Advertisement
I want to explore what this way of looking at things means. I'm just so intrigued!
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nihilism
"Nihilism is the philosophical doctrine suggesting that values do not exist but rather are falsely invented."
"Often this means or is meant to imply that the beliefs of the accuser are more substantial or truthful, whereas the beliefs of the accused are nihilistic, and thereby comparatively amount to nothing (or are simply claimed to be destructively amoralistic)."
"Though the term nihilism was first popularized by the novelist Ivan Turgenev,[6] it was first introduced into philosophical discourse by Friedrich Heinrich Jacobi (1743–1819), who used the term to characterize rationalism,[citation needed] and in particular Immanuel Kant's "critical" philosophy in order to carry out a reductio ad absurdum according to which all rationalism (philosophy as criticism) reduces to nihilism, and thus it should be avoided and replaced with a return to some type of faith and revelation."
"Søren Kierkegaard posited an early form of nihilism which he referred to as levelling.[8] Levelling was the process of suppressing individuality to a point where the individual's uniqueness becomes non-existent and nothing meaningful in his existence can be affirmed:
Levelling at its maximum is like the stillness of death, where one can hear one's own heartbeat, a stillness like death, into which nothing can penetrate, in which everything sinks, powerless. One person can head a rebellion, but one person cannot head this levelling process, for that would make him a leader and he would avoid being levelled. Each individual can in his little circle participate in this levelling, but it is an abstract process, and levelling is abstraction conquering individuality.
– Søren Kierkegaard, The Present Age, translated by Alexander Dru with Foreword by Walter Kaufmann, p. 51-53"
"Nietzsche characterized nihilism as emptying the world and especially human existence of meaning, purpose, comprehensible truth, or essential value. He hints that nihilism can become a false belief, when it leads individuals to discard any hope of meaning in the world and thus to invent some compensatory alternate measure of significance. Nietzsche used the phrase 'Christians and other nihilists', which is consistent with Christianity in general as Nietzsche describes nihilism, though as nihilism is now commonly construed, Christian philosophy is its opposite. Another prominent philosopher who has written on the subject is Martin Heidegger, who argued that "[the term] nihilism has a very specific meaning. What remains unquestioned and forgotten in metaphysics is being; and hence, it is nihilistic."[17]"
"Nietzsche asserts that this nihilism is a result of valuing "higher", "divine" or "meta-physical" things (such as God), that do not in turn value "base", "human" or "earthly" things. But a person who rejects God and the divine may still retain the belief that all "base", "earthly", or "human" ideas are still valueless because they were considered so in the previous belief system (such as a Christian who becomes a communist and believes fully in the party structure and leader). In this interpretation, any form of idealism, after being rejected by the idealist, leads to nihilism. Moreover, this is the source of "inconsistency on the part of the nihilists". The nihilist continues to believe that only "higher" values and truths are worthy of being called such, but rejects the idea that they exist. Because of this rejection, all ideas described as true or valuable are rejected by the nihilist as impossible because they do not meet the previously established standards."
"In this sense, it is the philosophical equivalent to the Russian political movement: the leap beyond scepticism — the desire to destroy meaning, knowledge, and value. To Nietzsche, it was irrational because the human soul thrives on value."
"Nihilism, then, was in a sense like suicide and mass murder all at once."
I like that line
"He considered faith in the categories of reason, seeking either to overcome or ignore nature, to be the cause of such nihilism. "We have measured the value of the world according to categories that refer to a purely fictitious world".[19] He saw this philosophy as present in Christianity (which he described as 'slave morality'), Buddhism, morality, asceticism and any excessively skeptical philosophy."
"Nietzsche's complex relationship with nihilism can be seen in his statement that "I praise, I do not reproach, [nihilism's] arrival. I believe it is one of the greatest crises, a moment of the deepest self-reflection of humanity. Whether man recovers from it, whether he becomes master of this crisis, is a question of his strength!".[20] While this may appear to imply his allegiance to the nihilist viewpoint, it would be more accurate to say that Nietzsche saw the coming of nihilism as valuable in the long term (as well as ironically acknowledging that nihilism exists in the world so has more gravity compared with categories that refer to a purely fictitious world). According to Nietzsche, it is only once nihilism is overcome that a culture can have a true foundation upon which to thrive. He wished to hasten its coming only so that he could also hasten its ultimate departure."
"'To the clean are all things clean' — thus say the people. I, however, say unto you: To the swine all things become swinish! Therefore preach the visionaries and bowed-heads (whose hearts are also bowed down): 'The world itself is a filthy monster.' For these are all unclean spirits; especially those, however, who have no peace or rest, unless they see the world FROM THE BACKSIDE — the backworldsmen! TO THOSE do I say it to the face, although it sound unpleasantly: the world resembleth man, in that it hath a backside, — SO MUCH is true! There is in the world much filth: SO MUCH is true! But the world itself is not therefore a filthy monster!
– Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra"
How do *you* feel about Nihilism?
I rather like it.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nihilism
"Nihilism is the philosophical doctrine suggesting that values do not exist but rather are falsely invented."
"Often this means or is meant to imply that the beliefs of the accuser are more substantial or truthful, whereas the beliefs of the accused are nihilistic, and thereby comparatively amount to nothing (or are simply claimed to be destructively amoralistic)."
"Though the term nihilism was first popularized by the novelist Ivan Turgenev,[6] it was first introduced into philosophical discourse by Friedrich Heinrich Jacobi (1743–1819), who used the term to characterize rationalism,[citation needed] and in particular Immanuel Kant's "critical" philosophy in order to carry out a reductio ad absurdum according to which all rationalism (philosophy as criticism) reduces to nihilism, and thus it should be avoided and replaced with a return to some type of faith and revelation."
"Søren Kierkegaard posited an early form of nihilism which he referred to as levelling.[8] Levelling was the process of suppressing individuality to a point where the individual's uniqueness becomes non-existent and nothing meaningful in his existence can be affirmed:
Levelling at its maximum is like the stillness of death, where one can hear one's own heartbeat, a stillness like death, into which nothing can penetrate, in which everything sinks, powerless. One person can head a rebellion, but one person cannot head this levelling process, for that would make him a leader and he would avoid being levelled. Each individual can in his little circle participate in this levelling, but it is an abstract process, and levelling is abstraction conquering individuality.
– Søren Kierkegaard, The Present Age, translated by Alexander Dru with Foreword by Walter Kaufmann, p. 51-53"
"Nietzsche characterized nihilism as emptying the world and especially human existence of meaning, purpose, comprehensible truth, or essential value. He hints that nihilism can become a false belief, when it leads individuals to discard any hope of meaning in the world and thus to invent some compensatory alternate measure of significance. Nietzsche used the phrase 'Christians and other nihilists', which is consistent with Christianity in general as Nietzsche describes nihilism, though as nihilism is now commonly construed, Christian philosophy is its opposite. Another prominent philosopher who has written on the subject is Martin Heidegger, who argued that "[the term] nihilism has a very specific meaning. What remains unquestioned and forgotten in metaphysics is being; and hence, it is nihilistic."[17]"
"Nietzsche asserts that this nihilism is a result of valuing "higher", "divine" or "meta-physical" things (such as God), that do not in turn value "base", "human" or "earthly" things. But a person who rejects God and the divine may still retain the belief that all "base", "earthly", or "human" ideas are still valueless because they were considered so in the previous belief system (such as a Christian who becomes a communist and believes fully in the party structure and leader). In this interpretation, any form of idealism, after being rejected by the idealist, leads to nihilism. Moreover, this is the source of "inconsistency on the part of the nihilists". The nihilist continues to believe that only "higher" values and truths are worthy of being called such, but rejects the idea that they exist. Because of this rejection, all ideas described as true or valuable are rejected by the nihilist as impossible because they do not meet the previously established standards."
"In this sense, it is the philosophical equivalent to the Russian political movement: the leap beyond scepticism — the desire to destroy meaning, knowledge, and value. To Nietzsche, it was irrational because the human soul thrives on value."
"Nihilism, then, was in a sense like suicide and mass murder all at once."
I like that line
"He considered faith in the categories of reason, seeking either to overcome or ignore nature, to be the cause of such nihilism. "We have measured the value of the world according to categories that refer to a purely fictitious world".[19] He saw this philosophy as present in Christianity (which he described as 'slave morality'), Buddhism, morality, asceticism and any excessively skeptical philosophy."
"Nietzsche's complex relationship with nihilism can be seen in his statement that "I praise, I do not reproach, [nihilism's] arrival. I believe it is one of the greatest crises, a moment of the deepest self-reflection of humanity. Whether man recovers from it, whether he becomes master of this crisis, is a question of his strength!".[20] While this may appear to imply his allegiance to the nihilist viewpoint, it would be more accurate to say that Nietzsche saw the coming of nihilism as valuable in the long term (as well as ironically acknowledging that nihilism exists in the world so has more gravity compared with categories that refer to a purely fictitious world). According to Nietzsche, it is only once nihilism is overcome that a culture can have a true foundation upon which to thrive. He wished to hasten its coming only so that he could also hasten its ultimate departure."
