, so I've never experienced this chest beating behavior you describe.

Satyr wrote:
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.

Close... he can't think beyond his sanctuary... and that's deliberate (though probably still unconscious). You've probably heard him describe your philosophy as "up in the clouds". I prefer to think of it as "in the mist". I imagine the metaphor of a sanctuary being surrounded by a foggy mist. A philosophy that comes knocking at the door comes from the mist, a place Biggy can't see into and dares not go, so he sends it away back into the mist. He, of course, likes to think of himself as "grounded" and therefore it's "up in the clouds" that he won't go, but that's neither here nor there--the point is that he deliberately obfuscates any philosophy that isn't his own, blurs it, renders it obtuse so that his mind doesn't have to deal with it. But he does offer an alternative--he beckons the philosophy to transform itself into a "context"--that is, a form that fits within the walls of his sanctuary, and only then does he allow it to enter. The catch being--and I don't know how aware of this he is--that not all philosophies can be transformed into the contexts he expects. That's usually the case with me, and many others I'm sure.

Satyr wrote:
Are any two perspectives equal? No.
Isn't natural selection based on testing, selecting, which judgement - expressed through choice - is superior, or more accurate?

Something like that. I'm not sure what you're getting at though. I've had people challenge my subjectivism by saying that it couldn't be the case that all subjective worlds determine reality because otherwise how is it that some beings, with their own unique subjective perspectives, die and others don't? If I believed I could fly, I could jump off a cliff and survive, but that's not what actually happens. My answer is: what you call death, I call the crumbling of a reality. If what I say is true--that each being's subjective world determines their reality--then we are talking about a multitude of realities and each is Reality relative to the being that experiences it. If a being makes a poor choice, something that kills it, or simply something that proves to it that it was wrong, then that reality in which it lives "crumbles"--or to say it differently, it "transitions" to a new reality, one that has stronger integrity--that is, one that can survive longer because it is based on new knowledge--the being knows better this time around.

Satyr wrote:
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?

Who said anything about a telos? From a deterministic perspective, the universe is nothing but a collection of particles and energy, all following physical laws at every moment. When you look back through history and pre-history, you see a continuous evolution all the way from the Big Bang to life on Earth to the evolution of man to civilization to life in the modern world. Is it really that unthinkable that all of that adhered to the same physical laws that all particles adhere to except at a higher level? Where are the gaps in physical laws required? What happened in this history that necessarily required free will, the kind that is incompatible with determinism?

And why would determinism imply that all civilizations are equal?

Satyr wrote:
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.

For the record, subjectivism doesn't necessarily imply living in separate realities--there can be overlap where there are common experiences.

Satyr wrote:
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.

Like hell there can't be agreement. Why can't two individuals so happen to share the same opinion, the same morality? Subjectivism doesn't force differences, it simply allows for it.

Besides, this is a common misconception about the objective/subjective distinction. Just as objectivism doesn't deny the existence of subjectivity, subjectivism doesn't deny the existence of objectivity. Objectivists have no qualms agreeing that things like opinions, beauty, tastes, etc. exist. It only says that such things can't exist except within an objective reality. Subjectivism simply flips that on its head and says that reality is fundamentally subjective, but there can certainly be objective things within it--ex. mathematics, physical objects, hard facts, etc. They simply get their reality from being experienced, but they project as (are experienced as) objective things.

Satyr wrote:
I say "right is might".
What's another way of saying "right is might"?
Survival of the fittest.

Meaning what? The right fit makes you strong? Or do you mean moral "right"?

Satyr wrote:
Which philosopher/philosophy did you use to help you? Myself.
How did you come across this philosophy/philosopher that made such a profound impact on your life?

I didn't fall back on a particular philosopher to help me through. I worked out my own philosophy to make sense of my drug-induced experiences, without which I would be hopelessly confused about what is real and what isn't, and quite disturbed by the demonic, at least for a lot longer than I was. Who knows where I would have ended up. But that's not to say I never came across any philosophers that inspired me along my journey. Nietzsche is one of my favorites, as well as a handful of Buddhist writings. I tried reading other philosophers but either couldn't understand them or just lost interest. One thing I walked away with from Nietzsche is to look at a person's motives rather than the contents of their words. Ask why one is saying what one is saying rather than what they are saying.


Last edited by fizzarolli on Sun Aug 28, 2022 11:54 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
Maia



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

Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia - Page 3 EmptySun Aug 28, 2022 11:49 am

Satyr wrote:
Maia wrote:


Sound is pretty direct too, especially in echo-location. Its range is obviously not as good as light, though.

It may well be the only way you can imagine it, since it seems to be a pretty common idea, but in fact I don't see darkness. I have no field of vision at all.
How do you conceptualize the difference between an internet place, like a forum, and an actual place, like a city?

