News:

If they treat education like a product, they can't very well bitch when you act like a consumer.

Main Menu
Menu

Show posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Show posts Menu

Messages - Your Audience

#1
Quote from: LMNO on April 18, 2007, 03:11:09 PM
It only implies arrogance if he claimed he was the ubermensch, himself.  As far as I know, he didn't. 

You're right in saying it's not overt. It is only my own feelings for Nietzche's approach.

Although, it is still unproven, as far as I know, that his methodoligy works. His procedure for preparing for the arrival of the superman state (of being) is still incomplete. That's not to say that it couldn't work, just that we don't know, whereas Vipassana and Za Zen have proven results.
#2
Quote from: Cain on April 18, 2007, 11:28:29 AM
His "Superman" was never a biological creation, it was a spiritual one, as anyone who read Thus Spake Zarathustra knows, and despite how much Rosenburg wanted it to be otherwise.

I don't distrust his intentions. He does imply a difference between enlightened faith or the more mysterious 'knowing' and the constraints of the patterend ego:

. . . only in the <i>invincible faith</i> that this sun, this window, this table is a truth in itself, in short, only by forgetting that he himself is an artistically creating subject, does man live with any repose, security, and consistency. If but for an instant he could escape from the prison walls of this <i>faith</i>, his "self consciousness" would be immediately destroyed.

And yes he does state that the subject has to 'forget' his one-way metaphorical relationship to experience, and therefore exercise personal power from an enlightened state, but the idea of the 'superman' in a spiritual sense, is volatile and prone to missinterpretation. This is in part probably down to his writing style, but I also feel the whole concept betrays a certain arogance in Nietzche. Whichever way you look at it, the 'superman' or 'overman' is considered a superior being, better  than human. Yes, any real connection between Nietzche and Nazism is a mistake, as is any attempt to deny that he was anti-authoritarian and believed ultimately in self-law (Of the Superman). But he still projected a perfectionist ideal onto the future and created a saviour figure (personified or not), and in that is as guilty of nihlism as Christianity.

His writting and ideas are amazing, and I would tell anybody to read them. There is a lot that is good in Nietzche. But his Ubermensch still implies that we are not good enough, which in turn implies a slight superiority and arogance. I believe that should be noted.
#3
Nietzsche is thrilling and liberating to read, no doubt. I admire him for going to town on deconstructing the arogance of the enlightenment. But I'm always reduced to feel that he's simply replaced one arogance with another. Objective intellect is a falicy (excuse my bad english spelling by the way), but I instinctively feel that 'will to power' is as much an arogance. It was right of him to point out that the contemporary concepts of truth he battled with were validated simply by vertue of the 'truth holders' status and skill in  using the accepted linguistic metaphors, but instead of progressing to a more Taoist perspective of staying low and humble, like water, and not engaging with power mongers on their own level, he enflamed his own arguments and gave birth to that very aristocratic ideal of the Ubermensch. It is liberating to feel power, but if it is rooted in nothing but a 'subjective' self, then, as another great poet put it, 'the centre cannot hold'. You have the potential to end up with a crazy Hitler.
I think this is why some poeple call Nietzche 'conceptually permissive'. It's easy to get your rocks off on him but be warry what you spawn.
#4
Quote from: HBOMB on April 17, 2007, 07:51:15 PM
this statement from him struck me:

QuoteFor they must all bear within themselves the laws of number, and it is precisely number which is most astonishing in things. All that conformity to law, which impresses us so much in the movement of the stars and in chemical processes, coincides at bottom with those properties which we bring to things. Thus it is we who impress ourselves in this way. In conjunction with this, it of course follows that the artistic process of metaphor formation with which every sensation begins in us already presupposes these forms and thus occurs within them.

Quoteall this is completely and solely contained within the mathematical strictness and inviolability of our representations of time and space. But we produce these representations in and from ourselves with the same necessity with which the spider spins.

Is he saying we can't escape the numbers?  That by our own creation in numbering and the systems and laws they are relayed within we have bound ourselves?  Also that the metaphoric creation is possibly bound in this manner or that metaphoric formation is our way of escaping the numbers...or is it both?

Gettin hung up on numbers is as much a metaphoric creation as anything else. Then again, once you've identified the Law of 5s it's easier not be ensnared by it. But we shouldn't be complacent.
#5
Quote from: LMNO on April 17, 2007, 01:12:39 PM
Quote from: Your Audience on April 16, 2007, 10:41:15 PM
Quote from: Cain on April 11, 2007, 11:54:58 AM. . . metaphors which correspond in no way to the original entities.

That's the point at which somebody should have hit him with a barstool.

Speaking of metaphors that don't correspond to entities...

Come, come now LMNO. I don't want to be your barstool.
#6
Quote from: Cain on April 11, 2007, 11:54:58 AM. . . metaphors which correspond in no way to the original entities.

That's the point at which somebody should have hit him with a barstool.
#7
Think for Yourself, Schmuck! / Re: Unfinished notes
April 16, 2007, 03:25:55 PM
Quote from: triple zero on April 16, 2007, 12:37:53 PM
i think that just about anything can be used as a tool to break out of the Prison, when used with the correct intention.
but then again, just about anything can be a bar in the Prison, when you get hung up/stuck on it.