"'To the clean are all things clean' — thus say the people. I, however, say unto you: To the swine all things become swinish! Therefore preach the visionaries and bowed-heads (whose hearts are also bowed down): 'The world itself is a filthy monster.' For these are all unclean spirits; especially those, however, who have no peace or rest, unless they see the world FROM THE BACKSIDE — the backworldsmen! TO THOSE do I say it to the face, although it sound unpleasantly: the world resembleth man, in that it hath a backside, — SO MUCH is true! There is in the world much filth: SO MUCH is true! But the world itself is not therefore a filthy monster!
– Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra"
How do *you* feel about Nihilism?
I rather like it.
Advertisement
Advertisement
-
Re: Nihilism
Tue, July 14, 2009 - 1:10 PMI think I really like the general idea of Nihilism simply because I see no reason for an afterlife.
The very idea is sheer annoyance. -
-
Re: Nihilism
Wed, July 15, 2009 - 10:47 AM"I think I really like the general idea of Nihilism simply because I see no reason for an afterlife.
The very idea is sheer annoyance."
I like the idea of worshipping kittens because they are so cute and cuddly and snakes I don't like because they annoy me, therefore I will them not to exist. -
-
-
Re: Nihilism
Wed, July 15, 2009 - 10:52 AMthanks Bob. I am trying my best to learn to *think* like you!
-
-
-
Re: Nihilism
Tue, July 14, 2009 - 7:12 PMOf course values are social constructs, a manifestation of a very common formal fallacy in which one assigns objective reality to subjective concepts such as evil, good, spirit, soul etc.
To deny that such things have objective reality is quite rational. In doing so, one tends to overcome the narratives of one's culture. Religion, mores, etc and is preceived as beliving in nothing.
However, there may be objective realities to values from an evolutionary stand point..as a sort of regulating emergent property that responds to evolutionary pressure. It is unwise to kill your kin when you kin can benefit you with some skill that you do not have a vice versa. We see it in non-human species also.
However, to take this stance it is important to disregard the internal narratives of the emergent evolutionary property...that Jesus walked on water, that being kind gets you Karma, that a god approves, that you have a soul to be punished, and instead take them for what they are, a survival mechanism. -
-
"To deny that such things have objective reality is quite rational."
Tue, July 14, 2009 - 10:21 PM...all of that is accretion, Diarrhea; no nihilist "needs" to situate the self against / with any of those posits, at all, and certainly "need" not identify with any agenda or kerygma of nattering fools *or* trusted cerebral archae.
Your idea of what is "rational" is merely fanciful; you seem to define it as "that which does not conflict with my reduction of reality". "Objectivity" is not something you seem qualified to comment on, at this time, as you have in fact argued repeatedly for belief in the nonexistence of observable reality.
Thus, you and most pretenders to atheist apology are actually *even more stupid* than the fools that pretend their Bibles contain some sort of magical blueprint for figuring out how to mumble in the correct sequence.
Atheism is an adolescent phase of potential nihilism. Nihilism is based on the truth that atheism *pretends* to have become aware of - but, atheism is reduced by atheist "logic" to merely one stance with regard to a fiction.
Possibly because of unconscious awareness of the inherent vaporous uselessness of atheism, many atheists attempt to claim "nihilism" per se for/as atheism, in private, while distancing themselves from it publicly. Nihilism is roundly hated by theist society - and atheist society, for its part, will join in and throw stones from time to time - one supposes in the effort to appear part of the community by embracing a common hatred of troubling reality.
Many are horrified by the truth - none more so than those who stand around nervously and childishly pontificating at the last outposts of wishful fancy. -
-
Re: "To deny that such things have objective reality is quite rational."
Wed, July 15, 2009 - 5:17 AMRationality is based on empirical, demonstrable, repeatable evidence or epistemologically coherent deduction of probablities based on what IS known. . Galileo demonstrating that two objects of different weights fall at the same rate by dropping two different sized balls before an audience. Sure, they can be misinterpreted. Sure, logic can have it's own internal flaws...but it works best for describing the world.
Rational stances, like athiesm, are taken because there are no demonstrable experiements or logical theories to justify beliving in deities. It is irrational to assign existence to anything you could make up without being able to demonstrate it. Remember, athiesm is not a belief in the absence of God, it's an absence of belief in God. Look at Russell's teapot experiment: Rationality is also based on a sliding scale of probablility for UNprovable things like god as well...you cannot prove a teapot is not orbiting mars,,that doesn't mean it's rational to belive in it because it's unprovable. Being unable to prove it doesn't give it a 50% chance of being true.
I have not argued for reality's non-existence, just the hermenutic inability to overcome perceptions and subjectivity in relation to it.
I agree science could be totally wrong, but argue that it is way less likely to be so when compared to the baseless assertions of religion. -
-
Re: "To deny that such things have objective reality is quite rational."
Wed, July 15, 2009 - 10:45 AM"Rationality is based on empirical, demonstrable, repeatable evidence or epistemologically coherent deduction of probablities based on what IS known"
what is the empiricle proof for the law on non contradiction?
-
-
Re: "To deny that such things have objective reality is quite rational."
Wed, July 15, 2009 - 12:08 PMAbsolutism , NOT nihililism, is right .
Acknowledge that Lokifreign . -
-
Re: "To deny that such things have objective reality is quite rational."
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 7:02 AMFortunately, someday your absurd idiocy will end in annihilation; it's inevitable.
Absolutism is a faulty crutch propping a crippled mind, sideways and contorted; absolutist reasoning fails with stunning regularity to apprehend anything of consequence beyond the most obvious "truths" ('the thing is now there' and 'there are things'), yet absolutism apparently has drug-like qualities, rendering its users more insipid and delirious over time.
Nihilism has no drug-like qualities. It's simply the truth, undiluted by simpering delusions and hackneyed quasi-philosophical tapestries of invented logic. It's why so many hate the concept and seek to saddle it with a figment of "inherent evil" or "depression" - not ludicrous semi-Christian nor nattering Atheismist nabob can stare reality in the face without flinching.
Forget courage: if you need it, you lose. It falls to those of us with the innate fervid *need* to know the truths. Most human beings are not only incapable of seeing them, but are better off ignoring them.
Go play, Jason; tell yourself your stupid mumbling has some relevance, but don't be too surprised that, increasingly, your philosophy will not even be able to stand in private - it will crumble and disintegrate because it is not based in anything - it's just wishful, fanciful thinking that has no social component.
Dooooooooooooom. -
-
Re: "To deny that such things have objective reality is quite rational."
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 3:02 PMLOKI POSTED : Fortunately, someday your absurd idiocy will end in annihilation; it's inevitable.
RESPONSE: HOW ?
Absolutism is a faulty crutch propping a crippled mind, sideways and contorted; absolutist reasoning fails with stunning regularity to apprehend anything of consequence beyond the most obvious "truths" ('the thing is now there' and 'there are things'), yet absolutism apparently has drug-like qualities, rendering its users more insipid and delirious over time.
Nihilism has no drug-like qualities. It's simply the truth, undiluted by simpering delusions and hackneyed quasi-philosophical tapestries of invented logic. It's why so many hate the concept and seek to saddle it with a figment of "inherent evil" or "depression" - not ludicrous semi-Christian nor nattering Atheismist nabob can stare reality in the face without flinching.
Forget courage: if you need it, you lose. It falls to those of us with the innate fervid *need* to know the truths. Most human beings are not only incapable of seeing them, but are better off ignoring them.
Go play, Jason; tell yourself your stupid mumbling has some relevance, but don't be too surprised that, increasingly, your philosophy will not even be able to stand in private - it will crumble and disintegrate because it is not based in anything - it's just wishful, fanciful thinking that has no social component.
Dooooooooooooom.
RESPONSE: WHY SHOULD ANYBODY BELIEVE THE STATEMENTS YOU HAVE MADE SHOWN ABOVE ? -
-
Re: "To deny that such things have objective reality is quite rational."
Sat, July 18, 2009 - 12:30 PMThis man wants to control others' bodies. This is a facet of the vice of Greed attributed to Binah, and also Malkuth.
The only aspect of God they can attach themselves to is the human son, the "Son of Man", and they misinterpret the "Father" as just that, a physical heavenly father that "begot" the "son". Everything is physical to these people. They cannot countenance the unlimited reality of the Godhead. Control, unto death. Belief that things go in circles, cycles. For them. See how this applies to the instant attribution of the same physicality for the "Father" as the "Son" is embodied in? They want to make a man their god, and because they blame God for their very own willful ignorance, they want to displace their own suffering onto this shadow, demonic version of God, a God that sets up a separate reality where they can avoid their sins for all eternity, hiding in the darkness at the furthest reach from the real Godhead. And in truth, because of the ever-divisive nature of one of Binah's aspects, they would run away forever, thereby (this can be clearly seen in the simple tendency of the Tree of Life to replicate itself) extending the depths of creation simply to find more places to hide, and rule over despotically.
This will never happen. It goes no further. No trapped human-like God that has to "shepherd" wastrels for all eternity.
There is no escape from this place, other than working together. No spiritual (though physical, physical bodies "beamed up") Rapture, no alien Rapture, we are going to die here in the most vicious way unless we work together to solve problems.