An internet forum is just a set of words and commands, essentially. A city, on the other hand, is a real place with a spatial layout and a full set of sensory input.
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 - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia - Page 3 EmptySun Aug 28, 2022 12:48 pm

fizzarolli wrote:

Oh, do you? I didn't say his arguments are complex, I said he is complex--you know, his psychology. I really think he has a mental disorder and I want to understand it better. He's a fascinating specimen, a shrink's wet dream (he's got you talking endlessly about him, don't he?).
That doesn't make her complex. The psychosis confuses you.
She adopted an ideology; she didn't invent it, nor does she understand it.
She went from Abrahamism to Marxism and now Postmodernism...a natural progression. She never changed her mind, she changed the terminologies and the rhetoric. She's exactly where she was 50 years ago...in a hole. Where she'll be buried.
I'm interested in her as I would be of any psychotic....even Ecmandu.
She's a symptom of Americanism.
Psychosis is what it manufactures by the myriads - see Transsexuality, now becoming paedophilia and bestiality.
She's loud and obnoxious, so she volunteers herself. Hard to ignore her...like anyone can't ignore an insane person or a child in the room.


fizzarolli wrote:
His intelligence comes through in the eloquence of his writing--he's well spoken--but sure, maybe he's as dumb as a sack o' dicks in all other departments, bringing his overall intelligence below average.
What?  Shocked
"Well spoken"?!!
What?!!!
HA!!!


fizzarolli wrote:
But I have serious doubts you've measure his other intellectual aptitudes (did you give him a math test?) and, sorry to say it, he's a hell of a lot more eloquent than you, so...
Ha!!! Is it because she makes you feel smart?


fizzarolli wrote:
Oh, he is hypocritical. You got that part right.
If you say so...it's all subjective, right?


fizzarolli wrote:
You're confusing maturity for intelligence/complexity. You can have a very intelligent child.
Compared to other children.
Intelligence = pattern perception and appreciation.

Where does she display such a gift? She's a parrot.
Look at the thread she created where she is talking to herself, by quoting others and responding to them her trite nonsense.
Do you find that eloquent and healthy?
You're very impressionable, aren't you?


fizzarolli wrote:
You can have an immature person with an extremely complex mental disorder (in fact, immaturity is likely to be a symptom). I've never had the pleasure of being "thumped" by the Bigster because I don't rant or lash out in my responses. If I absolutely have to let it out, I'll do it in notepad first, save it somewhere, and come back to it when I've simmered down, and then refine and rewrite it until it comes off half assed intelligent sounding, witty, and on my game. Biggy can't get to me the way he gets to others, so I've never experienced this chest beating behavior you describe.
I bet you find women mysterious and incomprehensible, don't ya?
So, retards are "complex" in your view? What about madmen?
Is it because their words are confusing you, and you don't watch their actions?


fizzarolli wrote:
Close... he can't think beyond his sanctuary... and that's deliberate (though probably still unconscious). You've probably heard him describe your philosophy as "up in the clouds". I prefer to think of it as "in the mist".
So, you and she have the same IQ?
Do you consider yourself "complex"?

Doesn't she and you use those metaphors to express your inability to comprehend?


fizzarolli wrote:
I imagine the metaphor of a sanctuary being surrounded by a foggy mist. A philosophy that comes knocking at the door comes from the mist, a place Biggy can't see into and dares not go, so he sends it away back into the mist. He, of course, likes to think of himself as "grounded" and therefore it's "up in the clouds" that he won't go, but that's neither here nor there

--the point is that he deliberately obfuscates any philosophy that isn't his own, blurs it, renders it obtuse so that his mind doesn't have to deal with it. But he does offer an alternative--he beckons the philosophy to transform itself into a "context"--that is, a form that fits within the walls of his sanctuary, and only then does he allow it to enter. The catch being--and I don't know how aware of this he is--that not all philosophies can be transformed into the contexts he expects. That's usually the case with me, and many others I'm sure.
I define every word I use by referring it to observable phenomena all can experience independently.
Like 'morality, value, beauty, male/female, gender' and on and on...
Does she?
Has she defined Dasein, or admitted it is according to her understanding?
Has she defined morality, or does she simply adopt marxism and claim it is imposed by those in power upon the powerless?
Does she justify her understanding?
Do you?


fizzarolli wrote:
Isn't natural selection based on testing, selecting, which judgement - expressed through choice - is superior, or more accurate?
Yes...or is that too "right wing" for you?
Too mist-ifying.


fizzarolli wrote:
Something like that. I'm not sure what you're getting at though.
It's in the "mists".