I think that's one of the most important things to try and get across.

I think this also ties on to the other thread (BIP content discussion) of what practical aproaches to suggest in BIP. The best practical approaches (Operation Mindfuck style) somehow highlight the 'activists' learnt responses to life, forcing the prison walls to become visible. As we're habitually inclined to choose to re-efnorce the prison while involved in the Machine processes, undermining our habbitual responses through "subversive" action in the personal sphere is a very potent "therapy".

I really do like this forum. It helps me have good thoughts. Thanks for the spring board, Cain.
#8
Think for Yourself, Schmuck! / Re: Unfinished notes
April 16, 2007, 12:07:46 PM
Quote from: Cain on April 09, 2007, 08:52:51 PM
Linguistics as a BIP.

People think with words.  Higher concepts can only be thought of through verbal means in particular.  However, language simplifies the world, removes the chaos.  Controls how thinking happens as well as what can be thought (subject-object framework).

Language can be expansive as well as reductive. Good poetry evokes a greater reality than what is presented on the page. Simple sentances, such as the koan or the haiku, can completely liberate the mind used with the correct intention.

The problem isn't language, it's our use of it. It's not the subject-object pattern of grammer that enforces the idea of a sepparate identity for the language user (although it afirms the habbit), it's the learnt psychology of the individual that has rationalised the sense processes (awareness of environment = separation from it). This is the great divide and the first map to be confused for the teritory.

Language simply conforms to our intent.
#9
You would need lot's of time on your hands for this:

Create a treasure hunt that leads to the pamflet.

For example, in a college/public library: In the toilet leave a sticker on the bog door with a memebomb, such as "Congradulations! you have found clue No.1. What the fuck you waiting for?", followed by a book reference for the library. In the particular book referenced leave another memebomb plus book ref and so. By following the refs (to really weird books) you finally come to the pamflet stashed somewhere sneaky.

This doesn't have to be in a library. It can be anywhare so longs as the clues can be followed.
#10
I read it and it's interesting but I think it could be better.

A few basic points:

I know it's probably been harvested from lots of different sources but I think the style should be more coherent. If you're going to address the reader as 'mate' then continue doing so (or not if I were you, didn't quite ring true). Maybe give it to one person and let them re-wright it in a consistent style. The TGRR interludes are good but you're gonna need more interlude type chapters from other 'characters' or just more from his good self for balance. Short paragraphs at the end of sections of just the very best stuff would work just as well.

If it's ment to be a collection of different 'posts' on a website then make it more obvious that that's what it is. At present it's an interesting read but with no structure, therefore very little focused impact.

For more impact I would try and engage the reader in more practical endeavours. The whole sprockets and widgets thing was intriguing but sadly wasn't developed at all. Go into detail, draw a full colour map! Give suggestions on how to fuckup the Machine's basic processes in the personal sphere.

As a structure, the philosophising bits could be interspersed with the activity bits for good balance.

There's a fair bit of repetition that needs weeding out and a lot of stuff talked around from similar angles. Better to make the point and build on it than waffle around the same point (which seemed to happen in the last few sections which should have been mor sprocket and widget stuff, practical info and aplications).

I think you could wittle the whole thing down to a third of it's current size and have a much more direct impact on the reader.

A more coherent style will ensure the message doesn't become diluted.
#11
Literate Chaotic / Re: Illuminatus! Trilogy
April 13, 2007, 02:19:31 PM
That wasn't my point, but yes you're right.
#12
Literate Chaotic / Re: Illuminatus! Trilogy
April 13, 2007, 01:47:21 AM
Mankind does instinctively co-operate; an individual generally does try and co-operate with the community at large. That's why state funded peer-preasuer and manufacture of consent are so succesfull.

Government and state simply take advantage of our co-operative instincts.

The idea that Government evens out the odds against the bullies doesn't sit right with me. It does but only for it's own citizens. The current style of Governemnt still maintains it's power through violence, it's only transfered outside of the official borders. While the wealthy decadence insures a fuzzy warm 'peace' on the inside, the state still relies heavily on violence outside to maintain the 'state'. That just aint right.

Anarchy is such a missused and throw away term these days. I don't see it so much as a political ideology as a necessary part of your soul. We may retreat into conformity and placid agreement more often than not but the spirit of anarchy is still a usefull and productive thing to feel. Trying to formalise like some an all inclusive self-sustaining political ideoligy was always a bad idea I think, and mainly misses the point.

Inconclusive I know, just a thought.
#13
Principia Discussion / Re: ITT: Famous Last Words
April 06, 2007, 02:29:03 AM
Not if your doll-gimp fetish is transmitting like a blairing car horn.
#14
Principia Discussion / Re: Ancient Greeks and Eris
April 06, 2007, 02:22:20 AM
Now I'm definatley going to have to rub one off on you.
#15
Principia Discussion / Re: The Barstool Experiment
April 06, 2007, 02:21:11 AM
Quote from: Idem on April 06, 2007, 12:52:52 AM
Quote from: Your Audience on April 05, 2007, 11:33:53 PM
Ok, thanks for the explenation.
Are you a Brit and/or a Vargyr?

I'm a Brit in the traditional sense of the word and I'm considering changing my name to Vargyr.