Christians believe in Satan far more than they believe in a non-physical, entirely spiritual in nature Godhead beyond our comprehension.
Know why? It has to do with this supposed tendency to "sin", and find someone else to take on this sin.
So despite killing a man for sins, after cutting up so many animals, these sort of people won't let go of judgment and simply ease off other people. They want everything seen as black and white extremes, an aspect, again of Binah, Form, and they believe that the Force aspect of Chokmah (Wisdom), the Unlimited seat of the godname YHVH, is something they can abuse over and over again, simply because so many insist on seeing God as physical. The Yod of that name is not physical. Perhaps even the Vau is not. One could say that to some degree the angels nearest us are "Adam Kadmon" in nature, and all this shit about Arik Anpin, Abba and Imma, Zeir Anpin, and Nukva (all placed in the context of having physical form, despite the fact that the individual sephirahs in question are being 'personified', is just another way of saying 'we're gonna ignore our problems, put them off on something higher, and insist that everything is human, from *TOP TO BOTTOM'. So, ABBA, huh? YHVH is ABBA, huh? Fucking die already. Lots of hellish problems headed our way. Enjoy them. -
-
Re: "To deny that such things have objective reality is quite rational."
Sat, July 18, 2009 - 12:50 PMSo, if one side pillar is "male", from the most stupid and uninformed opinion, and it is responsible for the vice of Lust at it's bottom, and the other is "female" likwise, and has the vice of Lies at its bottom, and they both come together at Yesod (which is supposed to balance them), yet the *Form side* ****won't stop lying****, and blames everything on Lust, as if the fallen angels were Force-side and not Form-side (the farther down the tree, on whatever scale, the more differentiated and "physicalized" do the aspects get), and *NEVER MENTIONS* all the killing, lies, pride, greed, and everything else being done wrong, and insists that lust solely is responsible for every wrong, then this is what it relies upon, WITHOUT QUESTION. It cannot see itself. Know thyself (some really don't want to look at themselves, and so look within to 'Jesus', a polar dualistic means of achieving the Mercy, the source of which they *don't believe exists!*, while refusing to change the very behavior I've just outlined. If only one thing matters, our sexual actions, then let me say that most religions are breeding cults, that inculcate through fear, fear of the *loss of physical form*, feear of death and change, and sheerly burgeoning with the desire to have a more perfect world simply handed to them, which no doubt because there is nearly no evident enlightenment, these worthies will inevitably degrade into violence, ownership and destruction again.
Maybe it'll be fun to watch.
-
To deny that such things have objective reality is quite questionable
Sat, July 18, 2009 - 2:58 PMBOB POSTED :This man wants to control others' bodies. This is a facet of the vice of Greed attributed to Binah, and also Malkuth.
RESPONSE : How is preaching that people should have uprightness and decorum *instead of* getting into sexual debauchery ---"greed" ? How is protecting precious infants from abortion on demand ---greed ?
BOB POSTED :The only aspect of God they can attach themselves to is the human son, the "Son of Man", and they misinterpret the "Father" as just that, a physical heavenly father that "begot" the "son". Everything is physical to these people. They cannot countenance the unlimited reality of the Godhead. Control, unto death. Belief that things go in circles, cycles. For them. See how this applies to the instant attribution of the same physicality for the "Father" as the "Son" is embodied in?
RESPONSE: Actually , I do NOT support the weird , notion a notion held by Mormons and some Fundamentalists , that God The Father has some some sort of Spirit body . God the Father is PURELY spirit and that worship Him do so in spirit and in Truth .
The early church Father Gregory of Nyssa referred to Jesus the Son as : 'eternally begotten of the Father ' . Notice the adverb 'eternally'. <---That is, indeed , a fascinating concept .
Think of the engendering of the Logos / God the Son , prior to his birth on Earth , as being *not* anything like human reproduction, but more like a ray of Light emanating from another reservoir of Light . That is why the Nicene creed the original version , speaks of Jesus , as Light from Light true God from true God '
BOB POSTED :They want to make a man their god, and because they blame God for their very own willful ignorance, they want to displace their own suffering onto this shadow, demonic version of God, a God that sets up a separate reality where they can avoid their sins for all eternity, hiding in the darkness at the furthest reach from the real Godhead.
RESPONSE: Since when is avoiding sin for all eternity something bad ? Avoiding sin for all eternity when one can achieve it by dint of holy , and chaste intoxication with Light of Jesus (who gives new wine for new wineskins) sounds like being bathed in a perpetual mountain breeze ! Sin --at least from what I've gathered ---is like a junk food that is crudely exhillerating at first , but then gets tedious . Yes, sin gets all so tedious .
Where sex did abound , the noise of a tedious world did more abound .
This will never happen. It goes no further. No trapped human-like God that has to "shepherd" wastrels for all eternity.
BOB POSTED :There is no escape from this place, other than working together. No spiritual (though physical, physical bodies "beamed up") Rapture, no alien Rapture, we are going to die here in the most vicious way unless we work together to solve problems.
RESPONSE: Hey speak for yourself. I still hope to go to another planet one day : a beautiful , superlative planet that has "trees" of crystal and ethereal , attractive women that hate sex and sing sonorous hymns that are wordless , when the sun rises and also when the stars appear in the alien sky , and also when a young mother brings her infant into town
The rapture doctrine is a doctrine that comes from a bunch of cultists named J.N Darby and the Plymouth Bretheren twisting the scriptures and passing on such misinterpretations through a guy named C.I.Scofield who spread it in America --in *some* Protestant circles .
As for the notion, that folk singer Ozark Billy called "pie in the sky when you die" , Jesus did NOT teach that . The teachings of Jesus were far more nunaced then that .
'For the wind bloweth where it listeth ' (See the Gospel according to John Chapter 3 verse 8).
Please look that one up . The Bible is a lot more interesting ---at least in a number of verses then the Bible thumpers are !
-
-
-
Re: "To deny that such things have objective reality is quite rational."
Sat, July 18, 2009 - 7:53 PM"Absolutism is a faulty crutch propping a crippled mind, sideways and contorted; absolutist reasoning fails with stunning regularity to apprehend anything of consequence beyond the most obvious "truths" ('the thing is now there' and 'there are things'), yet absolutism apparently has drug-like qualities, rendering its users more insipid and delirious over time."
hmmm, are you absolutely sure of this Loki?
"Nihilism has no drug-like qualities. It's simply the truth"
How can you possible know this?
"undiluted by simpering delusions and hackneyed quasi-philosophical tapestries of invented logic."
what is an example of "invented logic". Logic is not invented, it is discovered and it is an example of universal absolute truth upon which this universe is governed, which of course refutes your opening self refuted argument. Tell me Loki, have you ever taken a course in logic?
"It's why so many hate the concept and seek to saddle it with a figment of "inherent evil" or "depression" - not ludicrous semi-Christian nor nattering Atheismist nabob can stare reality in the face without flinching."
where do you get a concept of "evil"? From Nihilism? I think you borrow it from my world view.
"Forget courage
"if you need it, you lose. It falls to those of us with the innate fervid *need* to know the truths. Most human beings are not only incapable of seeing them, but are better off ignoring them."
and we know this because you say so? Are you getting any help for this delusion of grandeur?
"Go play, Jason; tell yourself your stupid mumbling has some relevance, but don't be too surprised that, increasingly, your philosophy will not even be able to stand in private - it will crumble and disintegrate because it is not based in anything - it's just wishful, fanciful thinking that has no social component.
Dooooooooooooom."
Jason, are you familiar with the verse about rebuking a fool? -
-
Re: "To deny that such things have objective reality is quite rational."
Sat, July 18, 2009 - 9:22 PMDAN ASKED : Jason, are you familiar with the verse about rebuking a fool?
RESPONSE: Yes, but somebody's got to do it , lest they think themselves wise in their own conceits .
I got to keep trying to get Loki to repent of nihilism ! -
-
Re: "To deny that such things have objective reality is quite rational."
Mon, July 20, 2009 - 11:32 AMI am surrounded by fools. -
-
Re: "To deny that such things have objective reality is quite rational."
Mon, July 20, 2009 - 3:30 PM -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: "To deny that such things have objective reality is quite rational."
Mon, July 20, 2009 - 3:37 PM
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: Nihilism
Wed, July 15, 2009 - 10:18 AM"However, to take this stance it is important to disregard the internal narratives of the emergent evolutionary property...that Jesus walked on water,"
"that Jesus walked on water"
Let me describe this...
Some want to live in a magical reality, where miracles happen.
This is created by crushing an individual psychically.
Thereby making him synonymous with the *human* archetype of God by removing the troublesome personality. I know very intimately how this is done.
In Qabalah there is a trait ascribed to the sephirah Kether (Crown) called The Point Within The Circle. Whatever this may have meant to occultists over the centuries, here is my take:
On one level this describes basic dimensionality. Also (crudely) sexuality. But taking off philosophically from the first idea we have the active principle (often inferred in Qabalah to be the human male part of sexuality, though in the most crude interpretation of reality) witnessing the feminine, or receptive quality of the 'silent' reality he witnesses.