fizzarolli wrote:
I've had people challenge my subjectivism by saying that it couldn't be the case that all subjective worlds determine reality because otherwise how is it that some beings, with their own unique subjective perspectives, die and others don't?
Given natural selection, what do you think?
How would judgement evolve without natural selection?
God?


fizzarolli wrote:
If I believed I could fly, I could jump off a cliff and survive, but that's not what actually happens. My answer is: what you call death, I call the crumbling of a reality. If what I say is true--that each being's subjective world determines their reality--then we are talking about a multitude of realities and each is Reality relative to the being that experiences it.
See?
I knew there was a reason why you and she were so ...close.


fizzarolli wrote:
If a being makes a poor choice, something that kills it, or simply something that proves to it that it was wrong, then that reality in which it lives "crumbles"--or to say it differently, it "transitions" to a new reality, one that has stronger integrity--that is, one that can survive longer because it is based on new knowledge--the being knows better this time around.
You dance around it....but you cannot ignore what natural selection implies.
Are animals debating over which one is wrong and which one is right?
Ha!!!

Let me help...
[quote+"Nieatzsche"]What does not kill me helps to make me stronger.[/quote]
No, you don't create your own private reality.
You suffer the consequences to the degree your subjective interpretation are contradicted by the objective world.
Modern manmade and maitnained systems shelter us all, and you, from the severity of these consequences and so retards, like her, survive to frustrate the rest with their delusions.
Do you know how fast she would understand what 'morality' means if she were placed in the wilds with a group?
Can you imagine how quickly life would acquire purpose and meaning?

Sorry...it wasn't as eloquent, as you deserve.


fizzarolli wrote:
Is it really that unthinkable that all of that adhered to the same physical laws that all particles adhere to except at a higher level? Where are the gaps in physical laws required? What happened in this history that necessarily required free will, the kind that is incompatible with determinism?
If the absurdity of a world missing agency is incomprehensible to you, then I will not try to change your mind.

So, to you, natural selection is really natural determination...there's nothing being selected.
It's all inevitable. Evolution is a joke, told by a clown in a circus.
Judgement is unnecessary ....choice an illusory.
A cosmic, comic, trick.

You cannot be wrong, since it is determined for you to judge and choose as you do.


fizzarolli wrote:
And why would determinism imply that all civilizations are equal?
The same reason it implies all judgements and choices are equal?
What applies to individuals applies to cultures (genes/memes) - civilization being an expression of a particular culture, a particular worldview.
All are equal in nothingness. Determinism implies all have ben determined, not because they proved themselves worthy, but just because....chance.....universal will... in a no free-will world.


fizzarolli wrote:
For the record, subjectivism doesn't necessarily imply living in separate realities--there can be overlap where there are common experiences.
Really?
So, in your subjective reality is her subjective reality compatible?
Which one of you two is right? None?
Are you both right?
Why are you debating at all? Both can't change their minds if it hasn't been determined that you do so.
You aren't free to change your mind. You have no choice, no agency.


fizzarolli wrote:
Like hell there can't be agreement. Why can't two individuals so happen to share the same opinion, the same morality?
Because our subjective perspectives are tested against the same objective world?
We are all held accountable to the same cosmic flux.


fizzarolli wrote:
Subjectivism doesn't force differences, it simply allows for it.
And what of the consequences?
Does it allow those?


fizzarolli wrote:
Besides, this is a common misconception about the objective/subjective distinction. Just as objectivism doesn't deny the existence of subjectivity, subjectivism doesn't deny the existence of objectivity. Objectivists have no qualms agreeing that things like opinions, beauty, tastes, etc. exist. It only says that such things can't exist except within an objective reality. Subjectivism simply flips that on its head and says that reality is fundamentally subjective, but there can certainly be objective things within it--ex. mathematics, physical objects, hard facts, etc. They simply get their reality from being experienced, but they project as (are experienced as) objective things.
So, in your and her opinion subjectivity is selective, arbitrary.
Some things are subjective, like beauty, morality, fitness, intelligence, and others are objective, like gravity, mortality etc.
Can you see the pattern?
It required intelligence to see it....can you see the connecting pattern in all those concepts you insist remain subjective, relative to the ones you arbitrarily admit are objective?
How do you separate the categories?
I bet it ain't emotion, right? I bet it ain't subjectively, right? I bet it ain't due to some self-interest factor, right?
Just magically you create two categories...one is all subjective the other all objective.


fizzarolli wrote:
Meaning what? The right fit makes you strong? Or do you mean moral "right"?
Now that I'm getting the picture as to why you are so addicted to her...I will only repeat:
Not might is right....but RIGHT is Might.
Do with it as you wish.
Throw it in the garbage, mock it....don't care.
If you get it, you get it.