Thereby, in calling for such supernatural occurrences, one shrinks this reality, making this figure the metaphysical center of this dimensionality.
Christians, don't even bother to argue with me. -
-
Re: Nihilism
Wed, July 15, 2009 - 10:20 AMHack your way out of that dead-end womb if you have to... -
-
Re: Nihilism
Wed, July 15, 2009 - 10:38 AMThe religious favor just the constriction I've described for a few possible reasons.
1. They want to worship the human figure in the form of an ever-recurrent redeemer.
2. They are unwilling to face any social and environment problems scientifically.
3. Add your own. I don't feeling like thinking about it. -
-
Re: Nihilism
Wed, July 15, 2009 - 10:42 AMWho put the words into Jesus' mouth? Why does it say that God will provide the words when they are necessary?
The Qliphoth. Reminder: Vices of Malkuth (Kingdom) Greed, Inertia.
Principally Inertia. Some things refuse to be changed. Rigidity, Dogmaticism, Literalness ("the Bible is the literal word of God!" <they scream>) On a course. Towards destruction.
Many interpretations of Biblical verse, no?
The tenor of that which advises is colored by our collective actions here. That's Satan for you. -
-
Re: Nihilism
Wed, July 15, 2009 - 10:43 AMAnd God said, "Slaughter the Canaanites, down to the last man, woman, and child. Livestock too."
-
Re: Nihilism
Wed, July 15, 2009 - 10:55 AM"Who put the words into Jesus' mouth?"
let me guess. Jesus?
"Why does it say that God will provide the words when they are necessary?""
again, just guessing. because he wants to?
("the Bible is the literal word of God!" <they scream>)
We don't scream it. We believe it, and support evidence proves it.
"Many interpretations of Biblical verse, no?"
in essense, two. 1)The wrong one and 2) the right one.
"The tenor of that which advises is colored by our collective actions here. That's Satan for you."
sorry, too deep for me....
-
-
-
-
Re: Nihilism
Wed, July 15, 2009 - 10:50 AM"Some want to live in a magical reality, where miracles happen. "
this statement requires proof. How do you know it is a "magical reality". Aren't those terms contradictory? How is life and existance, not miraculous, by any standard? Why are your miraculous beliefs (self creation, abiogenesis, evolution etc.) better than the far more rational ones of the bible (eg. God Created supported by the law of biogensis, Sin entered the world resulting in corruption - evidenced by the laws of thermodynamic etc.)? -
-
Re: Nihilism
Wed, July 15, 2009 - 10:58 AMIf you are referring to such things as Entropy as being equatable to sin, I kindly ask you to try to stop your pathetic attempt at thinking this moment.
-
Re: Nihilism
Wed, July 15, 2009 - 11:03 AM"Why are your miraculous beliefs"
I have no miraculous beliefs. You do. Nice try.
You just attempted to put words in my mouth.
Look back to when Pinky did this in various threads, and you will find that I argue such bullshit very well.
No time for you now, though. -
-
Re: Nihilism
Wed, July 15, 2009 - 1:37 PM"I have no miraculous beliefs. You do. Nice try."
It wasn't a try. It was a simple statement of fact. You cannot live on this planet without them. You must believer in supernaturalism or supranaturalism. Both are "miraculous" or outside of the ordinary expectation or experience. How many times did life spontaneously generate in your experience? Answer, None! How many examples of information gaining mutations have you observed floating around in the germ cells of any organism? Answer, None! You believe in a universe that created itself. Just how do universes do pull of such a think? Answer, you have no idea. Your miraculous beliefs are also illogical ones, since you belief your miracles happened without a miracle worker, which makes you, deluded.
"You just attempted to put words in my mouth. "
Actually, I am cramming your words down your silly throat.
"Look back to when Pinky did this in various threads, and you will find that I argue such bullshit very well."
You do, and I don't tolerate bullshitters very well. So beware.
"No time for you now, though."
what, no more of your natural myths to discuss? shucks -
-
Re: Nihilism
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 10:47 AMOnce again, you are telling me what I must believe in. Failure. You have no right to do this.
You must assess those initial assumptions you are unwilling to look at.
Angry much?
"You believe in a universe that created itself."
This is false. You are assuming my beliefs, as if I had any.
I never said anything like this. If you are taking this from the quote page,
you might try to understand that I desried to investigate the philosophical nature of these ideas.
"Just how do universes do pull of such a think?"
I don't get what this means.
This is not a thread about universes. Perhaps you should start one.
Care to discuss nihilism? I will include myself in Christians' idea of Second Death, just to permanently get away from people like you.
Your language is getting a bit violent. Be careful.
What am I bullshiting about? Specify.
Your insistence that you decide what others believe will be your downfall.
Dan, try not to show so much of your aggresive side, it is liable to get you into trouble.
"Your miraculous beliefs are also illogical ones, since you belief your miracles happened without a miracle worker, which makes you, deluded."
I simply told you that I do not prefer whatsoever to believe in the need for any sort of miraculous happenings. You are displacing your own desires onto me. Why?
I'm astoundingly rational, Dan. If you really wish to discuss the nature of miracles performed to the agency of miracle worker, that would be another thread (not that I really mind that you tangent anywhere, in whatever fashion). But the thread is titled Nihilism.
Maybe I should adopt a snake avatar again. -
-
Unsu...
Re: Nihilism
Tue, September 22, 2009 - 3:33 AM"You believe in a universe that created itself."
No; and-- you, Dan, believe in a man that created himself, created this universe, sacrificed himself, to himself, for people he created himself, which refuse to stop sinning, who beleive they can be severe for all time, so they can require even more to function as Jesus did.
I beleive it's quite likely that a higher spiritual, non-physical, non-human God created the universe, and probably others, and that he created a system, known as the Qabalah, which he found an inventive way to bury in the Torah, so that brighter people could tease it out while dogmatic, power-hungry idiots weren't looking!
Otherwise I'm a true Nihilist. -
-
Unsu...
Re: Nihilism
Tue, September 22, 2009 - 3:38 AMThe Wise remain silent, whenever possible; and a Nihilist has no tongue. Elapsing Configuration. -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
-
-
Unsu...
Re: Nihilism
Sun, September 27, 2009 - 1:48 AMSo, bother to watch that "Good Night Israel" video? What's with those "aliens"? Are they aliens?
What do a lot of Christians want? Immortality. Physical Immortality. I wonder how long those things live?
They must be conscious. And it is said they like giving rectal exams. And they have no genitalia.
They was a creature mentioned in the epic of Gilgamesh named Enkidu. He was artificial, blended from some wild animal and whatever amount of human was necessary so he had speech.
What I'm saying is, whoever or whatever the god of this universe is, and however it works that further levels of unification occur for god, god is said to be able to operate outside of the timeline. The ancients had technology they shouldn't have, if this world had developed rationally and in a true evolutionary fashion. Someone god fashioned for his spiritual "chorus" stepped down and got mixed up with what were supposed to be rational, questioing beings here, and has been trying to control shit ever since. If these aliens evolved around some distant sun, why constantly hover over us, trying to understand humanity, even supposedly making hybrids with us? Go away, loser. It looks like you got punished, and your junk was taken away. Christians are next. Don't be on the forefront of wanting the death of this world through religion, or your going to end up looking like one of these spindly fucks, waiting around to see what happens. Don't be irrational. If they had evolved elsewhere, why keep hanging around over us? There's plenty of other shit to do. They lost their humanity. Christians are next. -
-
Unsu...
Re: Nihilism
Sun, September 27, 2009 - 2:03 AMThe question is not are these real. I don't care. The question is why do people talk about them. People need demons and devils to blame their shit on. People are irrational. It's imbedded in all human religions, and it's just us. We won't work together. We keep trying to control one another, **JASON**. They look sad. They may not really know what their purpose is. Their wonder might be gone. This shit down here needs to get sorted out, eventually. I don't care if God's real. It's not my business. Christians want him real. To use. Look into the depths of you, what do you need, what are you afraid of? Why need to control others? What's that about? These homos seem to need to control others. More fear. Bodily reasoning. It's all very sad. If they are real, why don't they have anything else worthwhile todo, someone else to pester? Humanity will never truly get off the ground until is stops trying to manipulate each other. Especially through sex. And not for sexual purposes, but for something far darker in scope. A renunciation of higher ideas of God, in favor of ones that are far too physical. Go talk about your dick elsewhere, Jason, it's incredibly annoying. -
-
Unsu...
Re: Nihilism
Sun, September 27, 2009 - 2:23 AMThe simple fact is everyone's supposed to be friendly. No one is supposed to want to rule over other people. At one time we had kings. Most of them were very unjust. This has carried on to the present moment, under different forms of legalities, so that those who were barbaric could take power. It was very rare to find good people that would lead people properly. Even in the Jewish kingdom. From David to some of his sons, Solomon and such, there always follows a period of decay where despotic people rule. And the modern era is replete with such. So rulers seem to always fall prey to the cooruption that power lends itself to. That's why we need a true form of democracy. Look how much Obama is getting dumped on. But the most hateful, supposed religious Christian people who won't give up this foul prosperity brought to them by destroying other nations. Obama takes it in stride. He has to work the system to the best degree he can. He can't dump all the bankers that have made these self-interested Americans prosperous overnight. Shit is close to collapse. And we get these angry Republican calling socialism. Not his fault you want everything to yourselves, greedy shitstains. But he has to apologize, when Bush never would. For Bush's mistakes. Not right. You weak Republicans won't take the fault for anything. Too greedy. There are greedy Dems too, but Repubs take the cake. That's what Republicanism always meant, feed the flock, the gentry, the landowners, enslave the rest. At least Dems are somewhat inclusive, and not based on money.