fizzarolli wrote:
I didn't fall back on a particular philosopher to help me through. I worked out my own philosophy to make sense of my drug-induced experiences, without which I would be hopelessly confused about what is real and what isn't, and quite disturbed by the demonic, at least for a lot longer than I was.
Do you think this experience makes you feel closer to her and her trauma?
You, and her seem to share this notion that philosophy is a "self-help" manual - chicken soup for the soul, as I once called it.
I've been through this multiple times with others of your kind.
How you differ...
She was disillusioned and turned to nihilism to reject it all...you, on the other hand, were not, but according to you, found the soothing warm broth you sought.
Both of you are the same, except for this slight adjustment.


fizzarolli wrote:
Who knows where I would have ended up. But that's not to say I never came across any philosophers that inspired me along my journey. Nietzsche is one of my favorites, as well as a handful of Buddhist writings.
Really, Nietzsche?  Evil or Very Mad
Now that's interesting.
You didn't find him too.....radical...too right-wing, god forbid, for your tastes?
Was he comforting to you, in your predicament?


fizzarolli wrote:
I tried reading other philosophers but either couldn't understand them or just lost interest.
More common ground with her.
She read Heidegger but did not understand a thing...so she invented her private version of Dasein, sounding more like Lock's tabula rasa.
Thanks for coming here, by the way.
You most certainly helped me comprehend why you waste your time with her, and why I, along with others, refuse to do so.
For you, it ain't a waste...since, as you admit, you are challenged by her "eloquent intellect."


fizzarolli wrote:
One thing I walked away with from Nietzsche is to look at a person's motives rather than the contents of their words. Ask why one is saying what one is saying rather than what they are saying.
So, he gave you pragmatic knowledge?
Is that all?
His psychological insights inspired you; filled in the blanks?
I could see that.

What kind of drama are you looking for?
Are you not participating in drama, right now?
There were things that occurred with other members, more interesting members of ILP....now long gone.....this is infantile stuff reflecting the general decline on on-line exchanges and ILP.
Sex, Drugs, and Rockn'Roll stuff, it was back then.
For some pussy was on the line....
Aeon was involved in some of it....earning the name I gave him: purple dragon.
What we have now is....dull, by comparison.
More highschool level shit, rather than college.

_________________
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 - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia - Page 3 EmptySun Aug 28, 2022 2:47 pm

One last thing...
Read what the "eloquent and intelligent" retard says:
retard wrote:
Or "absolutely not" as the Satyrs among us will insist. Whether in regard to religion or morality or politics or the biggest of the big metaphysical quandaries, there is nothing that they are not able think and to feel certain about.

Just ask them.
I ask you, in all honesty, before you ask me:
How many times can I explain it and how many times is it, as if, I've said nothing at all?
Where, do I ever say anything about being "certain"?
Can you link me to a post of mine that claims certainty?
What have I said about the singularity, and about  absolutes?
What have I been discussing - if you even managed to comprehend my not so eloquent words behind your mental "mist," the "word salads," the "clouds" - other than about probabilities?
How many times have I used that term? Have I not defined it?
How do we establish what is more probable?
Do you care?
Do you think she cares?
It's as if I've said nothing.
She's debating the objectivists in her mind, and only arbitrarily selecting examples from the real world, to represent them.
Anyone who sees what kind of a moron she is, is a "fulminating fantic"....an "objectivist".
These projections are defensive.

So, gib...ask me, for her.....ask me about me claiming to be certain - absolutely so.

She's insane, in the membrane.
That you think of her as an "eloquent intellectual" says what about you, gib?
Let's shift our attentions from the retard to you.
I think I see a connection to those truckers you go on about.
I can give you an additional reason to remain clinched with her in eternal internal intercourse.
Mind-fucking is pleasing.


_________________
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 - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia - Page 3 EmptySun Aug 28, 2022 3:01 pm

Maia wrote:

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.

I forgot to thank you for this, Maia. <-- You see, Satyr? That's how it's done. What a host.

I'm here to satisfy my curiosity, Maia; as long as there's a thread and I can read it, I won't be disappointed.
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 - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia - Page 3 EmptySun Aug 28, 2022 5:23 pm

It's astounding how two idiots can have a conversation spanning months using words neither of them define.
A meaningless discussion over nothing.
We're back to the Tower of Babel...babbling on and on.

They both have no clue what I am saying - cause its "up in the clouds" or "clouded in mists" - yet they know enough to define me - that comes easier to them.
They don't know what Dasein means but I am a 'fulminating fanatic,' who is absolutely certain, and an 'objectivist' - whatever that even means - and far too right-wing for their tastes.
Having no clue they cannot offer counter-arguments, so all they have is a strawman effigy which both gleefully and repeatedly burn, while chanting odes to victory.
Because they cannot argue against my positions, they can't hope to convince me that I am wrong, which in their tiny minds means I am certain, or closed minded.
Because if I were not so, their idiocy would be more convincing to me, and I would be more willing to give them the "benefit of doubt" - even if they have no clue what they, themselves, are saying, since they refuse to define the words they use.
Yet, both are "eloquent geniuses," one, conveniently, appreciating these traits in the other. So we have a two sided jerk-off pairing, that wishes it could become a circle-jerk.
In the meantime I will be subjectively redefined, just as they subjectively define every word they use....refusing to share their understanding so that we all can also appreciate their mental eloquence and genius.
How long can this insanity potentially last?
Indefinitely...as long as idiocy is protected from the consequences of its own idiocy, it has no reason to adapt.
Like Mary Land: as long as the collective shelters and offers her free or affordable access to abortions she has no reason to rethink her lifestyle, her judgements, her life choices, or her behaviours.
Like a crocodile she has no reason to adapt.

_________________
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 - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia - Page 3 EmptySun Aug 28, 2022 5:44 pm

Rest assured that, subjectively speaking, serious philosophy is conducted by refusing to define words.
I think this is a fundamental principle of all "serious philosophy" and serious philosophers.
They all used words they did not define, leaving their definition to the subjective preferences of their interlocuters.
Every serious philosopher I've read did not define the words he used...including Heidegger, allowing the reader to understand them in whatever way their subjective interests desired.

This is fact...well subjectively speaking, of course.
We don't want to become "fulminating fanatical objectivists" do we?
We don't want to impose our definitions and understanding upon others, do we?
That would be amorally wrong/right, neither and both.

_________________
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 - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia - Page 3 EmptySun Aug 28, 2022 6:10 pm

Let us take a pause from our hard labours, conducting serious philosophy - the kind that stringently refuses to define its words, or offer arguments and reasoning, and sample some eloquent, yet devastating, prose that destroys fulminating fanatics and objectivists the world over - deep breathe and...
Eloquent Genius wrote:
1] I was raised in the belly of the working class beast. My family/community were very conservative. Abortion was a sin.
2] I was drafted into the Army and while on my "tour of duty" in Vietnam I happened upon politically radical folks who reconfigured my thinking about abortion. And God and lots of other things.
3] after I left the Army, I enrolled in college and became further involved in left wing politics. It was all the rage back then. I became a feminist. I married a feminist. I wholeheartedly embraced a woman's right to choose.
4] then came the calamity with Mary and John. I loved them both but their engagement was foundering on the rocks that was Mary's choice to abort their unborn baby.
5] back and forth we all went. I supported Mary but I could understand the points that John was making. I could understand the arguments being made on both sides. John was right from his side and Mary was right from hers.
6] I read William Barrett's Irrational Man and came upon his conjectures regarding "rival goods".
7] Then, over time, I abandoned an objectivist frame of mind that revolved around Marxism/feminism. Instead, I became more and more embedded in existentialism. And then as more years passed I became an advocate for moral nihilism
.
Let's stop and absorb the power of those words. Who can argue against such profound declarations, hiding a depth of knowledge and insight, yet, never breaking the cardinal rule of imposing definitions or reasoning on anyone?
Gib can't.
Feel free to copy & paste them - in bold, always - any time you come across a fulminating objectivist. They will be left with their mouths open, running away vanquished. If they return, as they probably will, simply repost these magical words.
Do you know how many were defeated by them?
except for gib...no gib was mesmerized by their eloquence and wanted more....and more....and more....

If you receive hundreds of views, you win.
That's how I evaluate what is true...and so does gib.

Please indulge me so that I can post another devastating piece of...craaa... genius...
Eloquent Genius wrote:
1] I am rational
2] I am rational because I have access to the objective truth
3] I have access to the objective truth because I grasp the one true nature of the objective world
4] I grasp the one true nature of the objective world because I am rational
Do you see how eloquently she captures the essence of fulminating objectivists?
Beautiful....short, precise, showing such depth of understanding.
She knows who her adversaries are and how they think.

Like the question:
Why is there something instead of nothing?...the question alone is the argument.
Why, she asks, already knowing there is a reason, a purpose, a motive.
Why not nothing?....her divine absolute concept.
Why would I be asking this if it were...Why nothing instead of something?
Why, indeed.
How did something come from nothing?
A follow up question?
How, why...who created it? Why did they do so?
There must be a reason.

Yes, my friends, we are in the shadow of giants.

_________________
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 - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia - Page 3 EmptySun Aug 28, 2022 7:01 pm

To be subjectively dishonest, I'm rethinking my positions. I feel like I'm growing out of my fulminating fanatic objectivist phase, and I'm becoming more subjective.
Like my use of "dishonest", rooted in Dasein, can be redefined. I won't say to what, though, that would be objectivism.
It's Dasein and that ought to be enough, in an either/or is/ought world.