-
-
-
-
-
Unsu...
Re: Nihilism
Sat, September 26, 2009 - 12:50 AMIf he "created this universe, sacrificed himself, to himself, for people he created himself" does this universe actually exist? -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.Unsu...
Re: Nihilism
Sat, September 26, 2009 - 12:51 AM
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.Unsu...
Re: Nihilism
Sat, September 26, 2009 - 1:02 AMIf one truly believes that Adam and Eve were created by God, and if one believes God is Jesus (despite the obvious implied circularity), then propose to me how he created them. And whether or not he exists (in this universe of not). Adam yes, Eve? Is that the Biblical name?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eve_(name) -
-
Re: Nihilism
Sat, September 26, 2009 - 8:37 AMBLAC , consider that Adam and Eve (Adamah and Hava in Hebrew ) and the realm of Gan Eden / the garden of Eden was in another spiritual realm ---not on the earth as physical objects are on the Earth and the Fall was into the sort of course materiality we have now . Reportedly there were Jewish mystical writings that postulate that thesis .
As to how they were created by God---I don't know all the ins and outs of it ---but it involved emanations of light.
I support an emanation conception of the creation with light and dimunitions of light being one of the primary substances by which all of the universes were created and possibly are still being created .
In the Genesis cosmogony ---one of the first perhaps the first substances God sent forth was light : 'Let there be light' . It would have been a dimunition of the original light , for God itself is Light, and so the light that first emanated from God at the start of universe(s) was a lesser light than God himself but an emanation of the original Light of God .
The notion of creation ex nihilo is unbiblical , for as Martin Buber : the Jewish theologian explains apprently the word for create in Genesis 1: 1 ' bera ' means to 'hew out' --thus suggesting original material to work with . -
-
Unsu...
Re: Nihilism
Sat, September 26, 2009 - 9:03 AMwww.sacred-texts.com/jud/zdm/zdm004.htm
www.sacred-texts.com/grim/kos/kos12.htm
http://63.249.123.11/jud/zdm/zdm003.htm
Which part of which word are you talking about?
Put that H a CH, in the English language.
Where were human beings first made, on the earth or in a spiritual mind.
Why are you concerned with wether light is God or not? He "said" light into existence. You are reflecting a lot of people's confusion on this subject.
Is light a substance. Stop talking about sex and God for a moment, and let's explore that.
"The notion of creation ex nihilo is unbiblical" That doesn't concern me. Creation of what?
Who's light, Elohim, or YHVH? -
-
Re: Nihilism
Sat, September 26, 2009 - 9:23 AMPIRATE POSTED :Is light a substance. Stop talking about sex and God for a moment, and let's explore that.
RESPONSE: More like a para-substance. Light is the most barely physical of physical phenomenon .
PIRATE POSTED : "The notion of creation ex nihilo is unbiblical" That doesn't concern me. Creation of what?
RESPONSE : The universes .
PIRATE POSTED :Who's light, Elohim, or YHVH?
RESPONSE: That is a false dichotomy , since YHWH and Elohim are one and the same, hence in the Hebrew text of the Old Testament it states , 'YHWH is Elohim ' wherever there parallel verse in English versions of the Old Testament is , 'The Lord is God' . -
-
Re: Nihilism
Sat, September 26, 2009 - 10:43 AMYou do know "Elohim" is plural, yes? -
-
Re: Nihilism
Sat, September 26, 2009 - 1:25 PMThat could evince a Trinity , Pinky . -
-
-
Re: Nihilism
Sat, September 26, 2009 - 3:12 PMNOT all protestants deny the Trinity, but, no, lately I've been attending a Greek Orthodox church.
They are neither Roman Catholic nor Protestant . And Greek Orthodox are quite strict about the Trinity , -
-
Re: Nihilism
Sat, September 26, 2009 - 7:27 PMSo...you believe in the trinity, or no? -
-
Re: Nihilism
Sun, September 27, 2009 - 2:52 AMYes, I do beleive in the Trinity . -
-
Unsu...
Re: Nihilism
Sun, September 27, 2009 - 2:58 AMWhat is the Trinity to you? Have any idea? Here, I'll put it down, so you don't have to expend the effort.
Father, Son, adn Holy Ghost.
If you could say any more than that, I would be decently surprised.
That's not it.
It's not Kether, Tiphareth, and Yesod either. It's not sexual. Too many fucks like you rely on something being sexual, so you can exploit it.
It's Ehyeh, YHVH, and Elohim. To seperate any from another is fatal.
And you won't study it. You're that lazy. You want to use it, to tell others how to function, most especially sexually.
Just shut up about that. Makes you look horribly stupid. -
-
Unsu...
Re: Nihilism
Sun, September 27, 2009 - 3:02 AMBitter, very bitter people, these Christians are.
-
Unsu...
Re: Nihilism
Sun, September 27, 2009 - 4:31 AMJason thinks God is a man, or light. NO.
Some Kabbalists think God is merely YHVH - Elohim. NO.
The Christian Kabbalists think God is Kehter, Tiphareth, and Yesod. NO.
Many think Elohim is a female (Binah, the Great Old Sea), and that YHVH is a man. NO.
God, as presented to us, is Ehyeh -- YHVH -- Elohim. There is no human in that picture.
No created being, as the Kabbalists say, is privvy to God itself. No human is God.
Christians have a lot to answer for.
Now, this Abba, Amma shit. NO.
That's not God. That's most likely the Ishim, following the system.
No momma and poppa. That's human bullshit. God is not dualistic, it's three-in-one.
It needs that third (actually first) aspect to balance the other two. That's the best I could say.
Needy, needy fucking humans.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Unsu...
Re: Nihilism
Sun, September 27, 2009 - 3:09 AMNo science there, just pseudo-science. Shut up.
What universe(s). I see only one. Posit reasons for another, use scientific terminology, or get the fuck out.
YHVH is not Elohim,otherwise why have two names? Neither is light, too simplistic. Start again.
God is not light. You need to know what you're speaking of. -
-
Unsu...
Re: Nihilism
Sun, September 27, 2009 - 3:14 AMGhana. Don't orgasm so the people of Ghana can have a sandwich. Just how insane is this person?
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Nihilism shall be (hopefully) overcome by an absolutist utopia !
Fri, August 14, 2009 - 3:13 PMNo , Loki . There are absolute Truths and Values that have NO shades of grey .
Deductive logical laws like the law of Non-contradiction are ironclad and there is NO exceptions in any possible worlds .
And in keeping with such logical laws we absolutist, utopian , idealistic ideologues will strive to the bitter , last end to set at naught the dystopian , sexy thinking of you nihilists !
We will continue to strive for a new heavens and a new earth . We shall strive for a new world in the morning where every child and every adult can live a sheltered life and cultivate sentimentality as well as pedantry !
In the words of Dr.Martin Luther King Jr .
'Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord. ! ' -
-
Look up what "Utopia" refers to
Fri, August 14, 2009 - 3:45 PM>>There are absolute Truths and Values that have NO shades of grey . <<
That's true! There are also data that are temporary and/or transient. Most "truth" is a fiction based on perceptions, but... *those* facts are true.
Of course, "values" are arbitrary attributions (this is true! yaaay JL is right about something (when assessed in a context in which he's right)), but some of them are absolute, as it were, at least when assessed in a frame within which they are absolute.
Of course, the absoluteness of these values is relative. Even the simplest of measurements rely on invented quanta for their "trueness".
Your view of the universe is a fiction, J, that you write each moment.
Very little of what you sermonize about so often has any basis in reality - except for the reality that exists between your ears.
Your Christian portrait of deity, for instance: utterly unconvincing and unverifiable; portions of it are actually easily disproved.
Your belief that meaning is an inherent property of matter is ludicrous, for another example. Your belief that aesthetic is innate, objective, and static is hilariously ignorant.
Hoever, you're not entirely wrong about the existence of certain absolutes (beyond the uselessly mundane); *this*, *this* is absolutely true and (apparently) inalterable:
Meaning is a construct of mentality - it cannot be located, nor objectively demonstrated.
No thing has a "purpose" that a consciousness didn't invent and attribute to it.
Based on reality, I can posit that there will be no savior, no salvation, no redemption, and no 'ultimate' reward nor punishment for acts undertaken or contemplated. Accepting this is (among other things) the road toward highly valuable and healthful revelations: morality, happiness, freedom, fulfillment. Understanding that meaning is something we attribute to things and experiences solves all of the problems kicked up by atavistic and mentally stunted recourse to simplified, fantastic, and ultimately insane mythologies of inherent purposes. -
-
REPENT LOKIFREIGN !