So, I'm re-thinkig my positions on evolution, thanks to my new buddy gib....paisan, come stai!!!
Not natural selection but natural determination. Nobody is indulging in the inhuman, fascistic, practice of excluding and selectively including.
Ecmandu went crazy because of it.
No, no....all is determined....inevitable.
Not god....the universe has already chosen.

Then again....hmmmm....see the more I go in one direction the more I turn around and see the rationale in the other. A choice?
Nope....determined.

I can't choose, that would be …wrong. But I'm now an amoralist...so it may be right, or both....who knows?
Don't know how to make up my mind - can't risk it - ....can't be unjust to the either side.
You know like Ecmandu wants everyone to receive what they desire, without denying it to anyone.
See, same ...genius. Ecmandu invented infinite universes...and the retarded genius?
Yes, she surrendered to nihilism, so that she can never be wrong, nor right....but both and neither.

Choice is an illusion.
Judgement is a farce.
We don't need judgment when all is determined.
So stop judging people, is what I'm saying.
It's wrong, in an amoral way - but nobody can be wrong, or right....so both and neither.
[see above]
We are all an audience of our own existence. Let's hope things will go our way.

_________________
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 - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia - Page 3 EmptySun Sep 04, 2022 9:49 pm

How many lies can an individual or a culture absorb before reality's truth shatters them?

Factor in sheltering for individuals.
How much bullshyte can an individual believe in before the system must step in and mitigate the negative consequences, reducing their severity? Collectivize the repercussions, disseminating them across membership.

Why do you think nihilists are always collectivists?

_________________
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 - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia - Page 3 EmptyMon Sep 05, 2022 9:49 am

Paganism begins with what is present, what is perceived, what exists and is sensually perceived, and works upward from there.
Bottom<>Up
So, we begin with the action, the interaction, the dynamic fluctuating existent.
Our gods are not metaphysical, but primarily physical - physis, before metaphysis.

All our concepts, including that of god, begin from this grounding in ignorance, gradually building gnosis and evaluating its degree of probability.
Free-Will included....both terms associated with action (will) and its qualification (free).
What is the action of will? Choice...movement towards...
Free qualifies its power of movement towards; its choice to move towards an objective/destination - including perception of available options, evaluating its perception - freedom of thought in regards to what is accessible, real, attainable.
Wisdom evaluates this discernment between the fantastical from the realistic - wisdom discriminates to produce efficiency and through this effectiveness, viz., a probability modifier.

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

reasonvemotion

Gender : Female Posts : 679
Join date : 2013-01-09
Location : The Female Spirit

Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia - Page 3 EmptyTue Sep 06, 2022 12:52 am

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"

It is quite simple.
I don't know his age, but guessing in his 60's.

This advice from one man to another (Biggie)...

"While I believe that most older men are young men trapped inside, I don’t believe they should act on that.

Sure, we still find women attractive and we still want to have sex with them in every way we did when we were twenty. But we shouldn’t act like spoiled little narcissistic boys who only think of themselves. We are men now and have been for quite some time."

He looked at me and smiled and said “I gotta tell you something, Sonny. Inside every old man is a young man saying what happened?”

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 - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia - Page 3 EmptyTue Sep 06, 2022 5:58 am

I had a different experience.
When I was young I looked at my peers and thought
"Who are they? Why are they so obsessed with sex?"

_________________
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 - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia - Page 3 EmptyTue Sep 06, 2022 8:01 am

Trapped in their absolutist definitions of words, Desperate Degenerates negate, their own conceptions reflecting an Abrahamic obsession, finding common ground with Buddhism.
Their motive is absolution - salvation, a return to innocence, that never was.
An escape from guilt and shame, from personal responsibility.

They redefine words to achieve this negation of the existent - of nature herself.
No self, no will, no choice....they want to become one with the void, while remaining alive.
Biblical paradise, transferred to a utopian world-view.
The living dead - zombies.
Innocence. They want to escape the guilt of existing - life feeding on life.
Ecmadu's consent violations, projecting this sense of shame, imagining an existence where nobody is deprived by another's acquisition.
Squaring a circle.
The idea that your happiness is dependent on another's unhappiness; your survival is dependent on another's death; the "injustices" inherent in existing; the exploitation inherent in appropriating another's accumulated energies in the form of flesh and blood, or plant fiber....matter; their desperate desire to escape matter, their own bodies....their own identity into a shared identity, a collective..., going so far as to surrender to nothingness as the ultimate collective absence of identity.
Ideological self-sacrifice - consumed by otherness to pay for consuming others.
Abrahamism and then Marxism has socially selected this spiritual feebleness, this intellectual cowardice.

This is related to how they cannot fathom empathy without sympathy/antipathy, without shared pathos, compassion; this is why they cannot fathom objectivity without the mitigating theoretical parity of being collectively trapped in absolute subjectivity.
Abrahamism weaponized guilt....making sacrifice of self the only form of absolution.
Isn't this evident in Americanism and how those "privileged whites" created a superior system reliant on exploiting, and cultivating, the world's inferiorities?
They now turn on those who created their superfluous western lifestyles, rejecting their own culpability by projecting their shame and guilt on those "evil Europeans."
You see, they were "innocent" - myth of the noble savage - before white men corrupted them.
They were never brutal, never violent....at least not on the level of European men...not because they were 'benevolent' and altruistic, and morally superior, as they want to believe, but because they lacked the means and the minds to think on that level.

Now they want to distance themselves from all that wealth and privilege they partook in and carelessly enjoyed. Now that the empire is dying...
When the prison is falling apart the guards pretend to be inmates....hoping they will not face the consequences of their past participation in the incarceration system.
The lie of becoming rich without exploiting and without condemning others to poverty, has escaped the awareness of devout Christian capitalists.
They don't want to think about it....and now that they are forced, they want to absolve themselves from the guilt.
What did you think 'natural selection' meant? Love and kindness?
Ha!!!
We love to focus on the positivity, the empowerment of nature....don't we?
But nature is neither good nor evil.....it merely is.
Your motives are not her motives; your intentions are not her intentions; your feebleness is not her; your deceptions she exposes.
Come to terms with your existence and what it means to survive.
Death and suffering is how life experiences existence. Only the dead and the lifeless never suffer, and never die.
Deal with it, you fuckin' sheeple!! You live because something died, and probably suffered before it did.
Deal with the personal guilt!

Know Thyself before you die.
See what and who you are.
You ain't no innocent victim. You are a selfish agency, otherwise you would already be dead.
That you live means you've appropriated and exploited and caused suffering to something and someone else.
That is life.

Pagans dealt with it by worshipping and showing humble gratitude towards the prey they killed...this is Thanksgiving, its pagan origins, not its Christian corruption thanking some non-existent god.
This is the side-effect of self-awarness....see what I mean when I repeat this?
Self-awarness is the source of nihilistic defensiveness - a coping method, trying to protect the ego from the ideal coming face to face with the real.
Christ did not absolve your sins....your guilt...meaning your existential culpability.
Grow a fuckin' pair and admit it to yourself.

_________________
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 - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia - Page 3 EmptyTue Sep 06, 2022 3:13 pm

Maybe gob can explain how this eloquent phrase...
iamaretardedimbecile wrote:
There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know.
...adds a genius context to any issue ever discussed in any culture, at any time.
So, ignorance validates....anything?
Is this what your "eloquent genius" means?
Help me, given that you are someone who appreciates this imbecile's "eloquent" musings.
I lack your subjective appreciation of this level of genius.....so please help me understand what you so, obviously, admire.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν


Last edited by Satyr on Tue Sep 06, 2022 3:58 pm; edited 3 times in total
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 - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia - Page 3 EmptyTue Sep 06, 2022 3:22 pm

You, gib, came here looking for what interest you, as a self-identifying feminized simpleton: drama.
You let me know, from the start, that you were a pussy...and how I ought to treat you.
In the process you exposed what you truly are when you showed such deep admiration for a moron, explaining why you will spend months, perhaps years, wasting your time on her level of "philosophical discourse."

But... 'I may be wrong.' See, I am learning your elegant codes of feigned ethics...
Maybe it is I who doesn't 'get it'...so please, add to your elucidations an explanation of why this emotional garbage is "philosophy":
Iamaretardeedimbecile wrote:
1] I was raised in the belly of the working class beast. My family/community were very conservative. Abortion was a sin.
2] I was drafted into the Army and while on my "tour of duty" in Vietnam I happened upon politically radical folks who reconfigured my thinking about abortion. And God and lots of other things.
3] after I left the Army, I enrolled in college and became further involved in left wing politics. It was all the rage back then. I became a feminist. I married a feminist. I wholeheartedly embraced a woman's right to choose.
4] then came the calamity with Mary and John. I loved them both but their engagement was foundering on the rocks that was Mary's choice to abort their unborn baby.
5] back and forth we all went. I supported Mary but I could understand the points that John was making. I could understand the arguments being made on both sides. John was right from his side and Mary was right from hers.
6] I read William Barrett's Irrational Man and came upon his conjectures regarding "rival goods".
7] Then, over time, I abandoned an objectivist frame of mind that revolved around Marxism/feminism. Instead, I became more and more embedded in existentialism. And then as more years passed I became an advocate for moral nihilism
.
And, if this brilliance doesn't debunk every philosophical treatise ever written, or will ever be written....I add a further brilliant piece of 'eloquent' philosophical "argument" describing how she understands "objectivists," of the Ayaan Rand, genitally mutilated, kind of selfish Capitalism:
Iamaretardeedimbecile wrote:
1] I am rational
2] I am rational because I have access to the objective truth
3] I have access to the objective truth because I grasp the one true nature of the objective world
4] I grasp the one true nature of the objective world because I am rational
Paisan...I know you are busy with your full and exciting life, but please, explain how this brilliant mind is debunking every philosophy ever written, or will ever be written; also debunking free-will and objectivity in the process, as a casual side matter?