Fri, August 14, 2009 - 6:08 PMMeaning is NOT a mere attribution . It exists a priori. It is discovered by man ---NOT a construct of his consciousness .
It pre-exists as what Alfred North Whitehead called 'eternal objects' .
You ought to have a beginning course in epistemology , young man !
Have you even bothered to read the Meditations of Rene Descartes or the 'Discourse on The Method' , by him ????
To claim that truth is relative to preception is to put forth an alieans adjective.
Relative truth is a self-negating turn of phrase ---one term is anti-climatic to the other . It is like the phrase 'decoy duck' or 'artifical leather ' . A decoy duck is NOT actually a duck and artifcial leather is NOT authentic leather .
Likewise relative truth negates the very prescriptiveness of the word 'truth' .
REPENT LOKIFREIGN . It is never too late . Become an absolutist ideologue and seek to promote a utopia .
Oh , and lest I forget . You are much IN ERROR to assert that esthetics are subjective, and to deny that the precepts of esthetics are absolute and innate .
REPENT AND SEEK THE LORD , Lokifreign .
Break up your fallow ground . Turn to the Lord and let him rain righteousness upon you .
For with the Lord is plenteous redemption .
SEEK THE SHELTERED LIFE FOR THE SHELTERED LIFE IS GOOD .
Be ye not deceived by the froward ways of debauchery . SEEK VIRTUE . REPENT ! -
-
Re: REPENT LOKIFREIGN !
Fri, August 14, 2009 - 9:45 PMFUCK OFF>>>> YOU ASSHOLES>>>>>
NO>>> DISCUSSION>>>
Let me find the password to that account, and I kiil your thoughts.
Like they meant anything anyway.
Nihilsm rocks!!!!
Approach the center of my black Nihilism at your own great peril!
Christians suck Jesus cock! Practically you all do!
Lying sons a bitches!
(The crowd parts, knowing they are not the chosen victims, and some weasely little fuck runs further into the darkness...)
-
Re: REPENT LOKIFREIGN !
Fri, August 14, 2009 - 9:48 PMI got a bat that have the word repent on it, with your name inscribed on the handle.
You are incapable of appreciable thought. Who do you think wants to read your trash?
There is no funny left in you.
Rational future, full of so much heartbreak, you sheerly cannot even IMAGINE it!
No magical saviors lilting down from the heavens. No express ride to dumbshitland.
Did you knock at our door? No fucking solicitation, asshole! -
-
DEVIOUS... UNPREDICTABLE!!!
Fri, August 14, 2009 - 10:02 PMThe road to the western lands is by definition, the most dangerous road in the world; for it is a journey beyond death, beyond the basic God standard of fear and danger...
www.youtube.com/view_play_list
It is, the most heavily guarded road in the world, for it gives access...
-
-
yours are the words of a demoonic liar, JL, I rebuke you
Sat, August 15, 2009 - 4:53 AM>>Meaning is NOT a mere attribution<<
Yes, it is. This is self-evident. Worse still for your retarded fantasy: it is absolutely true and 100% certain. Meaning is attribution - that you pretend this reduces it, somehow, reveals the heart of your dysfunction, and the character of your immorality. You are a Bad Man. You hate beauty, and you attack it. You want to destroy any positive aspects of life. You despise and denigrate humanity. You loathe *yourself*. You are a self-avowed enemy of that which is good and healthful. You are - mentally, spiritually, intellectually - a disturbed toddler, screaming impolitely and attempting to smash all the toys, throw your food about, mewling and swearing as you try to make a runny, unhealthy poop on your siblings' faces.
Fare more importantly, though:
there is no basis in fact to anything you say, here or elsewhere; nothing you believe is demonstrable; you are not credible. Your assertions have no merit, and are frivolous. It would be a disgrace to humanity at large to address your beliefs, as this would grant them even the semblance of plausibility.
The end. -
-
AAAAAHAHAHAHA AHAAAAAAAAAHAAAA HHHHHAAAAA!!!!!!
Sat, August 15, 2009 - 7:14 AM>>Meaning is NOT a mere attribution<<
LOKI POSTED :Yes, it is. This is self-evident. Worse still for your retarded fantasy: it is absolutely true and 100% certain.
RESPONSE: Is the propostion that meaning is an attribution, itself an attribution ????
LOKI POSTED :Meaning is attribution - that you pretend this reduces it, somehow, reveals the heart of your dysfunction, and the character of your immorality. You are a Bad Man.
RESPONSE: Loki you are good for a laugh !
LOKI POSTED :You hate beauty, and you attack it.
RESPONSE: On the contrary , I love beauty and seek to preserve it from you dystopian relativist , postmodern types who love ugly kitch !
LOKI POSTED : You want to destroy any positive aspects of life.
RESPONSE: Are you joking ?
LOKI POSTED : You despise and denigrate humanity. You loathe *yourself*. You are a self-avowed enemy of that which is good and healthful. You are - mentally, spiritually, intellectually - a disturbed toddler, screaming impolitely and attempting to smash all the toys, throw your food about, mewling and swearing as you try to make a runny, unhealthy poop on your siblings' faces.
RESPONSE: AH HAHAHA AH HAHAHA HA HAHA HAHA HAHA HAHA HAHA ! -
-
no
Sat, August 15, 2009 - 9:43 AM>>Is the propostion that meaning is an attribution, itself an attribution ???? <<
No. It's an observation. Getting verrrrry shaky, there, pardner. It's all starting to fall apart around your ears.
>>I love beauty and seek to preserve it<<
No. Patently untrue. You refute this lie of yours with each post.
>>Are you joking ? <<
No.
-
-
Refuting the spurious doctrines of Lokifrteign
Sat, August 15, 2009 - 12:09 PM>>Is the propostion that meaning is an attribution, itself an attribution ???? <<
LOKI POSTED :No. It's an observation. Getting verrrrry shaky, there, pardner. It's all starting to fall apart around your ears.
RESPONSE: An observation of what (A) something that you attribute to phenomenon OR (B) something inherent to the phenomenon itself ? So which is it Loki , (A) OR (B) ????
[GOTCHA !]
>>I love beauty and seek to preserve it<<
LOKI POSTED : No. Patently untrue. You refute this lie of yours with each post.
RESPONSE: The posts have I have posted testify to the fervent love of beauty I have had for a long , long time . What I hate is tackiness / kitch the legacy of earthy postmodernism !
>>Are you joking ? <<
LOKI POSTED : No.
RESPONSE: Well then you have an attitude that could be described by the adjective.........creepy ! -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: you have made yourself small, weak, and afraid
Sun, August 16, 2009 - 5:21 AM1
Your attempt to engage in relativist thought processes for this first point is hilarious. Inept, but gratifying nonetheless. Not what I'd call a 'good try' - but redolent with telling desperation. Your logic is non sequitir and specious, though; if you wish to discuss it you'll have to make a coherent sentence that has something to do with the discussion.
"Argument" isn't just "willy nilly spit out retarded inversions and being a juvenile smartass". Stick to the topic. Stop being a delirious asshole and focus on facts. "gotcha" what? Got me pegging you down like an insect to a board? Suck it up, J. You're a failure at philosophy *because* you are afraid of the truth. Philo is not for cowards.
2
>>The posts have I have posted testify to the fervent love of beauty<<
No; quite the opposite - they are a testament to your refusal to encounter reality. Reality is where beauty lives. The beauty in your mind is not 'alive' - it's static, and safe. You're a coward that hides from truth, as revealed by your foolish attempt to escape point 1. Your sole motive for posting words to the internet is the attempt to infect others with your hatred and fear - fortunately, you are so incoherent and unpersuasive as a writer that, aside from attracting the odd sexy lady seeking to pop your weird cherry (whom you hilariously suck up to until they catch a real whiff of your BS), no one can take anything from your rants save "gee; I never suspected anyone was really that retarded in this day and age".
>>. What I hate is tackiness / kitch the legacy of earthy postmodernism ! <<
You don't even have a faint conception of what you're blathering about. You haven't a command of the terms you eruct; it's absurd for you to use terms that you fail to understand and still expect anyone to take you seriously. Grow up.
3
I'm sure it *is* creepy for someone like you - isolated, misanthropic, evil toward humanity, atavistic, brutal, ignorant, spiteful, deprived, and self-loathing - to have encountered a mind willing to speak the truth to you. I'm sure most people avoid it, and your company (as you strain to hold people at bay while you denigrate all that they cherish). I am more compassionate and forgiving than most. Unlike you, I don't have to lie or pretend in order to live out my philosophies; mine are tempered - yours are fluffy, untested figments. Squishy, as they have never withstood a single challenge.
It's because you've allowed yourself to be weak, due (one imagines) to your cringing terror at the thought of being dunked into the effluvia and sharp edges of a real life. So much easier, isn't it?, to point at the TV and yell "bad!" than to see even a small % of what the real world contains. I'm sure it does seem creepy to you. Shadowed paths through the park sometimes seem frightening, to children. -
-
Loki puts forth more relativist TRASH ! Trash the ideology and lifestyle of LOKI --hipster TRASH !
Fri, September 25, 2009 - 9:27 PM1
LOKI POSTED :Your attempt to engage in relativist thought processes for this first point is hilarious. Inept, but gratifying nonetheless. Not what I'd call a 'good try' - but redolent with telling desperation. Your logic is non sequitir and specious, though; if you wish to discuss it you'll have to make a coherent sentence that has something to do with the discussion.
RESPONSE: Loki , stop the switcharoo . You are the noted relativist who has called logic "a low order of mentality" . You reject logic and intentionally tolerate ambiguity . You have called Plato a liar .
"Argument" isn't just "willy nilly spit out retarded inversions and being a juvenile smartass". Stick to the topic. Stop being a delirious asshole and focus on facts. "gotcha" what? Got me pegging you down like an insect to a board? Suck it up, J. You're a failure at philosophy *because* you are afraid of the truth. Philo is not for cowards.
RESPONSE: You are against philosophy. True philosophy hates ambiguity / hates ambivalent thinking . You support ambiguity/ you support ambivalent thinking .
2
>>The posts have I have posted testify to the fervent love of beauty<<
LOKI POSTED : No; quite the opposite - they are a testament to your refusal to encounter reality. Reality is where beauty lives. The beauty in your mind is not 'alive' - it's static, and safe. You're a coward that hides from truth, as revealed by your foolish attempt to escape point 1. Your sole motive for posting words to the internet is the attempt to infect others with your hatred and fear - fortunately, you are so incoherent and unpersuasive as a writer that, aside from attracting the odd sexy lady seeking to pop your weird cherry (whom you hilariously suck up to until they catch a real whiff of your BS), no one can take anything from your rants save "gee; I never suspected anyone was really that retarded in this day and age".
>>. What I hate is tackiness / kitch the legacy of earthy postmodernism ! <<
You don't even have a faint conception of what you're blathering about. You haven't a command of the terms you eruct; it's absurd for you to use terms that you fail to understand and still expect anyone to take you seriously. Grow up.
3
I'm sure it *is* creepy for someone like you - isolated, misanthropic, evil toward humanity, atavistic, brutal, ignorant, spiteful, deprived, and self-loathing - to have encountered a mind willing to speak the truth to you. I'm sure most people avoid it, and your company (as you strain to hold people at bay while you denigrate all that they cherish). I am more compassionate and forgiving than most. Unlike you, I don't have to lie or pretend in order to live out my philosophies; mine are tempered - yours are fluffy, untested figments. Squishy, as they have never withstood a single challenge.
It's because you've allowed yourself to be weak, due (one imagines) to your cringing terror at the thought of being dunked into the effluvia and sharp edges of a real life. So much easier, isn't it?, to point at the TV and yell "bad!" than to see even a small % of what the real world contains. I'm sure it does seem creepy to you. Shadowed paths through the park sometimes seem frightening, to children.
RESPONSE : YOU GO SUCK AN EGG , MISTER ! What you promote is NOT philosophy , It is ANTI-intellectual hipster TRASH .
(You are a nihilist hipster . Go suck an egg, hipster !) -
-
Re: well played, maestro
Fri, September 25, 2009 - 10:44 PMYes; excellent riposte and full of carefully reasoned argument. You have, at last, proved yourself somehow *not* a ridiculous liar, with the above. -
-
Re: well played, maestro
Sat, September 26, 2009 - 8:25 AMYEP .
And all the sarcasm you display, Lokifreign , does NOT gainsay how the absolutist ideology espoused by some of my friends and I espouse is based on philosophy and sound analysis . -
-
A very telling statement from Loki :the relativist adversary of Truth and Beauty
Sat, September 26, 2009 - 8:42 AMThe beauty in your mind is not 'alive' - it's static, and safe<--------direct quote from Lokifreign .
Get a load of the statement above from Loki . Notice how he disparages the static and safe ! Since when does something having the characteristic of safety make it less beautiful or NON-beautiful ????
Thus we can see the postmodern ethos of Loki prizes an abandon ; a lack of safety , a LACK of order ...!
Very telling ....
-
-
-
Unsu...
Re: Loki puts forth more relativist TRASH ! Trash the ideology and lifestyle of LOKI --hipster TRASH !
Sat, September 26, 2009 - 12:29 AMNihilist just means we'll leave you. Can you remember where to put it in? -
-
Unsu...
Re: Loki puts forth more relativist TRASH ! Trash the ideology and lifestyle of LOKI --hipster TRASH !
Sat, September 26, 2009 - 12:38 AM
-
-
Re: Loki puts forth more relativist TRASH ! Trash the ideology and lifestyle of LOKI --hipster TRASH !
Sun, September 27, 2009 - 7:10 AM<< Your logic is non sequitir and specious, though; if you wish to discuss it you'll have to make a coherent sentence that has something to do with the discussion. >>
I agree. It's like trying to debate a bucket of house paint.
<< You're a failure at philosophy *because* you are afraid of the truth. Philo is not for cowards. >>
Ideology, on the other hand, is expressly designed with human cowardice and weakness in mind.
<< You reject logic and intentionally tolerate ambiguity . You have called Plato a liar . >>
That makes him a "relativist"? Or simply one who has read Plato with insufficient reverence?
<< You are against philosophy. True philosophy hates ambiguity / hates ambivalent thinking . You support ambiguity/ you support ambivalent thinking . >>
Then the God of the Bible might well be an arch-relativist!
One of my favorite OT passages-
[1] For all this I considered in my heart even to declare all this, that the righteous, and the wise, and their works, are in the hand of God: no man knoweth either love or hatred by all that is before them.
[2] All things come alike to all: there is one event to the righteous, and to the wicked; to the good and to the clean, and to the unclean; to him that sacrificeth, and to him that sacrificeth not: as is the good, so is the sinner; and he that sweareth, as he that feareth an oath.
[3] This is an evil among all things that are done under the sun, that there is one event unto all: yea, also the heart of the sons of men is full of evil, and madness is in their heart while they live, and after that they go to the dead.
[4] For to him that is joined to all the living there is hope: for a living dog is better than a dead lion.
[5] For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten.
[6] Also their love, and their hatred, and their envy, is now perished; neither have they any more a portion for ever in any thing that is done under the sun.
[7] Go thy way, eat thy bread with joy, and drink thy wine with a merry heart; for God now accepteth thy works.
[8] Let thy garments be always white; and let thy head lack no ointment.
[9] Live joyfully with the wife whom thou lovest all the days of the life of thy vanity, which he hath given thee under the sun, all the days of thy vanity: for that is thy portion in this life, and in thy labour which thou takest under the sun.
[10] Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest.
[11] I returned, and saw under the sun, that the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favour to men of skill; but time and chance happeneth to them all.
Ecclesiastes 9.
Pit yourself against that, if you will. -
-
Systematic exegesis please
Sun, September 27, 2009 - 8:08 PM<< You are against philosophy. True philosophy hates ambiguity / hates ambivalent thinking . You support ambiguity/ you support ambivalent thinking . >>
ROCKSTAR POSTED :Then the God of the Bible might well be an arch-relativist!
One of my favorite OT passages-
[1] For all this I considered in my heart even to declare all this, that the righteous, and the wise, and their works, are in the hand of God: no man knoweth either love or hatred by all that is before them.
[2] All things come alike to all: there is one event to the righteous, and to the wicked; to the good and to the clean, and to the unclean; to him that sacrificeth, and to him that sacrificeth not: as is the good, so is the sinner; and he that sweareth, as he that feareth an oath.
[3] This is an evil among all things that are done under the sun, that there is one event unto all: yea, also the heart of the sons of men is full of evil, and madness is in their heart while they live, and after that they go to the dead.
[4] For to him that is joined to all the living there is hope: for a living dog is better than a dead lion.
[5] For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten.
[6] Also their love, and their hatred, and their envy, is now perished; neither have they any more a portion for ever in any thing that is done under the sun.
[7] Go thy way, eat thy bread with joy, and drink thy wine with a merry heart; for God now accepteth thy works.
[8] Let thy garments be always white; and let thy head lack no ointment.
[9] Live joyfully with the wife whom thou lovest all the days of the life of thy vanity, which he hath given thee under the sun, all the days of thy vanity: for that is thy portion in this life, and in thy labour which thou takest under the sun.
[10] Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest.
[11] I returned, and saw under the sun, that the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favour to men of skill; but time and chance happeneth to them all.
Ecclesiastes 9.
Pit yourself against that, if you will.
RESPONSE : Please , Mr.Rockstar , provide systematic exegesis to highlight and explain how the verses in Ecclesiastes cited above evince relativism , instead of merely a pessimism about the drift of situational circumstance ...the latter involving mere efficient causes and certainly NOT formal causes that clash and go awry in a world of randomness and blunder ? -
-
Re: Systematic exegesis please
Mon, September 28, 2009 - 3:13 PMGood lord, man, that is such a tired dodge. Do you think it compels? No one is fooled by you - not even us other fools. Rebut or admit you never knew what you were babbling about. That you fail to understand the words you use the most often is apparent to anyone with half a brain. I realize that sounds cruel, but it's not anyone else's fault you're handicapped nor is anyone obligated to forgive your manners on the basis of your incomplete cognitive organ. You must learn to adapt to whole-brained society. -
-
Re: Systematic exegesis please
Mon, September 28, 2009 - 4:51 PMLOKI POSTED :Good lord, man, that is such a tired dodge. Do you think it compels?
RESPONSE: Since it is not a dodge , one should say that it is a sound argument .
LOKI POSTED :No one is fooled by you - not even us other fools. Rebut or admit you never knew what you were babbling about.
RESPONSE: Sound exegesis of texts is a must. One is obligated to present a parsing of the text if an interpretation of it is called into question ---or one must present some sort of semiotic data to back up the interpretation !
LOKI POSTED :That you fail to understand the words you use the most often is apparent to anyone with half a brain.
RESPONSE : Specifically demonstrate how you allege I have failed to use the words I use most often ?
LOKI POSTED : I realize that sounds cruel, but it's not anyone else's fault you're handicapped nor is anyone obligated to forgive your manners on the basis of your incomplete cognitive organ.
RESPONSE: I have NOT shown bad manners in the present message board .
LOKI POSTED : You must learn to adapt to whole-brained society.
RESPONSE: Scholarship requires what you call pedantry . Admit the following :
PEDANTRY=ACCURACY -
-
Unsu...
Re: Systematic exegesis please
Mon, September 28, 2009 - 6:36 PM"RESPONSE: I have NOT shown bad manners in the present message board ."
Show the adoption papers. I'm an adult, I don't need to be adopted. Adoption aborted.
-
Unsu...
Re: Systematic exegesis please
Mon, September 28, 2009 - 6:37 PMScholarship is the wish to teach oneself something. Pedantry is the insistence that one has that others must listen to what one thinks he has learned.
-
Re: Systematic exegesis please
Tue, September 29, 2009 - 4:52 PMJesus, Leary, you are a dimwitted asshat. Go suck a tailpipe. -
-
Re: Systematic exegesis please
Wed, September 30, 2009 - 11:07 AMLOKI ,
Here is an apparent quote from Bertrand Russell ,
'A PEDANT IS A MAN WHO PREFERS HIS STATEMENTS TO BE TRUE .'
You Loki, take a post-truthful relativist approach ! -
-
Unsu...
Re: Systematic exegesis please
Wed, September 30, 2009 - 4:19 PMSo now you quote a known atheist?
I think his atheism was mostly a defense against people like you.
Flagellate, flagellant. See if there is anything to merge with. Wasted life, huh? -
-
Re: Systematic exegesis please
Wed, September 30, 2009 - 4:45 PMJust because I quote him on that matter doesn't mean I support atheism !
Come on be more logical that .
Just because an atheist says 1+3=4 doesn't mean the statement is wrong because it is said by an atheist .
-
Re: Systematic exegesis please
Wed, September 30, 2009 - 4:58 PMouch; chuckle -
-
Re: Systematic exegesis please
Mon, October 26, 2009 - 2:09 PMSweetness. Sheer joy! -
-
Re: Systematic exegesis please
Mon, October 26, 2009 - 2:12 PMShit, don't you even say it! Hand up to Dan. Dan is real. C'mon!
I'm gonna be the biggest shitkicker you eva seen!
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: Look up what "Utopia" refers to
Fri, August 14, 2009 - 10:22 PM>>There are absolute Truths and Values that have NO shades of grey . <<
black and white... black and white... black and white...black and white.... Fire and ice... fire and ice... fire and ice...
Strict dualism.
Now... if you don't balance your sexual energies with a woman, on the largest scale, there will always be 'Unbalanced Force'.
At least from this limited perception. So... enslave all these maquiladora women that don't deserve husbands, in Mexico, China, wherever?
They... will... jerk... yer... chain... and that itself causes this dreaded masturbation you say you don't practice.
But they are not aware, you are not aware, I bet if all people were coupled to some degree, this might go away.
No... physical... contact... due to this endlessly greedy economy.
And so then the need for pornography... which people make money off of. And it gets more crazy all the time...
Here, let me give you an example from a current user:
touwatchdog.tribe.net/thread/...53497e0c
So, women in toto don't deserve physical love, without getting knocked up. Where does that lead?
Since no one wants to use condoms? Anger on every side of the sexual puzzle.
Fine by me. I leave.
-
-
Re: Look up what "Utopia" refers to
Fri, August 14, 2009 - 10:31 PM"No... physical... contact... due to this endlessly greedy economy."
AND YOUR FUCKING WARPED CHRISTIAN IDEOLOGY ABOUT THE BODY AND SEX!
IF YOU DON'T WANT TO BE HUMAN KILL YOURSELF. nOT WILLING TO FACE THESE PROBLEMS HERE, KILL YOURSELF.
Why the fuck do you want a human body anyway? So you can dominate others with your puerile trash?
Can't think, won't fuck, can't stop lying, can't stop telling others what to do, why the fuck do you breathe?!
Not like I don't think about it all the time. About the only way to get away from absolute rabid dumbshits, at this point. -
-
Re: Look up what "Utopia" refers to
Sat, August 15, 2009 - 7:18 AMNo... physical... contact... due to this endlessly greedy economy."
AND YOUR FUCKING WARPED CHRISTIAN IDEOLOGY ABOUT THE BODY AND SEX!
IF YOU DON'T WANT TO BE HUMAN KILL YOURSELF. nOT WILLING TO FACE THESE PROBLEMS HERE, KILL YOURSELF.
Why the fuck do you want a human body anyway? So you can dominate others with your puerile trash?
Can't think, won't fuck, can't stop lying, can't stop telling others what to do, why the fuck do you breathe?!
Not like I don't think about it all the time. About the only way to get away from absolute rabid dumbshits, at this point.
RESPONSE: ' Bring me a little water Silvy, bring me a little water now . Bring me a little water ,Silvy every once in a while. You gotta bring me a little water , Silvy every little once in a while '---LEADBELLY
-
-
-
Re: Look up what "Utopia" refers to
Fri, August 14, 2009 - 10:25 PM"Based on reality, I can posit that there will be no savior, no salvation, no redemption, and no 'ultimate' reward nor punishment for acts undertaken or contemplated."
I agree; except for the reward/punishment angle. We can't say yet. They want an end, give 'em an end.
BTW, GET THIS RELIGIOUS SHIT ON THE NIHILISM THREAD!!!
-
-
Re: Nihilism shall be (hopefully) overcome by an absolutist utopia !
Fri, August 14, 2009 - 10:14 PMdystopian , sexy thinking of you nihilists !
SEXY? You're never going to get beyond this 'Yesod' spoken of.
"new heavens and a new earth"
So, destroy the universe that your Jesus created? We haven't even used it yet!
"pedantry"
You can shove yer 'pedantry up yer ass! -
-
Re: Nihilism shall be (hopefully) overcome by an absolutist utopia !
Sat, August 15, 2009 - 7:21 AMMARL POSTED : SEXY? You're never going to get beyond this 'Yesod' spoken of.
RESPONSE: I don't want NO sexy .
Where sex did abound , the noise of a noisy world did also abound !
"new heavens and a new earth"
MARL POSTED :So, destroy the universe that your Jesus created? We haven't even used it yet!
RESPONSE: No, that's not what is meant. NOT destroy, Tend it like a garden . Renew it !
"pedantry"
MARL POSTED :You can shove yer 'pedantry up yer ass!
PEDANTRY IS GOOD ! -
-
Unsu...
Re: Nihilism shall be (hopefully) overcome by an absolutist utopia !
Sat, September 26, 2009 - 8:33 AMHow does one tend a universe like a garden? -
-
Unsu...
Re: Nihilism shall be (hopefully) overcome by an absolutist utopia !
Sat, September 26, 2009 - 8:37 AMYou gonna get your pitcher out and pour out some life on suns and planets?
I'll just use my raygun.
-
Re: Nihilism shall be (hopefully) overcome by an absolutist utopia !
Sat, September 26, 2009 - 1:26 PMBy implementing careful analysis and nurturance towards non parasitic living agents , Pirate .
-
-
-
-
-
-
Unsu...
Re: Nihilism
Tue, September 22, 2009 - 3:25 AMRead the OP again, please.
"Nietzsche used the phrase 'Christians and other nihilists', which is consistent with Christianity in general as Nietzsche describes nihilism, though as nihilism is now commonly construed, Christian philosophy is its opposite."
He considered faith in the categories of reason, seeking either to overcome or ignore nature, to be the cause of such nihilism. "We have measured the value of the world according to categories that refer to a purely fictitious world".[19] He saw this philosophy as present in Christianity (which he described as 'slave morality'), Buddhism, morality, asceticism and any excessively skeptical philosophy."
"'To the clean are all things clean' — thus say the people. I, however, say unto you: To the swine all things become swinish! Therefore preach the visionaries and bowed-heads (whose hearts are also bowed down): 'The world itself is a filthy monster.' For these are all unclean spirits; especially those, however, who have no peace or rest, unless they see the world FROM THE BACKSIDE — the backworldsmen! TO THOSE do I say it to the face, although it sound unpleasantly: the world resembleth man, in that it hath a backside, — SO MUCH is true! There is in the world much filth: SO MUCH is true! But the world itself is not therefore a filthy monster!