Shit-head...didn't you come here looking for "drama"...DRAMA, you little woman?
Gossip is your interest, no?
Yes...well, I'll fuckin' give you drama...step up and I'll show you why they talk about me even when I'm not around.
Fuckin pussies.

You think I do not see you lurking, or that IP concealers can mask your innate biological patterns?

Patterns, imbecile....patterns.
This is why you and her believe in no free-will...you don't see or understand your own patterns.
Learn to hide yourself by knowing yourself.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν


Last edited by Satyr on Tue Sep 06, 2022 4:05 pm; edited 1 time in total
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 - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia - Page 3 EmptyTue Sep 06, 2022 3:43 pm

When you are a convicted sex offender - no matter the collectivized capitalistic injustices - and you've ruined your life with bad judgement calls, expressed by bad life choices, of course you would deny free-will.
To protect your ego - your self appreciating, self-glorifying, image - your lucid conscious self, from the implications...from the eyes of others.
And...
When you've fallen for simplistic, infantile, anthropomorphic rhetoric, such as Abrahamism, and have "matured" to be disillusioned by an equally, yet more abstract, form of the exact same rhetoric - Marxism - and then, for a third time, adopted yet another "rendition" of the exact same rhetoric.... of course you want to dismiss free-will and all culpability, to protect your ego from the implications.

Some, morons, believe that knowing and parroting deep philosophical concepts, makes them...genius...as they act out judgements and choices that contradict these 'deep philosophical concepts,' exposing them as no more than pretenders and imitators.
Would these fucks not reject free-will to disconnect the act of choice from the metaphysical concept of free-will?
Would they not imply the exact same themes found in Biblical allegory, in secular, abstract contexts?
I mean...Mary Land's abortion choice, to bite from the "forbidden fruit" of Jon Schwartz hanging figs, faces the consequences of her 'sinfulness.'
Who shall save her, in a "no god world"?
Yes...you know it.
Humanity = god; god = humanity.
The collective. The chosen collective, will provide salvation to her idiocy....i.e., sinfulness.

Is Jon pissed that this collective salvation failed to save him as it saved Mary Land?
Yes, indeed.
Explanation?
Feminization of Man.
He is not of the ...chosen.

_________________
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 - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia - Page 3 EmptyTue Sep 06, 2022 4:33 pm

You will notice how ambiguous all responses are to this thread, fuckturd.
This is how idiocy conceals itself, while, at the same time, making itself noticed.
, gab, bag, ...I'll be waiting for your reply, if you are a man...paisan.
I doubt it.
I want you to explain to me your deep appreciation of this hypocrite, so that I can see your subconscious hypocrisy more clearly.
I want to know you, more than you know yourself - see Marj running for cover in recipes and daily routines...revealing what can be denied...as overthinking and projection....
Begin with this latest one...she's so proud of, having abandoned the other stupid shit she cut & pasted over years of her annoying contributions that got her banned and now weeping like an "innocent victim."
You and Maia seem mesmerized by her...so explain what this means:
iamaretardedcunt wrote:
There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know
That the unknown justifies any hypothesis?
That the absence of omniscience and omnipotence implies anything goes?
That ignorance is a validation of any idiotic theory ever imagined?
Explain, you stupid pathetic imbecile, who came here looking for drama, what your mentor means.
I know, but you explain it to me, in your own words.
I'll make you a participant....like I do everyone who volunteers, as you did. You will be my evidence, my example, my empirical proof for everything I've ever said.
Explain that "eloquent" and deeply genius phrase.....and why it has you returning for more and more...forever, and ever.
I bolded it, as she does to give it that extra ooomf....that convinces with pathos...
I'll seek approval from the audience.....to replace quality with quantity....

Note to others
What does this even mean?

p.s.
I may be wrong...an "eloquent" disclaimer.
I am no objectivist.
Gods forbid...no sinner am I.

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




Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia - Page 3 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia - Page 3 Empty

Back to top Go down
 
Satyr, iambiguous, and Maia
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 3 of 3Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3
 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: