New Moon Ashes

.
[/quote]
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: A Market Economy That Doesn’t Have a Social Contract
If the law didn’t forbid it, they might be trying out alternative projects, new styles of social economics.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”

quote=“Bill Wiltrack”

.

Some follow the philosophy of ethical hedonism.

Some sublimate their sexual energy.

Some practice the art of celibacy.

Have you consciously entertained any one of these philosophical disciplines?


How has sexual energy affected your philosophical pursuits?

Have you experienced any notable results in the field of sex and philosophy that could help any fellow members?

.
[/quote]
05-22-2013, 11:48 AM Post: #2
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: SEX & Philosophy [NSFW]
I found one of the greatest philosophical insights one night that I had shitty sex with a distasteful hooker, and still the next day the reality of the world itself was replenished.

As a more or less celibate person in general, I notice that sex falls into the category of freedom of approach, the freedom to act as one wants. It certainly thus negates the freedom of distance, the freedom to choose what one wants. Of course, choice is always bound in deeper instinct, the freedom of distance more recognizes and remembers than acts.

In other words, people that don’t get laid are free and intellectually superior, while people that get laid are pussy whipped and 10x the people for it.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-23-2013, 06:37 AM Post: #3
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: SEX & Philosophy [NSFW]
At bottom there is one type of energy, and where this does not release sexually, it needs to be released otherwise. The saying: “an intellectual is someone who has found something more interesting than sex” carries truth, but this appears fair to me only in the case where sex is at least partially exhausted in its interestingness, where it is known to a certain depth. In all other cases, the pursuit of sex needs to accompany philosophy - I have no respect for the attitude that justifies celibacy because it forces energy into the mind. This would deprive the pupil (that’s what I consider a ‘real’ man or woman to be - a pupil of life) of experiences such as the one named by Pezer, but also others, endless others.

When sex becomes ideationally exhausted, we get perversion, reliance on fetishes, ‘imaginative approaches to the deed’. Only an intellectually incapable mind can fall in this trap, as indeed sex itself is not an ideational realm, recognizing its roots in the primitive should be enough to understand this. Sexual energy however can be used, even if driven up as sex-force - base eros - to drill into fields of ideational potency, the creative mind, imagining facility. Sexual desire and philosophy are consecutive stages. And indeed it follows that the greatest philosophers were all more or less celibate. Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, Kierkegaard, Kant and also that Socrates, for whom sex was a normal daily business, was a relatively empty philosopher.

The crux however to me is that where sex is near, philosophy is most powerful. Wherever the possibility of fulfilling the potency is imagined, seen, with a good degree of vivacity, the poetic instincts in the philosopher really merge with the practical deep-chest-breathing that belongs to the real world.

The ‘real’ question, for a pupil of life, is: How does sexual energy transmute into thought? To ask this without the assertion ‘sex deprives of ideas’ is perhaps difficult, as the pain of facing an incapacity to get laid can be a strain on the thinking process and a threat to its honesty - so there is only one solution - hunt.

See mans powerdrive as two hounds - one lust, the other ambition. The intellectual is able to sublimate ambition into curiosity (the ambition of the mind) and the lover is able to sublimate lust into ‘style’ - cultural sophistication. The two meet in what is known as human power – wherever humans have exerted, displayed (Schopenhauers Will and Imagination) historical power, they have managed to both consummate and sublimate sexual urge. Life becomes a celebration of itself – and in such a philosophical orgasm man created marriage, and probably several other great institutions of humanity - War perhaps being the primordial one.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-23-2013, 10:07 AM (This post was last modified: 05-23-2013 10:14 AM by Fixed Cross.) Post: #4
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: SEX & Philosophy [NSFW]
A philosopher a man who transgresses himself. In order to do this he must harness the untamed passions, without compromising them, becoming “beast” but holding a perspective on truth. Then he breaks truth.

How does one harness untamed passions? A combination of skill and strength - how does one hold a perspective on truth? Fate – or metaphorically, blood (substance) and soil (circumstance).

Or, to speak with Machiavelli, “Virtù”.

[Image: FGDownBelow.gif]

“Become yourself” means “know your virtue”.
Spinoza holds virtue as adequate knowledge, which he, in his tomfoolery, holds for equal to power. This can only be true if knowledge applies to “all that matters is the quantum of power that one is, all the rest is cowardice”.

Exact knowledge of power is adequate knowledge.
“Clarity concerning hopes and threats”.

Even in the most genius intellect, this knowledge is only partially abstractable to become communicable, reason. The other part is Quality.

Every formula (and our man’s formula is: “a goal and a straight line”) is a vessel for a variable. This can not be named, this can only be applied, this is what, if you’ll excuse my French, “comes out”… and “seeds” - I would like to have a cup of tea now, with Aleister Crowley and his bag of pharmaceuticals.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-23-2013, 01:18 PM (This post was last modified: 05-23-2013 01:18 PM by JSS.) Post: #5
JSS Offline
Moderator
Posts: 287
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: SEX & Philosophy [NSFW]
Bill,

You have been hypnotized into lusting to fuck white women… end of story.

You have no idea why or how and you never will… but it has nothing whatsoever to do with philosophy, merely genocide from people much smarter than you.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-24-2013, 06:53 AM Post: #6
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: SEX & Philosophy [NSFW]
For me, sex produces happiness and a calming and lowering of instinctual disharmony and tensions. Like opiates, but not as potent of course. The body recedes for a while so that the mind becomes more free to just exist.

Sex is philosophically interesting in so far as happiness and instinctual-pathological organization and disorganization are interesting. And like Pezer said, there is also a distance involved, a factor of dispassion vs. impassioned living, which distinctions can be rendered more palatable or at least noticeable through the lens of regular sex or a regular lack of sex.

And like any drug, sex can also become an addiction, which is also quite philosophically interesting in its own right, of course.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-24-2013, 08:32 AM Post: #7
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: SEX & Philosophy [NSFW]
That is true, but it evades the concept of energy as value-propery: Eros. There is much more to be said. Perhaps what I say makes uncomfortable, I felt I was touching on a rather significant truth, one that philosophy often avoids - hence its worldly impotence.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-25-2013, 01:32 AM (This post was last modified: 05-25-2013 01:33 AM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #8
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: SEX & Philosophy [NSFW]
That energy you mention is so intricately and deepy divided into separating flows, sub-flows and counter-flows; much had been built now upo the separateness of this divided substance. I do not see how you mean to reach a state of singularity here with respect to Eros itself, regardless of our theorizing as to its inherent structural-property value to self-valuing.

Like the idea of god, this view only serves to open and sustain a certain kind of vantage, a mode of experiential possibility and (re)organization. But the set up is already what it is, we tweak it here or there only in the interests of better serving the needs of this set up, what emerges from its many layers and orders of causality-affectation.

I guess I find little value in reifying things too far beyond the reality of their property and existence, even where this serves some noble end. To employ these images (eidos) requires a certain naïveté for they to be effective, a naïveté that for better or worse I seem incapable of sustaining.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-25-2013, 02:41 PM Post: #9
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: SEX & Philosophy [NSFW]
JSS, I think it is moe fair to say that you have brainwashed yourself out of wanting to fuck pretty white girls. This is the sense in which sexual sublimation is weakness, one may fool onesself that one is bigger than sex.

It is like food and health nuts.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”

ll Wiltrack"
.

No biggie but I’m having a little trouble in understanding the one post directed towards me:

You have been hypnotized into lusting to fuck white women… end of story.

You have no idea why or how and you never will… but it has nothing whatsoever to do with philosophy, merely genocide from people much smarter than you.

quote=“Bill Wiltrack”
.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsJtiAVKIDc[/youtube]
[flash(0,0)]http://www.youtube.com/v/lsJtiAVKIDc[/flash]

Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: ~ Holy Thugs of Venezuela ~
Agreed.

I enjoyed it a lot, these spike docs are very good.

Humans need to believe in something…

quote=“Bill Wiltrack”
.

Sitting here in my eighteen year old truck parked on what the police call heroin alley. It’s a dark, damp morning.

I’m a dinosaur. I am old enough to remember three social wars in my country; the war on poverty, the war on crime, and the war on drugs. I need only step out of my vehicle and begin to walk in order to find out how these wars turned out.

Based upon the outcome of these social wars I got the feeling I know how our latest war, the war on terror is going to turn out.

Looking out over Martin Luther King Boulevard before I exit and walk to the last job in Cleveland, I remember a quote from the late, great Dr. Martin Luther King Junior, Everything that we see is a shadow cast by that which we do not see. Life-like figures emerging from the blackness, make their transactions, and then disappear back into the beautiful, sardonic park called Rockefeller.

The emerging blackness in our veins makes a transaction in our brain then disappears into the beautiful, sardonic park called high.

As I fall victim to the actors in this crossroads of wars I found myself in, I wonder, am I also the creator?

As we fall victim to the actors in the crossroads of wars we find ourselves in, I wonder, are we also the creator?

.
[/quote]
My thesis for this thread: This video is extremely telling. Especially towards the end. This video defines characteristics that are similar to ALL religions. Interesting. Deceptively deeply interesting…

.
[/quote]
Gobbo Offline
.:
Posts: 406
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 6
RE: EMERGING BLACKNESS
Black history month represent.
“I said I was going to get to your calls but…look.”
[/quote]

[/quote]

05-29-2013, 03:03 AM Post: #3
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: The Fifth Zeitgeist
The same, but gone through a purification. We are living the death of the Allah zeitgeist, and the birth of the Science zeitgeist. Don’t you notice that there has been tnesion from moment 1 between these forces? No synthesis has been, or will be possible.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-29-2013, 03:04 AM Post: #4
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: The Fifth Zeitgeist
Btw, well come.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-29-2013, 11:01 PM Post: #5
Ierrellus Offline
Student
Posts: 5
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 0
RE: The Fifth Zeitgeist
Thanks for the posts and welcome. I do like the idea of consciousness as the next zeitgeist. It appears to be a primary consideration in current science and philosophy.
I don’t think religion will go extinct. It seems to flourish in times of transition. In the West it has evolvedv from concepts of tribal dieties to deism, pantheism, panentheism, etc.
As for a science/religion synthesis, I believe it may be possible from a Spinozan POV; but, I’ve been told that Spinoza was actually an atheist.
We must love one another or die."–W.H.Auden
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-30-2013, 02:30 AM (This post was last modified: 05-30-2013 02:31 AM by pezer.) Post: #6
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: The Fifth Zeitgeist
Religion and consciousness, as you smartly put it, are at odds. Science can seduce the religious man by providing its obvious power, but religion, faith, has as a pre-requisite that you believe without understanding. Lack of understanding, which was the genesis of both religion and science, in religion becomes also a goal, a point of pride. From this, I believe, it follows that the more science progresses, and with it, understanding, the less religion is possible.

In this sense, yes, many will turn to Gods, but they will be retrogrades tomorrow as a monarchist is today. They exist, but they are considered odd wackos and obviously stuck in the past.

Of course, this is more of a mission declaration than a prediction; while religion can flourish almost anywhere, science and purely human consciousness take an inordinate amount of effort and intent.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-30-2013, 02:34 AM (This post was last modified: 05-30-2013 02:34 AM by pezer.) Post: #7
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: The Fifth Zeitgeist
Also, to make a more strictly Nietzschean point, specifically Christianity has a retarding effect on science, to alter its north and influence; not its outcome, but the very questions that lead to scientific investigation.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-30-2013, 05:23 AM (This post was last modified: 05-30-2013 05:23 AM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #8
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: The Fifth Zeitgeist
If you want to be technical about it, philosophy came before religion, or at least what we know of as religion today. The genesis of philosophy gave genesis to its (ab)use at the hands of mythology, birthing religion. Ancient religions in the East were more philosophies than anything else, the less impure combination of philosophy and myth. Religion muddied the waters.

In terms of a fifth zeitgeist, there may not be one – man has more or less exhausted his ideation, and (pseudo)science is doing a nice job of mopping up whatever might be left. I think the most likely outcome is that most people will become (re)converted into religious orders, science will more fully abandon philosophy and become merely the unthinking servant of fascist techno-capitalist control. I honestly struggle to see how any sort of authentic spirit of science or philosophy can continue to survive long in this world.

If Marx had lived today, he would have killed himself.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-30-2013, 12:03 PM Post: #9
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: The Fifth Zeitgeist
Fuck Marx, give me Kropotkin. The tragic spirit is the one that seeks victory even with the heart, even when it is denied one by appearances.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-30-2013, 03:35 PM Post: #10
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: The Fifth Zeitgeist
Here’s a good essay on this very subject, Crisis of the Mind, on what might come to be called the final diffusion of culture, to speak with Valéry.

“We later civilizations . . . we too know that we are mortal.”

beforethelight.forumotion.com/t43…of-culture
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.

05-31-2013, 01:02 AM Post: #11
Ierrellus Offline
Student
Posts: 5
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 0
RE: The Fifth Zeitgeist
We exist in a time that has been called the information age. We have split the atom and have sliced the gene. We have survived the death of the gods. We relegate truth to statistics.
All of this appears to have left a sore hole in erstwhile ideals that offer self-substantiation. Maybe there is no fifth zeiteist. Maybe we have to make do with the understandings we have.
IMHO,the evolution of a child replays evolution of our species (Piaget). The evoltion of the species replays the evolution of the child.
We seem to be in an age of transition.

I like Marx.
We must love one another or die."–W.H.Auden
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-31-2013, 03:20 AM Post: #12
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: The Fifth Zeitgeist
I like Marx too, but I’m not in love with him. He doesn’t see, doesn’t allow for life outside of zeitgeist. Zeitgeist is a phenomenon like any other, with a cycle, beginnings and ends, it is a mortal phenomenon.

In the end, we do have control. What’s scary about that is that we then realize that there are people directly acting upon our abilities to control certain important aspects of our philosophical lives. Mainly, and usually ultimately, the State.

Why has language stopped evolving in its bones?
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-31-2013, 03:31 AM Post: #13
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: The Fifth Zeitgeist
It’s still evolving, the question is rather, toward what? I see small signs, glimpses into what is coming- a more real, more fucking real power of language, man. But the death of forms, good and bad, is what clears away the space for the forms of the future. We can try to discern the subtler trends and smallest bits that are swirling and spinning in the evolutionary soup of modern logos. Also, we can create our own language, which is what I’ve been doing for about a year now, so far with great success.

The next stage is almost here.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
06-15-2013, 12:58 AM Post: #14
Ierrellus Offline
Student
Posts: 5
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 0
RE: The Fifth Zeitgeist
Are we entering what Chardin called the noosphere?

03-25-2013, 04:19 AM Post: #1
exzc Offline
Student
Posts: 13
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 0
Nietzsche General
So that Law of Manu in Nietzsche is pretty interesting.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-25-2013, 04:57 AM (This post was last modified: 03-25-2013 04:57 AM by pezer.) Post: #2
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Nietzsche General
Oh, yes…

It’s dynamite.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-25-2013, 09:57 AM Post: #3
exzc Offline
Student
Posts: 13
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 0
RE: Nietzsche General
It’s somewhat worth to keep in mind that Nietzsche’s source for the Law of Manu - some French douche - is thoroughly discredited nowadays. Nonetheless it’s much more important to note just what Nietzsche thought he found with it, namely the antithesis of Christianity. As codifications of ways of life they both preclude the possibility of new values, but whereas with Christianity we see the Chandala’s will to self-annihilation, in the caste systems we see an attempt at cultivating and perfecting multiple castes at once, all the while attempting to contain and eliminate the unwanted of the system. They both attempt to “improve” mankind, but one tames, makes man base, while the other elevates and ennobles. I’m of the opinion that you can read Nietzsche very literally when he speaks of a Christian will to nothingness, if you take him to believe, like the french douche Nietzsche read held, that the Chandala from the indian caste systems migrated and took with them - then further cultivated - the ethical prescriptions that were designed to contain and eliminate them in the first place.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-27-2013, 06:55 PM Post: #4
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Nietzsche General
I’ve been curious to track down Nietzsche’s French douches since I read him. I think I’m going to hit a library soon.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-29-2013, 06:16 AM Post: #5
exzc Offline
Student
Posts: 13
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 0
RE: Nietzsche General
Read Aphorisms 1 and 2 of the second essay of the Genealogy of Morals and let me know what you think of the ‘sovereign individual’.

03-30-2013, 11:09 AM Post: #7
exzc Offline
Student
Posts: 13
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 0
RE: Nietzsche General
What’s true?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-30-2013, 12:29 PM Post: #8
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Nietzsche General
Nietzsche was a philosopher of today. It happened, we clicked. It is now possible to realize the world of ideation for what it is, the whole of metaphysics,

all of living as a community

can now be re-appropriated down to the most honest land of experience. We know now how much of it is bullshit. Perhaps we are planning new bullshit!

The sovereign individual is the individual that suddenly notices himself dancing to many other peoples’ tunes.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-01-2013, 04:47 AM Post: #9
exzc Offline
Student
Posts: 13
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 0
RE: Nietzsche General
I have no idea what you’re talking about. I think you’re trying too hard to be profound. It was a simple question.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-01-2013, 04:50 AM Post: #10
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Nietzsche General
No question about Nietzsche is simple. In fact, that might be the only simple answer you get in the whole of Genealogy of Morals.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”

04-01-2013, 04:56 AM Post: #11
exzc Offline
Student
Posts: 13
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 0
RE: Nietzsche General
Hmmm so true.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-01-2013, 05:00 AM Post: #12
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Nietzsche General
'f you can’t stand the heat…
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-01-2013, 05:03 AM (This post was last modified: 04-01-2013 05:04 AM by pezer.) Post: #13
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Nietzsche General
Genealogy of Morals is a brick of dynamite. The fuse is reading it the whole way through, without wanting to be better than truth.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-01-2013, 05:06 AM Post: #14
exzc Offline
Student
Posts: 13
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 0
RE: Nietzsche General
3deep5me
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-01-2013, 05:14 AM Post: #15
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Nietzsche General
You like to keep score?

I guess someone should… Though, in general, it is those who love battle that loose count first.

03-22-2013, 07:08 AM Post: #1
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
Freedom from the Trap
Sun Tzu warned about leaving the enemy with no means of escape. The system has learned that, all systems have learned that a trap overcome is many-fold more transformingly powerful than a trap barely escaped.

So you are stuck facing integration to the system or ruin? No escape at all?

Let your fear of death focus into a beam. In evolution theory, we call this an addaptive pressure. It’s a source of power about X% of the time for those who approach it blindly, 100% for those who approach it with seeing eyes.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-22-2013, 08:57 AM (This post was last modified: 03-22-2013 08:58 AM by Q.) Post: #2
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Freedom from the Trap
I like this.

It’s true. Sometimes I am surprised by my motivation to do certain things, but then I realize that while I am fairly calm day-to-day, I am frantically trying to escape this thing.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-22-2013, 11:57 AM Post: #3
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Freedom from the Trap
I think it’s a measure of how much fun you were able to have and to what degrees as a kid. You learn power through fun, and I would extend fun to anything absorbing.

If you built up certain power, to then have it stiffled is a form of death. The very essence, almost, btw, of the christian dogma. To use it to escape the trap in a way not yet learned… Well, now that’s there what we do call evolution.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-22-2013, 11:58 AM (This post was last modified: 03-22-2013 11:58 AM by pezer.) Post: #4
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Freedom from the Trap
Yet I call even for more. I call for no escape.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-22-2013, 11:59 AM Post: #5
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Freedom from the Trap
Or, rather, I am suggesting there is none.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-22-2013, 11:59 AM (This post was last modified: 03-22-2013 12:00 PM by pezer.) Post: #6
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Freedom from the Trap
I am saying that in certain doom lies the ultimate optimism.

Ghost Town
It’s sort of funny coming here now that it’s a ghost town.

Hellooooo ooooo o

haha. All right time to do some work.

Also, I made my Pentad post for those that concerns.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
06-25-2013, 01:53 PM Post: #2
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Ghost Town
Something else is interesting:

Be careful of what you say. That is, I made an offhand remark about advertising, and now it has taken on a goliath life of its own. Pezer has literally run off to some South American gulag or something.

These things are highly fascinating to me. Perhaps that is why I make offhand remarks.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?

06-29-2013, 09:02 PM (This post was last modified: 06-29-2013 09:07 PM by Fixed Cross.) Post: #4
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Ghost Town
That was no vain remark.

It is quiet… in here…

let’s dance through these empty halls and chant
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
06-30-2013, 03:04 AM Post: #5
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Ghost Town
It was 100% offhand. Vain, or not.

It’s like some people are just waiting around to start hating stuff. It’s really that simple.

The ability to stay positive and actually like the world is something I have only seen in me and you, not even Tom.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?

RE: Ghost Town
psst. Wanna see something?

glutenfreeandfuckedup.com/
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?

I can’t fail to see their point as well. We can only give if it’s day in court to convince anyone. I’m quite confident, yet not entirely (philosophically) certain. Fairly, the burden is not on the disbeliever but on on advertising itself to prove that it can be a constructive and nourishing thing especially as there is little precedent… or? You and me share the professional capacity to produce a functional image. We can value the art of advertising in terms of our self-value (as artists, creators) whereas to people who do not have a passion for esthetic engineering (value-appearance-creating) can only relate to it passively.

To some the truth is only the actual, the immediately real. To others the truth a possibility with the potential of being negated by another possibility-- truth as something to actively engage from the idea that this is what it means to exist, that it is the only thing that separates them from nothing. For them: to be is to act. Here’s an interesting subset of the rainbow cosmic contrasts that may fit this situation.

makara.us/04mdr/01writing/01tg/tapestry1.pdf

07-01-2013, 05:35 AM (This post was last modified: 07-01-2013 06:23 AM by Q.) Post: #9
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Ghost Town
Quote:
The burden is not on the disbeliever but on on advertising itself to prove that it can be a constructive and nourishing thing especially as there is little precedent… or?

That’s all fine, but leave that in the argument. You know? That’s just something we’re talking about on a forum. Why should that matter with respect to what we’re doing here, or people’s propensity to be here in the first place?

Quote:
To some the truth is only the actual, the immediately real. To others the truth a possibility

I can accept that I am a creative, and others are not, and that for them certain values lie elsewhere. I don’t accept using that psychological distinction to make comments about what is ‘real.’ We are philosophers, for frig’s sake. We shouldn’t be thinking that way. We should be embracing each other’s strengths, and just using what we have to make what we want in the world.

That’s why the people actually affecting change the world, different branches of anonymous that actually do stuff, are all people in different positions of power acting from their strengths in coordination. It’s not anarchists with little-to-no technical training protesting on the street; it’s people in offices with double lives.

THE GREAT ULTIMATE FIXED
CROSS ORDERS ME TO DO HIS MENIAL WORK

BOOHOO

NO I AM HONORE
D
NJOW THIS PAGE IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION

SOOON WI

I

WI WILL HEAVE

Probably the best swords they didnt predict, the fire made them (make them).

This is goddamn genius.
Fuck the social contract.

Yeah so I would ask which elements these are.

Takers?

Tonight

Get up
Wake up
Rise -

New Moon in Scorpio

Life is what you make it nigga. Imma make it, no matter what it takes my nigga, we gonna take it.

  • Nas

User Control Panel 0 new messages View your posts
FAQ Members Logout [ Fixed Cross ]
Board index ‹ Arrow ‹ Science
Change font size
142857

Moderator: Perseus

Post a reply
Search this topic…
10 posts • Page 1 of 1

142857

icon_post_target.gifby Iona » Thu Jan 01, 2015 5:59 am

What happens when we converge 7 with the 9-wheel?

Two full cycles; 7x2=14, 14x9=126

142857
285714
428571
571428
714285
857142
999999 <—7th term
1142856
1285713
1428570
1571427
1714284
1857141
1999998 <— 14th term
2142855
2285712
2428569
2571426
2714283
2857140
2999997 <— 21st term
3142854
3285711
3428568
3571425
3714282
3857139
3999996 <— 28th term
4142853
4285710
4428567
4571424
4714281
4857138
4999995 <— 35th term
5142852
5285709
5428566
5571423
5714280
5857137
5999994 <— 42nd term
6142851
6285708
6428565
6571422
6714279
6857136
6999993 <— 49th term
7142850
7285707
7428564
7571421
7714278
7857135
7999992 <— 56th term
8142849
8285706
8428563
8571420
8714277
8857134
8999991 <— 63rd term
9142848
9285705
9428562
9571419
9714276
9857133
9999990 <— 70th term
10142847
10285704
10428561
10571418
10714275
10857132
10999989 <— 77th term
11142846
11285703
11428560
11571417
11714274
11857131
11999988 <— 84th term
12142845
12285702
12428559
12571416
12714273
12857130
12999987 <— 91st term
13142844
13285701
13428558
13571415
13714272
13857129
13999986 <— 98th term
14142843
14285700 <— ( 100th term )
14428557
14571414
14714271
14857128
14999985 <— 105th term
15142842
15285699
15428556
15571413
15714270
15857127
15999984 <— 112th term
16142841
16285698
16428555
16571412
16714269
16857126
16999983 <— 119th term
17142840
17285697
17428554
17571411
17714268
17857125
17999982 <— 126th term

The 7th terms create the integers moving +1 on the left side and -1 on the right side.

Only the 7th terms, and continuing for some more terms,

999999
1999998
2999997
3999996
4999995
5999994
6999993
7999992
8999991
9999990
10999989
11999988
12999987
13999986
14999985
15999984
16999983
17999982
18999981 <— 133rd term
19999980
20999979
21999978
22999977 <— 161st term
23999976
24999975
25999974
26999973
27999972 <— 196th term

Amazing… counting down on the right from 99, and counting up on the left from 9.

Not to mention the unbelievable gymnastics these numbers are doing to maintain their original 142857 form… I went into this in my main mathematics topic, but for a brief refresher:

142857
285714
428571
571428
714285
857142

These hold their form and merely shift around to place the first terms in order.

999999

Term hitting on the 7; principle point of reconciliation between 7 and 9 (the 7-form breaks down, giving way to 9’s only).

1142856

To break down these numbers from here on our, we must identify the core of the original structure first; in this case it is “14285”, then we see there is a 1 in front and a 6 at the end.

1+6=7

Thus we add the front number to the end number, arriving at the original sequence, this number is “142857”, the eight term is also the first original term.

1285713

Same operation here; 28571 is the core, 1+3=4 so this number is “285714”, the ninth term here is also second original term.

1428570

Not sure what happens here. The 10th term is strange.

1571427

The core is 57142, and 1+7=8, so this is “571428”; the 11th term is also the 4th original term.

Now you see the pattern, and can figure out these others too.

1714284
1857141
1999998
2142855
2285712
2428569
2571426
2714283
2857140
2999997
3142854
3285711
3428568
3571425

To pick out a tricky one, look at “3428568”

The core is 4285, which means that two numbers have been changed.

Follow the rule, we add the first and last terms, 3+8=11

Now we have “4285611”

Now introduce a new rule, which will work in all such cases: that two-digit number at the end is split down the middle, first half adds to the preceding term, second half remains where it is.

So we get: 428571, this is the 3rd original term out of the 24th overall term.

Easier way is to just add 3+68 in the original number, to get 71 to complete it.

Another example with this rule,

4428567 is the 31st term

Identify the core: 4285

Add the front and end terms: 4+67=71

Now we have “428571”

Based on the splitting rule,

4+7=11, "4285611 is “428571”
'Because I can make reality from dreams
if they can build the pyramids with no machines. ’

–Toki Wright & Big Cats, Apex

'And this is what self-aware smiles that make for comedic detachment refer to still - it is always to contemplate the nonsensical. All good things were ‘nonsensical’. No good thing fitted perfectly within what already existed before it. It became good because it changed the rest. ’ --FC
Iona
rta

Posts: 497
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 4:47 am
Top
Re: 142857

icon_post_target.gifby Iona » Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:12 am

To see how truly complex and unbreakable this number is, look at these further multiples.

11571417

Core is 5714.

11+17=28, thus we get “571428” again.

28428543

Core is 4285.

28+43=71, so we get “428571” to complete it.

A harder one,

713427858

There are two possible cores, 42 and 85. Let’s try 42 first.

713+7858=8571 …bingo.

We combine them and get “428571”.

Can you even believe this? Utterly amazing. Now I am going to go way way up the chain and break down a huge one.

2134426437 <— the 14941st term

The only possible core is 42.

Adding in from the edges inward,

2134+6437=8571

Bingo. It is “428571”.

This number cannot be broken.
'Because I can make reality from dreams
if they can build the pyramids with no machines. ’

–Toki Wright & Big Cats, Apex

'And this is what self-aware smiles that make for comedic detachment refer to still - it is always to contemplate the nonsensical. All good things were ‘nonsensical’. No good thing fitted perfectly within what already existed before it. It became good because it changed the rest. ’ --FC
Iona
rta

Posts: 497
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 4:47 am
Top
Re: 142857

icon_post_target.gifby Iona » Thu Jan 01, 2015 4:17 pm

I know now what that 10th term is doing. Every 10th term is merely taking the regular form and adding a 0 at the end. If the 10th term lands on a non-7th term then it will be a “142857” +0 at te end, if the 10th term lands on a 7th term then it will be a “999999” +0 at the end.

999999/8=124999.875
999999/7=142857
999999/6=166666.5
999999/5=199999.8
999999/4=249999.75
999999/3=333333
999999/2=499999.5

999999x142857=142856857143
'Because I can make reality from dreams
if they can build the pyramids with no machines. ’

–Toki Wright & Big Cats, Apex

'And this is what self-aware smiles that make for comedic detachment refer to still - it is always to contemplate the nonsensical. All good things were ‘nonsensical’. No good thing fitted perfectly within what already existed before it. It became good because it changed the rest. ’ --FC
Iona
rta

Posts: 497
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 4:47 am
Top
Re: 142857

icon_post_target.gifby Fixed Cross » Thu Jan 01, 2015 5:35 pm

Amazing,
Marveling I ended up googling -

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/142857_%28number%29
decisionsciencenews.com/2013 … ng-142857/

Man has not been lazy, mathematics is perhaps truly the place where man is at his most manly, dignified, exalted, least debilitated. Here, philosophy can be at home and cause unadulterated beauty.

Primes are of course real in the sense of of a ‘number of objects’ - thus in as far as the numbers represent amounts. Thus we get a glimpse on the reality of the number seven.

I think that 7 is the first true prime.
1/3 = .33333 and 120.
1/5 = .2 and 72
Both are extremely well dividable, 1/5 even yields the golden ratio.

But 1/7 brings not ratio, but number. That is why it is prime, no will to be weird, no will to be – it must be split up. Even light finds in 7 its breakdown.

1/7 is the unbreakable number. 142857 142857 142857 142857 142857 142857 142857 142857

I wonder which primes first form this number in sequence.

1 2 3 5 7 2 4 8 1 5 2 4 1 5 7 2 8 5 7 4 8 1 7 2 8 7 2 4 8 1 5 1 5 2 4 5 7 4 1 5 2 8 1 2 2 7 1 4 7 2 4 8 5 7 8 5 2 8 1 7 2 4 5 1 5 7 2 7 4 5 7 2 8 7 4 1 5 2 1 5 4 5 7 8 1 7 2 8 7 2 4

1 2 3 5 7 11 13 17 19 23 29 31 37 41 43 47 53 59 61 67 71 73 79 83 89 97 101 103 107 109 113

11329535961

Notice: 60 is the first 369 prime filler meat that appears in this sequence. It fits nicely that 60 is the combination of the 9 and the 10, being 6.66666 of 9 and 6 of 10, and .666666 of 360.

But I really wonder where the sequence of primes produces this number directly.
e a r t h

Natural selection of self-selecting natures
before the light
au moins & en plus
Nature must war so that we can live.
Fixed Cross
rta

Posts: 358
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2013 3:35 am
Top
Re: 142857

icon_post_target.gifby Fixed Cross » Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:42 pm

A look at some ‘meat right off the prime’ – 369’s squeezed in most snugly.

1 2 3 (5 7) (11 13) (17 19) 23 (29 31) 37 (41 43) 47 53 (59 61) 67 [(71 73) 79 83 89 97 (101 103) (107 109) 113 127 131 (137 139) (149 151) 157 163 167 173 (179 181) (191 193) (197 199) 211 223 (227 229) 233 (239 241) 251 257 263 (269 271) 277 (281 283) 293 307 (311 313) 317 331 337 (347 349) 353 359 367 373 379 383 389 397 401 409 (419 421) (431 433) 439 443 449 457 (461 463) 467 479 487 491 499 503 509 (521 523)

6 12 18 30 42 60 72 102 108 138 150 180 192 198 228 240 270 282 312 348 420 432 462 522

The differences:

6 6 12 12 18 12 30 6 30 12 30 12 6 30 12 30 12 30 36 72 30 48
e a r t h

Natural selection of self-selecting natures
before the light
au moins & en plus
Nature must war so that we can live.
Fixed Cross
rta

Posts: 358
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2013 3:35 am
Top
Re: 142857

icon_post_target.gifby Iona » Thu Jan 01, 2015 11:04 pm

499

49 is 7x7, 9 is 3x3

7x7x3x3=441

441-9=432

432 is 9x48, 48 is 8x6

‘888888’ x 9 = “432” , 432+9=441, 441+(7x7)=490, 490+9=499

499 is ‘prime’, yet contains plenty of divisions in itself.

The point is that it cannot be divided into “hard edged numbers”, yet the fluidity within the number is great. 498 can be divided by 2, by 6, etc,. but 499 cannot be divided by anything, according to the prime system. Yet 498 and 499 can each break down in many ways as I noted above.

So given what we know now about numbers, what is the true meaning of “prime number”?
'Because I can make reality from dreams
if they can build the pyramids with no machines. ’

–Toki Wright & Big Cats, Apex

'And this is what self-aware smiles that make for comedic detachment refer to still - it is always to contemplate the nonsensical. All good things were ‘nonsensical’. No good thing fitted perfectly within what already existed before it. It became good because it changed the rest. ’ --FC
Iona
rta

Posts: 497
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 4:47 am
Top
Re: 142857

icon_post_target.gifby Iona » Fri Jan 02, 2015 6:27 pm

Fixed Cross wrote:A look at some ‘meat right off the prime’ – 369’s squeezed in most snugly.

1 2 3 (5 7) (11 13) (17 19) 23 (29 31) 37 (41 43) 47 53 (59 61) 67 [(71 73) 79 83 89 97 (101 103) (107 109) 113 127 131 (137 139) (149 151) 157 163 167 173 (179 181) (191 193) (197 199) 211 223 (227 229) 233 (239 241) 251 257 263 (269 271) 277 (281 283) 293 307 (311 313) 317 331 337 (347 349) 353 359 367 373 379 383 389 397 401 409 (419 421) (431 433) 439 443 449 457 (461 463) 467 479 487 491 499 503 509 (521 523)

6 12 18 30 42 60 72 102 108 138 150 180 192 198 228 240 270 282 312 348 420 432 462 522

The differences:

6 6 12 12 18 12 30 6 30 12 30 12 6 30 12 30 12 30 36 72 30 48

So these numbers are being regulated by ‘spaces’ determined in 3’s, 6’s and 9’s.

Therefore we can think of the prime numbers as expressions of emergence from within an implicitly 9-based system, primes are instances where the system produces convergences in the medial spaces between these points. The prime numbers themselves, starting with 7 as you noted, indicate the beginning and end delimitation points in between which rest mutable 9’s.

Hm… with this in mind I wonder if we can construct something really interesting here. Looking at those spaces themselves, we might try to group them up. In what quantities should we group them? Let’s try building a magic square with them.

7 11 13 17 19 23 29 31 37 41 43 47 53 59 61

Spaces in between,

4 2 4 2 4 6 2 6 4 2 4 6 6 2

4 2 2
2 4 6
4 6 4

Because every prime must be an ‘odd’ number, numbers in between will be even.

A space of 4 means there is 1 number situated exactly in-between the primes on either side, with another distance of 1 situated between that middle number and its bordering numbers, like this

19 (21) 23

In between we have 19 20 (21) 22 23

42 rings the 21 within the larger guards of 19 and 23. We know that 19 and 23 are “end points” delimiting the medial space of fluid 9’s. So let’s see about this space directly,

20+21+22=63

6+3=9
6x3=18 (9)

63 is a 36 mirror , 6x6=36

63 is “six 3’s”

333333 , 3+3 x 3+3 x 3+3 = 6x6x6 (three 6’s) = 216

21 is 7x3, 6 is 2x3, that is “72”

Notice also how the “six 3’s” and “three 6’s” transpose into each other as above.

6+6 x 6 = 72

The investigation into the medial space bounded by these two primes 19 and 23 reveals a lot of interesting stuff. The primes are ‘4’ distance apart meaning there is a distance of ‘3’ between them (the three numbers 20, 21 and 22). The average of those three numbers is 21. We just saw “216” and “72”, both are 9’s.

Let’s examine another medial space, I will choose something at random from a large list of prime numbers.

587 593

Distance between is ‘6’. That means there are 5 numbers hidden in-between which should constitute the fluid 9-space.

588 589 590 591 592

590 is ringed by 589 and 591, which is then further ringed by 588 and 592

That is 21 22 14 15 16 , or | 3 4 5 6 7 |

5 guarded by “1” and “1”

Together all that is “25”, or 5+1+1=7

2+5=7

And 5x5=25 (7)

So this medial space is actually a 7 (another prime).

The last medial space was 63 (9), which is 9x7

7, as the first true prime, may be important.

Working with the original numbers here we get, 2950, 2+9+5=16, 1+6=7

Converging the numbers 2+0=2, 9+5=14 (5), “25” , 2+5=7 , also “214” (7)

Or we use the 0 mirror 2955 and get 2+5=7, 9+5=14 (5), “75” or “714”

7+5=12 (3), 7+1+4=12 (3)

75 is “7|14”

“714” is 7 and 7x2

2950/9=327.7777… or 3|27 and 7/9

27 is 3x9

That is also “12”.777…

587 and 593 are also 20 and 17, the distance between which is 3, or

17-2=15 (6)

And

20-8=12 (3)

So the distance is a hard 7 (prime), but a fluid 3 and 6 (9).

Since these primes are set up guarding a medial space of five numbers rather than three numbers, perhaps this has to do with how the fluid 9’s construct a hard 7.

Random primes I pulled, one pair with a 3-distance between and one pair with a 5-distance between.

883 887 (3 spaces in between)

991 997 (5 spaces in between)

884 885 886 is 21 (3) ringed by 20 and 22 , 2 3 4

2+3+4=9 , or 884+885+886=2655 which is “18” (9)

2655/9=295 (7)

This is really getting back to my former work with 2, 5 and 7. These numbers are a kind of self-repeating organic matrix.

Now we see that the 3-space, again, is a fluid 9. What about the 5-space?

992 993 994 995 996

That is 2 3 4 5 6

2+3+4+5+6=20 (2)

992+993+994+995+996=4970 which is “11” (2)

Ok I have a theory…

Primes ringing medial spaces of 3 guard fluid 9’s, but primes ringing medial spaces of 5 are actually part of larger x3 patterns as 5x3=15 (6) or x9 patterns as 5x9=45 (9). These are two patterns going on under the primes… if we analyze a large set of them we might find these patterns under the numbers. This is going to take a while, but hey, I have nothing to do right now, so let’s do it.

307 311 313 317 331 337 347 349 353
359 367 373 379 383 389 397 401 409
419 421 431 433 439 443 449 457 461
463 467 479 487 491 499

In terms of medial spaces, this is

3 1 3 17 5 9 1 3 5
7 5 5 3 5 7 3 7 9
1 9 1 5 3 5 7 3 1
3 11 7 3 7

Would you look at that… 3’s but no 6’s at all.

Every medial space is ‘odd’. The 17 and 11 were especially surprising.

Keep in mind these are medial spaces we are interested in here. The idea is that the primes are ‘guarding’ these medial spaces which themselves constitute fluid 9’s of some kind. The trick I think is to isolate a medial space and determine its center and the ring around that center.

[307] 308 309 310 [311]

309 (3) ringed by 308+310=618 (6)

[311] 312 [313]

6 with no ring.

[313] 314 315 316 [317]

9 ringed by 314+316=630 (9)

[317] 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 [331]

9 ringed by 318+319+320+321+322+323+325+326+327+328+329+330

9 ringed by 3888 which is 27 (9)

So far we are holding the pattern, if the center is 3 it is ringed by 6, if the center is 6 it has no ring, and if the center is 9 it is ringed by 9. Let’s see if this holds.

[331] 332 333 334 335 336 [337]

1 ringed by 332+333+335+336=1336 (13)

Oh this is an interesting one. Prime numbers 331 and 337 (7 and 4) guard a core of 1 with a 13 ring.

[337] 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 [347]

9 ringed by 338+339+340+341+343+344+345+346=2736 =18 (9)

The rule holds here, 9 is ringed by 9.

[347] 348 [349]

348 is 3+4+8=15 (6)

6 with no ring. The rule holds again.

[349] 350 351 352 [353]

9 ringed by 350+352=702 (9) , the rule holds.

[353] 354 355 356 357 358 [359]

3+5+6=14 (5)

Before I calculate this ring I want to think about the pattern we are seeing here, to see if I can predict it.

We found 1 ringed by 13 (4), 3 ringed by 6, 6’s with no ring, and 9’ ringed by 9.

The even part of the fluid 9, which is 6, is unringed, meaning it does not need a “substance” gathered around it within the guards… this might be a clue for us. If 6 is ringless then we see the primes are guarding a 6-space itself, meaning that “6” is the key. When a different number is being guarded as the core, a ring is constructed around that core. The purpose of the ring might be to insulate the number as a nest.

1+4=5
3+6=9
6+0=6
9+9=18

1 gathers a 4 around itself to create a 5-substance, 3 gathers a 6 around itself to create a 9-substance, 6 stands alone as 6, and 9 gathers another 9 around itself to create a 18-substance.

9 doubles, 3 triples, 1 quadruples (and 6 remains as it is)

1x4, 3x2, 9x1

Now we have a core of ‘5’. How could 5 fit into this pattern?

The only thing I can think of with that 1 (4) is that it is set in between two 9’s ringed with 9’s. The pattern 1 5 9 may be important here if we want to situate the 5 in all this.

We might theorize that the 5 will also exist within a 9 ringed with a 9, meaning that the next pair of primes 359 and 367 should be a 9 with a 9 ring; but what will 5 ring itself with? 1 rings itself with 13 (4), 1+4=5. So maybe 5 rings itself with 4, 5+4=9?

Let’s try it out.

[353] 354 355 356 357 358 [359]

3+5+6=14 (5)

5 ringed by 354+355+357+358=1424 (11)

Oh, we have 5 with a 2-ring. That is interesting.

1 (13) and 5 (11)

1 constructs a 5-substance, 5 constructs a 7-substance.

We’ve seen previously that 1+4=5 and 2+5=7 are very important aspects of the numbers. I want to see if these patterns hold. So far there are no exceptions to how the cores in-between the prime guards work with their rings, so let’s keep going.

[359] 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 [367]

3 ringed by 360+361+362+364+365+366=2178 (18) (9)

The pattern broke down, but we see something else interesting. 3 invoked 9 here. That is 12 (3) again.

So far:

1 rings itself with 4 (and 1 is also “5” as 1 is 9+1=10 which is 5x2, think about the number wheel and how 9 might split itself directly down the middle… it can’t, but with the addition of ‘1’ it becomes “10” and splits directly down to 5.)

5 rings itself with 2
3 rings itself with 6 or 9
9 rings itself with 9
And 6 has no ring at all.

I’m skipping ahead to a few more ringless medial spaces, to see if the 6 rule holds.

[419] 420 [421]

6 with no ring.

[431] 432 [433]

Oh look here, we have a 9 with no ring! This 9 is guarded by “8” and “1”, while the last ringless space 6 was guarded by “5” and “7”… before that we had two other ringless spaces 6 guarded by 5 and 7 both times!

All right, we have a new pattern to theorize about.

Prime guards of 9 can guard 9-cores with no ring, while prime guards of 5 and 7 (5+7=3) can guard 6-cores with no ring.

[461] 462 [463]

A ringless 3 guarded by 2 and 4 (6).

We have, in terms of ringless cores, 3’s being guarded by 6’s and 6’s being guarded by 3’s, and 9’s being guarded by 9’s. Fantastic!

I am going to try some predictive magic here, based on what I now theorize. Let’s find some prime guards that match these configurations and predict what their medial space will do.

1607 1609

These I pulled out because they guard a ringless space, and these guards are 5 and 7. Remember last time we had this set-up? It was with these numbers,

[347] 348 [349]

Where a ringless 6 appears. So we will predict that another ringless 6 will appear in these new primes 1607 and 1609.

[1607] 1608 [1609]

1+6+8=15 (6), we were right.

Let’s try another ringless prediction. 2711 2713 is “2 and 4”, have we seen this yet? Yes, we saw it above with these numbers,

[461] 462 [463] , a ringless 3 guarded by 2 and 4 (6).

Let’s predict these new primes I pulled (and have not analyzed yet) will give us a medial space of a ringless 3.

[2711] 2712 [2713]

2+7+1+2=12 (3)

Bingo.
'Because I can make reality from dreams
if they can build the pyramids with no machines. ’

–Toki Wright & Big Cats, Apex

'And this is what self-aware smiles that make for comedic detachment refer to still - it is always to contemplate the nonsensical. All good things were ‘nonsensical’. No good thing fitted perfectly within what already existed before it. It became good because it changed the rest. ’ --FC
Iona
rta

Posts: 497
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 4:47 am
Top
Re: 142857

icon_post_target.gifby Iona » Fri Jan 02, 2015 10:14 pm

Continuing with some random Primes I pulled,

6599 6607 6619 6637 6653 6659 6661 6673
6679 6689 6691 6701 6703 6709 6719 6733 6737 6761
6763 6779 6781 6791 6793 6803

[6599] 6600 6601 6602 6603 6604 6605 6606 [6607]

6 ringed by 6600+6601+6602+6604+6605+6606=39618 ← look at that.

The prime guardians in this case are “11” (2) and “19” (1). It looks like such minuscule guardians force that ‘6’ to draw a massively fluid 9-ring around itself.

[6607] 6608 6609 6610 6611 6612 6613 6614 6615 6616 6617 6618 [6619]

7 inside a ring of 6608+6609+6610+6611+6612+6614+6615+6616+6617+6618=66130

66130 around 6613… wow. 7 and 7. I was wondering about that “7” being guarded here. Haven’t seen that yet.

The guards in this case are “19” and “13”, 1 and 4. 7+7=14

[6619] 6620 6621 6622 6623 6624 6625 6626 6627 6628 6629 6630 6631 6632 6633 6634 6635 6636 [6637]

4 with a ring of 6620+6621+6622+6623+6624+6625+6626+6627+6629+6630+6631+6632+6633+6634+6635+6636=106048 (19)

You know what I think is happening here… these larger values require more substance between the guards. As the fluid 9’s are necessarily larger the higher the numbers get. Primes are points of absolute divergence from the 9-order. They are “sentinels” between which values flow organically. Thus primes are a bit “unnatural” or rather like passageways between worlds.

I still need to do that analysis of multiple medial spaces together, but that will take some time… if anyone wants to help.
'Because I can make reality from dreams
if they can build the pyramids with no machines. ’

–Toki Wright & Big Cats, Apex

'And this is what self-aware smiles that make for comedic detachment refer to still - it is always to contemplate the nonsensical. All good things were ‘nonsensical’. No good thing fitted perfectly within what already existed before it. It became good because it changed the rest. ’ --FC
Iona
rta

Posts: 497
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 4:47 am
Top
Re: 142857

icon_post_target.gifby Fixed Cross » Sat Jan 03, 2015 1:58 am

This is amazing, this is a kind of field theory. What’s happening… yeah the primes are indeed those beyond-existence vortex points, markers of ‘flesh’ the word keeps coming to me before I think about it, in which the fluid 9’s are, looks like, the most plasmic form whereas the 7 is the most unyielding, which is why it appears in those ‘deserts’ –

But this would give “8” a supreme importance below the surface. 8 would be like the contingent operations director. Where 9 is the formal justification and 7 is the ‘destroyer’ that follows the perfect order of 6. 9 is extremely exalted, but it can never interfere. It always brings everything to a higher level of itself. 8 brings everything up one level and back one step. This is a very solid mechanism, as the expanse is measurable in two axes without having to use transformations. 1 up is 1 down, yet work is done. 8 is awesome, but works behind the scenes.

17_19 - 71 _73 107_109

These are some very fertile 9’s.
18, 72, 108 -

I am guessing 7 points to “chaos” (and dancing stars) - “difference” and 8 to superior order - “repetition”… It’s hard to be against 8. But he is truly the reverse of 1. He is the thing that allows for will to power-economy.
e a r t h

Natural selection of self-selecting natures
before the light
au moins & en plus
Nature must war so that we can live.
Fixed Cross
rta

Posts: 358
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2013 3:35 am
Top
Re: 142857

icon_post_target.gifby Fixed Cross » Sat Jan 03, 2015 3:02 am

8 primes

17 71

difference:
54

27 27!

17 + 27 = 44

71 - 27 = 44

44 = 8
e a r t h

Natural selection of self-selecting natures
before the light
au moins & en plus
Nature must war so that we can live.

Becoming approaching itself as a thing – Valuing

tby Fixed Cross » Sun Sep 25, 2011 11:23 pm

Recapitulation of the beginning:

The primordial activity of all beings is self-valuation, and valuation of other potential in terms of its own self-value. From this follows the activity of being, balanced increase. Being, as a verb pertaining to all that to which this verb pertains, is composed of beings. But!

Existence is not included in being.
– Not all existence self-relates, is able to attract other ‘stuff like itself’ nor retains of itself a ‘form’ of any kind. Quantity without quality. Perhaps; lack of electromagnetism.

It is by a small accident that quantity emerged with a quality, and even rarer that it emerged as the very specific quality of self-relating – that is to say, having the capacity to attract more quantity on the terms of ones own existence – an element, a value.

element-essence-consistency-
what combines these is a quality which manifests as an activity, but which itself is not an activity.
What I propose is that we break this logic and say that element, essence, consistency is simply a type of activity, amounting to a form. A specific type-of-activity, i.e. the type that gives rise to form.

In general; Activity is nothing else than the presence of this emergent quality in a limited quantity of existence.

Consequently: we do not “act” in the proper sense – we enact our formula – what we call acting is what may also be perceived as stillness, consistency, quality – if we do not relate it to ourselves. Our own perspective is what calls for a notion of value, valuation – but if one would stand outside of it, all being is, is automatic value-attainment enabled to a specific, rather complicated, ultimately intelligent type of valuing.

Intelligence can be understood as being a result of valuation at the same time as a way of making valuation into a being. Intelligence, acting – both are implicit in being. When we say “he acts intelligently” we mean “he exists effectively”. When we say “he is intelligent” we do not imply as much - but we should.

An intelligent life-form is not usually how we address a lone creature dwelling in itself failing to procreate. On the contrary, we see group-mechanic, self-assertion as the ground of intelligence. So whereas the specific intelligence of the loner is often the key to strange and wonderful portals, the intelligence of the most successfully procreative being is ‘intelligence at its finest’. But procreation of humanity happens on different levels.
Last edited by Fixed Cross on Mon Sep 26, 2011 5:41 pm, edited 16 times in total.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.

  • Thucydides
    Image
    Before the Light - Tree of Life Academy - Thought of a Rune (film by Pezer)
    User avatar
    Fixed Cross
    Doric Usurper

Posts: 7887
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 1:53 am
Location: the black ships
Top
Re: “being” approaching itself as a notion – Value
Unread postby von Rivers » Sun Sep 25, 2011 11:50 pm

recapitulation of the beginning:

The primordial activity of all beings is sex, and masturbation of other potential in terms of its own porn-collection. From this follows the activity of being, bumping nasties. Being, as a verb pertaining to all that to which this verb pertains, is composed of beings. But!

Existence is not included in being.
– Not all existence masturbates, is able to attract other ‘stuff like pussy’ nor retains of itself a ‘pussy’ of any kind. Plonker without pussy. Perhaps; lack of horniness.

It is no real accident that plonker emerges with a pussy, and even commoner that it emergers as the very specific quality of jerking off – that is to say, having the capacity to attract more pussy on the terms of how much it spends on dinner – the bill, a payment.

sex-porn-consistency-
what combines these is a plonker which manifests as an erection, but which itself is not an activity.
What I propose is that we use this logic and say that sex, porn, consistency is simply a type of sex, amounting to blowing a load. A specific type-of-activity, i.e., the type that gives rise to babies.

In general; Sex is nothing else than the presence of this emergent load in a limited quantity of pussy.
Last edited by von Rivers on Tue Sep 27, 2011 5:09 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
von Rivers
ILP Legend

Posts: 5792
Joined: Sun May 09, 2004 5:24 am
Top
Re: “being” approaching itself as a notion – Value
Unread postby Fixed Cross » Sun Sep 25, 2011 11:54 pm

Monooq wrote:
recapitulation

The primordial activity of all beings is sex, and masturbation of other potential in terms of its own porn-collection. From this follows the activity of being, bumping nasties. Being, as a verb pertaining to all that to which this verb pertains, is composed of beings. But!

Existence is not included in being.
– Not all existence masturbates, is able to attract other ‘stuff like pussy’ nor retains of itself a ‘pussy’ of any kind. Plonker without pussy. Perhaps; lack of horniness.

Yes! If that’s how it’s easiest for you to see it, it works in these terms as well.

It is no real accident that plonker emerges with a pussy, and even commoner that it emergers as the very specific quality of jerking off – that is to say, having the capacity to attract more pussy on the terms of how much it spends on dinner – the bill, a payment.

sex-porn-consistency-
what combines these is a plonker which manifests as an erection, but which itself is not an activity.
What I propose is that we use this logic and say that sex, porn, consistency is simply a type of sex, amounting to blowing a load. A specific type-of-activity, i.e., the type that gives rise to babies.

In general; Sex is nothing else than the presence of this emergent load in a limited quantity of pussy.

Not quite. Describe to me what causes the attraction to the pussy, and we’ll have the connection to your thread with the unfinished sentence, and what you are refusing to acknowledge there.
Last edited by Fixed Cross on Mon Sep 26, 2011 3:29 pm, edited 2 times in total.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.

  • Thucydides
    Image
    Before the Light - Tree of Life Academy - Thought of a Rune (film by Pezer)
    User avatar
    Fixed Cross
    Doric Usurper

Posts: 7887
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 1:53 am
Location: the black ships
Top
Re: being approaches itself as value
Unread postby Fixed Cross » Mon Sep 26, 2011 12:40 am

Value is a term to describe the mechanics in all areas of life, of being, of consciousness -
interestingly, it is also the seed, tree and fruit of the current financial crisis.

Value-theory has value at this specific paradigm-end. If the western world cracks down on itself, we – the philosophers - will know exactly why this was happening, and it will be able to absorb much of the disoriented, disorganized, randomly-valuing intellect around it. To build an economy, to rule a state through legislative logic built on sound axioms, to allow for art, for the greatest expressions of beauty - to gain health, power, endurance, - is this not all the product of vision?

Value and vision -
Arriving at the second stage of this philosophy,
the part where it begins to make more literal sense.

Nature likes to hide but I like to watch it.
It attacks from within and I like to watch it
It becomes me I become it I attack myself
and my watching has become predatory
Life is suffering, cruel selfconsuming
but to the attentive there is teaching
and knowledge, deep enough to resist
is able to convert energy into power
and power into control through cultivation
of those things that matter to good people
work, dining, a movie and sex.
producing physical or metaphysical value, consuming physical value, consuming metaphysical value, consuming the merger of metaphysical and physical values.

These are simplistic terms of ritual. Our life consists entirely of making what we do understandable - and thereby acceptable to us. We convert it to our own terms. Ritual is the original means man developed for this. Later, this became custom, and later even fashion. But ritual has always remained valid in its primal form.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.

  • Thucydides
    Image
    Before the Light - Tree of Life Academy - Thought of a Rune (film by Pezer)
    User avatar
    Fixed Cross
    Doric Usurper

Posts: 7887
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 1:53 am
Location: the black ships
Top
Re: being approaches itself as value
Unread postby Fixed Cross » Mon Sep 26, 2011 12:54 am

Vision and ritual
the mechanics of valuing and being of value
more and more we produce ritualistic visuals
and hold to them, depend on them
visual rituals, constantly, our life becomes it
where 20000 years ago, only the Shaman was
privy to this kind of mayhem.

The shaman suffered, disproportionately
he saw and endured
the others could remain blind

but as of recently
our eyes have been opened
in ambiguous accident
of government incompetence
non-being allowed
or caused - self sabotage

Spirit is life that cuts into life
We were witness to that spirit
the holy spirit - it’s sin, not against it, but committed by it.
The committing of it, the actual fact, the factual act
the moment of transformation of matter
to annihilate for a moment the belief
in a conceivable world. Cruel and evil;
Spirit does as spirit is in shaping the good and righteous.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.

  • Thucydides
    Image
    Before the Light - Tree of Life Academy - Thought of a Rune (film by Pezer)
    User avatar
    Fixed Cross
    Doric Usurper

Posts: 7887
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 1:53 am
Location: the black ships
Top
Re: being approaches itself as value
Unread postby Fixed Cross » Mon Sep 26, 2011 2:36 am

Another translation of valuing to sexuality:

“The chaste man, the true Knight-Errant of the Stars, imposes continually his essential virility upon the throbbing Womb of the King’s Daughter; with every stroke of his Spear he penetrates the heart of Holiness, and bids spring forth the Fountain of the Sacred Blood, splashing its scarlet dew throughout Space and Time. His Innocence melts with its white-hot Energy the felon fetters of that Restriction which is Sin, and his Integrity with its fury of Righteousness establishes that Justice which alone can satisfy the yearning lust of Womanhood whose name is Opportunity.” - [Aleister Crowley, Little Essays towards Truth]

But to focus on this is beside the point of value - it is an excess, marked to create a reference. Valuing to the top of our limited capacity is an art, and the only artform that makes a human happy, which I think largely means willing to procreate.

This willing to merge with the world that is philosophical conception is a specific type of self-valuing, born out of an intellect bound to its superiority to its teachings. Anyone who has been taught worse than they were worthy of has an advantage in critical thought, and an averse attitude to normalcy. We are critical of normalcy – the entire conception of being as chaotic, coincidental, deterministically understandable – this all has been assumed with great ease after the rewards of such belief proved to be powerful means to create powerful means to create powerful means, etc.

We are a utilitarian race, though sometimes we arrive at a reason for all this utilizing of means to attain the end of more utilizing. NIetzschean ontology has this as the highest race, the higher man and thinks he will be unique and short lived. We may see it as the necessity of evolution – because evolution has been newly explained. Specifically, self-valuing as primacy in determination of evolutionary direction means in human terms: vanity. Natures ‘vanity’ is what accounts for the deeply cleft differentiation between species.

Every atom has a tendency to be what we call ‘unique’. Only to be so found it must play a part in a greater whole. He must become a necessary, wanted, desired substance of a molecule. He must feel his value, and be dependent on it, for the ‘rush’ (enhanced energetic context) it gives him to participate in this well oiled machine of strong monads. So the world creates itself as increasingly delicate value-attaining systems, who by their increased momentum of the coursing energy remain stable.

Our culture has arrived at a point where the rush is eroding our very being – only a skeleton will remain of what was once our sceptic wise-arse culture. Only the criticism remains, what dies is the presumption that the criticism is the truth. We philosophers of the future do not mistakes our tool for the artwork itself.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.

  • Thucydides
    Image
    Before the Light - Tree of Life Academy - Thought of a Rune (film by Pezer)
    User avatar
    Fixed Cross
    Doric Usurper

Posts: 7887
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 1:53 am
Location: the black ships
Top
Re: Becoming approaching itself as a thing – Valuing
Unread postby aletheia » Mon Sep 26, 2011 6:54 pm

Glad I dwell beneath the mountains
Smiling in the darkest night;
Here of love are many fountains
Flowing daily free and bright.

Dismissal of the primal act inferred:

Birth of quality (from quantity), given into a form. Certain prescriptions of law account for the organization and interactions of these forms. Careful not to effect too much distance here: from where do these laws arise, are they called into their existing by the very act of formation? Or are they that which guides the possibility of this formation before it is? Empiricism and teleology meet here, somehow (not yet entirely mapped out). So return to the primal act perhaps: employing coincidence here appears as a veil, masking deeper truths, smuggling in hidden assumptions outside the purview of the system.

We start with an is. This has always been the only place to start. If that is so, what then is the meaning of asking “from where” of this is? Discursive refraction and loss of focus, it would seem. Light hitting the diamond thought and straying dissolving into meaningless darkness. Can we shelve the question of ‘from where’ for the moment? I think we must. Such questionings ought appear before us when properly called for, when these questions properly call us, and not as an immature and premature objectification in the service of abject maintanence through control as closure. Moreover, if finitude cannot be overcome then at a certain point this objectification MUST stray from itself and lose its potency.

Systems organized as structures hinged on the forward momentum of energetic controlled release. The ultimate vanity: to concern oneself with one’s own system in the face of the process itself. Only the most vain, most valuing and brimming with potential for power might attempt this. Ignorance is lack of contact with the destabilizing other; where structure militates against this contact structure serves the ends of the beings of which it is ground and form. For what is this ignorance saved, then?..

So might we not waste this potential on postulatings that contain no actual implications from which a future might be derivable? Crude object-hood being the last refuge, we might call to this nihilism rather than resist it as if it were worthy of our efforts of resistance, as if it had such power. Warping the unknown into the image of an empty known: the last attempt to maintain artificial closure. But we now have a goal that is able to subordinate this need for seeking refuge in the already known.

Next stage?:

Unifications of formal content sublimated into velocity; e=mc^2. Must release mass as potential for movement if forward inertia is to be maintained across bridgings to new territory. Alchemy might be necessary here. Divine archetypes just might contain enough force to provide a railing on which to cling as the storm approaches. But the longevity of these constructs is a serious liability if they lose coherence where stripped from their archaic grounds. Should we content ourselves with seeking to clarify into sight the vision of the next stage, or with forming the art of a new Century within which mankind might come to forge the images of new constructs capable of withstanding the g-forces of exponential acceleration? We have determined outselves to be VAIN enough; how then might we concretize that around which we allow our intention to gather?
‘The daemonic genius is the only thing capable of surviving the odds of existence versus no existence… because of what it empirically tolerates though fundamentally defying it, the deepest existence is satyrical. The grin on a primordial sailor, grim to all things human, his enjoyment in the uncertainty. He knows himself by this very factor. Valuing the uncertainty of the universe as an extension of oneself - this sailor is the primordial being.’ [Source]

Before The Light philosophy forum

User avatar
aletheia
Thinker

Posts: 693
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2011 3:56 pm
Location: Ethos Anthropos Daimon.
Top
Re: Becoming approaching itself as a thing – Valuing
Unread postby Fixed Cross » Tue Sep 27, 2011 1:16 am

Divine archetypes just might contain enough force to provide a railing on which to cling as the storm approaches.

Only if they are continuously understood, projected and perceived as continuously coming into being. Their power is in their spontaneous emerging, not in their intellectual truth. Understanding not as embedding a routine conception to represent some generalization, but as a more comprehensive perceiving-interpreting, making use of perceived limits to ‘guess’, to induce, to create. The adoption of the scientific method has been such a self-manipulation, we must now make another step. Vision itself no longer hidden as observation, but cultivated as the act of valuing, and consequently, of seeing deeper, valuing greater. This alone is healing, this alone can save races from decadence.

But the longevity of these constructs is a serious liability if they lose coherence where stripped from their archaic grounds.

Therefore we construct these constructs from the ground up.

Should we content ourselves with seeking to clarify into sight the vision of the next stage, or with forming the art of a new Century within which mankind might come to forge the images of new constructs capable of withstanding the g-forces of exponential acceleration? We have determined outselves to be VAIN enough; how then might we concretize that around which we allow our intention to gather?

As order is being defined, a pre-order is continuously being manifested. Since from such fluid grounds symbols emerge, we must relu on the self-creation of mythical narrative, under our intersubjective supervision. Regulating bu the purposeful juxtaposing of different aesthetics as if they are elements – with the intention to create a higher value, as in alchemy.

it will be useful to construct plays, narratives, symbolic conflicts. Above all, we must cultivate what hatred we feel, no longer dissolve it. Hate is no longer a sin, it is a requirement. A measure of it – no all consuming hate of course, but a biting, poisonous, aggressive and unpredictable lashing out against that which is troubling us, rather than to lash inwards, as philosophy has always done. The philosopher may come out of his cave, out of his jungle - as once he came from the mountain as a civilized saint, we come out of our wilderness with much less innocent intentions.

Are we to succeed, we also will cause mockeries of ourselves – the resistance we seek to develop to the rapid erosion of particularity has to mean something primarily to us, who are resisting. By resisting we create meaning, we derive meaning directly from the inflation of meaning, we’re reverse-speculating, and in the long terms this is of far greater interest than trend-surfing. Trend-creating is done by defying the operational logic of our lunatic society – lunatic, lunar, tides, phases, rhythm – setting in a new one. What we might ultimately aim for is to orchestrate our financial world, which is now hardly controlled, wild pulsating of value-attributions, into something of a symphony, where newly springing trends are assimilated into the melody, so to speak.

Anno 2011 no human plays the cosmic drum, there is no shaman great enough for all of us – still, all modern music is an attempt at this stabilizing representation. What lacks now is an honest vision, or simply honest, deliberate vision, a projection of a relatively exalted future. Vision made itself known to our time for a decade, in the beginning of the second half of the past century, we should not underestimate this remarkable time in the history of vision induced by music, sex and intoxication. We must hark back, and re-understand those principles on a higher arc. Arriving at a matured understanding of what the lads back then intuited – “The music of the spheres” as we may understand the electromagnetic webbing forever impacting our nervous system, could be the infrastructure of a relatively calm economic pulsating; reliable, predictable, well sustained. Under such circumstances culture would thrive, a global culture could be possible. It is still the question if this is desirable enough, desirable over enduring violent conflict.

Art and war – we may learn still much from how such a temporary gazing into the half cruel half beatific truth of the times as occurred in the 1960’s, produced the means of vision and ritual. This reckless visioning is going to be the measure of our philosophy – can we surpass the LSD - generation in terms of compelling vision? Can magic truly be made to happen, as a result of a philosophical project? This is of course highly doubtful – but to solidify whatever potential is given is a first step. This brings us back to the ‘divine’ archetypes – divinity is built on archetypes, as is man. But since these archetypes are derived from man, we have forever te freedom to interpret them as we wish, as we see fit, as they serve us best. Our mind has limits, these limits are the root of our creative power. We should master the essentials. To construct according to physical ‘logic’, learning about necessity. We are bound to the limits of our presence. But these limits are the requirements of creative power, the aesthetics of increase.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.

  • Thucydides
    Image
    Before the Light - Tree of Life Academy - Thought of a Rune (film by Pezer)
    User avatar
    Fixed Cross
    Doric Usurper

Posts: 7887
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 1:53 am
Location: the black ships
Top
Re: Becoming approaching itself as a thing – Valuing
Unread postby Fixed Cross » Tue Sep 27, 2011 4:34 pm

aletheia wrote:
Glad I dwell beneath the mountains
Smiling in the darkest night;
Here of love are many fountains
Flowing daily free and bright.

Dismissal of the primal act inferred:

Birth of quality (from quantity), given into a form. Certain prescriptions of law account for the organization and interactions of these forms. Careful not to effect too much distance here: from where do these laws arise, are they called into their existing by the very act of formation?

If you ask me, there are no such things as laws, just tendencies. The idea of absolute natural laws will always be invalidated once it has taken hold again.

Or are they that which guides the possibility of this formation before it is?

No, I think that this is not the case.

We start with an is. This has always been the only place to start. If that is so, what then is the meaning of asking “from where” of this is? Discursive refraction and loss of focus, it would seem.

Yes, the question must be “how is what is, is-ness?” Being as an activity, as a verb. A particular type of activity. We might even propose that not all activity is being.

Light hitting the diamond thought and straying dissolving into meaningless darkness. Can we shelve the question of ‘from where’ for the moment? I think we must. Such questionings ought appear before us when properly called for, when these questions properly call us, and not as an immature and premature objectification in the service of abject maintanence through control as closure. Moreover, if finitude cannot be overcome then at a certain point this objectification MUST stray from itself and lose its potency.

I agree, we need to abandon the notion of origin in terms of time and space. The origin is entirely in the activation of a mechanism, and this is due simply to the possibility of it occurring. The entire big bang theory, as ridiculous as it is as an attempt at explanation, may be abandoned.

Not to state that there has never been a big bang, but to observe that the notion of it isn’t very helpful, that it is not very different from “God”

Systems organized as structures hinged on the forward momentum of energetic controlled release. The ultimate vanity: to concern oneself with one’s own system in the face of the process itself. Only the most vain, most valuing and brimming with potential for power might attempt this. Ignorance is lack of contact with the destabilizing other; where structure militates against this contact structure serves the ends of the beings of which it is ground and form. For what is this ignorance saved, then?..

For being. In first instance, for the understanding one himself.

Recent philosophy and morality has made it impossible for man to exist as a proper being – it places him in a context that provides no ground for being, only for disintegration, enslavement to greater forces at the cost of loss of identity, self-value. We seek to reestablish the ground of being in an intellectual form. This has not yet been attempted. We can not yet say what the consequences will be for the rest of the world – for us however it means for one thing, total freedom from the degenerate stupidity that passes for an intellectual conscience. It might mean the means to a great, enduring power, sufficient to ultimately reorganize human thought and politics, to work on morality, to reinterpret morality in terms of a profound understanding.

So might we not waste this potential on postulatings that contain no actual implications from which a future might be derivable?

What may be wasted on such postulatings is out time — and no doubt, much time is wasted in this way. But we can not waste the potential of the notion itself. The question is: can we exploit this potential? Are we smart enough, is our will strong enough, are we power-hungry and practical enough?

Crude object-hood being the last refuge, we might call to this nihilism rather than resist it as if it were worthy of our efforts of resistance, as if it had such power. Warping the unknown into the image of an empty known: the last attempt to maintain artificial closure. But we now have a goal that is able to subordinate this need for seeking refuge in the already known.

Yes – our only ‘refuge’ is the future, the increase of spirit, of power, of vision, of experience, that comes with rooting oneself in the understanding of valuing as the root of being.

To organize in these terms is quite another step, and it speaks to reason that this requires much experiment. But experiment requires boldness, and boldness requires confidence. I am confident that value-theory warrants bold experiment, that it will produce new methods to power.

We have determined outselves to be VAIN enough; how then might we concretize that around which we allow our intention to gather?

When the time is ripe, when value-theory has been sufficiently understood and experimented with, forms will begin to arise automatically. The imagination will be affected, impregnated, and as collective, democratic, shared, broken up, compromised, castrated imagination declines in influence, there is now an alternative for the doom-scenario of ‘1984’ – power may now self-organize philosophically, for which it never before has had the means.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.

  • Thucydides
    Image
    Before the Light - Tree of Life Academy - Thought of a Rune (film by Pezer)
    User avatar
    Fixed Cross
    Doric Usurper

Posts: 7887
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 1:53 am
Location: the black ships
Top
Re: Becoming approaching itself as a thing – Valuing
Unread postby Fixed Cross » Tue Sep 27, 2011 5:00 pm

WHAT HAS BEEN OVERCOME BY THE INVENTION OF VALUE-THEORY:
Nietsche wrote:
594 (1883-1888)

Science–this has been hitherto a way of putting an end to the complete confusion in which things exist, by hypotheses that “explain” everything–so it has come from the intellect’s dislike of chaos.–This same dislike seizes me when I consider myself: I should like to form an image of the inner world too, by means of some schema, and thus triumph over intellectual confusion. Morality has been a simplification of this kind: it taught that men were known, familiar.–Now we have destroyed morality–we have again become completely obscure to ourselves! I know that I know nothing of myself. Physics proves to be a boon for the heart: science (as the way to knowledge) acquires a new charm after morality has been eliminated–and because it is here alone that we find consistency, we have to construct our life so as to preserve it. This yields a sort of practical reflection on the conditions of our existence as men of knowledge.

This problem has been solved; by understanding the atom as self-valuing, physics has become accessible to the heart.

595 (1884)

Our presuppositions: no God: no purpose: finite force. Let us guard against thinking out and prescribing the mode of thought necessary to lesser men!!

The lesser man wants to believe in objectivity, in determinism, in God, anything besides his own, acute valuation of himself and the world in his terms. Only strong subjects are capable of working with this theory.

596 (1886-1887)

No “moral education” of the human race: but an enforced schooling in [scientific] errors is needed, because “truth” disgusts and makes one sick of life–unless man is already irrevocably launched upon his path and has taken his honest insight upon himself with a tragic pride.

Truth is seen to be less ugly as it was once assumed –
since every being self-values, there is no possibility for an initial ugliness, only for an initial aesthetics.

Nietzsche, while being co-responsible for this theory, has been overcome. At least his weaknesses have been overcome.

597 (1886-1887)

The presupposition of scientific work: belief in the unity and perpetuity of scientific work, so the individual may work at any part, however small, confident that his work will not be in vain.

There is one great paralysis: to work in vain, to struggle in vain.

Again, a fundamental problem that has been overcome. “In vain”, what does that mean? It means: not pertaining to objectivity. Since objectivity is now understood as derived from subjective valuation, the act of valuing (also: vision) is seen as the ground of being, and can not be “in vain” – existence is no longer arbitrary, “outside oneself” – no, it is our work!

In vain to perhaps to God - but not to us!

The accumulative epochs, in which force and means of power are discovered that the future will one day make use of; science an intermediary station, at which the more intermediary, more multifarious, more complicated natures find their most natural discharge and satisfaction–all those who should avoid action.

Yes, yes, and with us, this stage has passed! A more direct, less ambiguous, self-simplified nature is being created – a type to dominate, a type in which action is justified, a type which can only be justified by action – a types whose actions justify the world to itself.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.

  • Thucydides
    Image
    Before the Light - Tree of Life Academy - Thought of a Rune (film by Pezer)
    User avatar
    Fixed Cross
    Doric Usurper

Posts: 7887
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 1:53 am
Location: the black ships
Top
Re: Becoming approaching itself as a thing – Valuing
Unread postby aletheia » Tue Sep 27, 2011 7:40 pm

Oh, for the wonder that bubbles into my soul,
I would be a good fountain, a good well-head,
Would blur no whisper, spoil no expression.

What is the knocking?
What is the knocking at the door in the night?
It is somebody wants to do us harm.

No, no, it is the three strange angels.
Admit them, admit them.
‘The daemonic genius is the only thing capable of surviving the odds of existence versus no existence… because of what it empirically tolerates though fundamentally defying it, the deepest existence is satyrical. The grin on a primordial sailor, grim to all things human, his enjoyment in the uncertainty. He knows himself by this very factor. Valuing the uncertainty of the universe as an extension of oneself - this sailor is the primordial being.’ [Source]

Before The Light philosophy forum

User avatar
aletheia
Thinker

Posts: 693
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2011 3:56 pm
Location: Ethos Anthropos Daimon.
Top
Re: Becoming approaching itself as a thing – Valuing
Unread postby aletheia » Thu Sep 29, 2011 5:41 pm

Fixed Cross wrote:
aletheia wrote:
Glad I dwell beneath the mountains
Smiling in the darkest night;
Here of love are many fountains
Flowing daily free and bright.

Dismissal of the primal act inferred:

Birth of quality (from quantity), given into a form. Certain prescriptions of law account for the organization and interactions of these forms. Careful not to effect too much distance here: from where do these laws arise, are they called into their existing by the very act of formation?

If you ask me, there are no such things as laws, just tendencies. The idea of absolute natural laws will always be invalidated once it has taken hold again.

Yes; something is, and this existing implies a how, a manner(s) of existing. We can never exhaust this is, either through exhausting its hows or any other means. Understanding this frees us from the mistaken need to try to “know it all”, to derive the is.

Or are they that which guides the possibility of this formation before it is?

No, I think that this is not the case.

Yes, that was a bad question.

We start with an is. This has always been the only place to start. If that is so, what then is the meaning of asking “from where” of this is? Discursive refraction and loss of focus, it would seem.

Yes, the question must be “how is what is, is-ness?” Being as an activity, as a verb. A particular type of activity. We might even propose that not all activity is being.

You have made this point repeatedly recently, it is a good one. But there are those who define being as is, is as being; how do you address them? Re: Plato, for a thing to exist it must participate in the being-ness of its own being existing, a shared “being a being-ness” by all existant things by virtue of their existing. Of course we have already answered Plato, but the kernal of my question is: how, in your method, do we walk that separating line between (improper) metaphysics and (proper) ontology? Being tied to activity, to value, seems to be the way you accomplish this. Activity itself is not being, value is not being, because these are not universals “floating” or abstracted prior to their “instantiation” through some existant thing. But those things which act, which value, these may be said to be in possession of being…? We might see a gradiation of being then, a continuum from non-being (existant “things” which do not value, at all) moving to progressively higher being (things that increasingly value and self-value)?

Light hitting the diamond thought and straying dissolving into meaningless darkness. Can we shelve the question of ‘from where’ for the moment? I think we must. Such questionings ought appear before us when properly called for, when these questions properly call us, and not as an immature and premature objectification in the service of abject maintanence through control as closure. Moreover, if finitude cannot be overcome then at a certain point this objectification MUST stray from itself and lose its potency.

I agree, we need to abandon the notion of origin in terms of time and space. The origin is entirely in the activation of a mechanism, and this is due simply to the possibility of it occurring. The entire big bang theory, as ridiculous as it is as an attempt at explanation, may be abandoned.

Not to state that there has never been a big bang, but to observe that the notion of it isn’t very helpful, that it is not very different from “God”

Agreed. What needs to be abandoned is the fruitless effort to derive the is. Abandoning this then frees us for real work.

Perhaps this misguided need to feel oneself has derived the is in fact is only a veil utilized to keep one from coming into the possibility of a more mature and powerful self-responsibility.

Systems organized as structures hinged on the forward momentum of energetic controlled release. The ultimate vanity: to concern oneself with one’s own system in the face of the process itself. Only the most vain, most valuing and brimming with potential for power might attempt this. Ignorance is lack of contact with the destabilizing other; where structure militates against this contact structure serves the ends of the beings of which it is ground and form. For what is this ignorance saved, then?..

For being. In first instance, for the understanding one himself.

Being as saved ignorance, as the raw potentiality of this saved ignorance to explode upon a new future moment with tremendous (self)valuing power?

Recent philosophy and morality has made it impossible for man to exist as a proper being – it places him in a context that provides no ground for being, only for disintegration, enslavement to greater forces at the cost of loss of identity, self-value. We seek to reestablish the ground of being in an intellectual form. This has not yet been attempted. We can not yet say what the consequences will be for the rest of the world – for us however it means for one thing, total freedom from the degenerate stupidity that passes for an intellectual conscience. It might mean the means to a great, enduring power, sufficient to ultimately reorganize human thought and politics, to work on morality, to reinterpret morality in terms of a profound understanding.

It might happen. In fact we might go as far as to say it is inevitable given what we know of humans, human history and life on earth generally. But this inevitability does not preclude the possibility of a very long and painful transition period. Perhaps mankind must first move through the opposite of this sort of utopianism (purging the negatives within the perspective) before utopia becomes possible.

The notion of reincarnation might be useful here: individuals reincarnate through progressive lives in order to learn what they have not yet experienced, to grow in ways other than how they have in previous lives grown. Similarly the species man might need to continue to pass through what it has not yet experienced in order to evolve to a higher form. What remains unsaid poisons us from within, as you said. In this sense willing away the “bad” is a childish methodology that will have to be abandoned at a certain point in mankind’s history, whether intentionally or not, replaced perhaps with a calling to this bad rather than a fleeing from it.

So might we not waste this potential on postulatings that contain no actual implications from which a future might be derivable?

What may be wasted on such postulatings is out time — and no doubt, much time is wasted in this way. But we can not waste the potential of the notion itself. The question is: can we exploit this potential? Are we smart enough, is our will strong enough, are we power-hungry and practical enough?

Interesting. First I thought your statement false, that we can waste this potential itself. This seemed to me very obvious. Then I thought back on my own life and past, and realized this has never happened, even and perhaps especially when it should have happened, it didn’t. I believe you are right here, somehow the potential itself cannot be wasted, it is always there, always dormant. Does this imply that this dormant potential can always, in theory, be awakened? Of this I am not so sure.

Crude object-hood being the last refuge, we might call to this nihilism rather than resist it as if it were worthy of our efforts of resistance, as if it had such power. Warping the unknown into the image of an empty known: the last attempt to maintain artificial closure. But we now have a goal that is able to subordinate this need for seeking refuge in the already known.

Yes – our only ‘refuge’ is the future, the increase of spirit, of power, of vision, of experience, that comes with rooting oneself in the understanding of valuing as the root of being.

To organize in these terms is quite another step, and it speaks to reason that this requires much experiment. But experiment requires boldness, and boldness requires confidence. I am confident that value-theory warrants bold experiment, that it will produce new methods to power.

Yes. Heaven has been replaced with the earth, as Nietzsche wanted; now we must replace the earth now with the earth of the future. Even if this means sacrificing our now for a future (and it always does mean just this, does it not?)

We have determined outselves to be VAIN enough; how then might we concretize that around which we allow our intention to gather?

When the time is ripe, when value-theory has been sufficiently understood and experimented with, forms will begin to arise automatically. The imagination will be affected, impregnated, and as collective, democratic, shared, broken up, compromised, castrated imagination declines in influence, there is now an alternative for the doom-scenario of ‘1984’ – power may now self-organize philosophically, for which it never before has had the means.

Yes. This provides plenty of justification for us to immerse ourselves in the project of this moment, this gives us plenty and more than enough to hope for. The loss of faith accompanied by Nietzsche has finally been allowed to renew, stronger, more potent and more practical than ever.

“The work of the eyes is done. Now go and do the heart-work on the images imprisoned within you.” ~Rilke

beforethelight.forumotion.com/t3 … orld-ashes
beforethelight.forumotion.com/t3 … orld-ashes

Lol Hahahahahahaha I had forgotten Timón Echurroneo. Tf did I even come up with that name, seriously. Timón Echurroneo.

Sudden – There is no step between not-quite-right or just-right and overdone. That is why we die, there’s no surfing time itself.

Timón Echurroneo


Dfamn

December 22, 2012

Far Away

Mind is going in a million
places
Too far away for a single
presence
Lightning! Present! One voice is heard:
What is the next way to step?
WAR, my precious,
war for the living.
war for finding the places

Timón Echurroneo December 20, 2012

Life does suck – It is undeniable that this is the first principle of any analysis of the preexisting, of that which exists without action. If there is no struggle, living sucks. Do we really think that this hasn’t been an active pressure in the evolutionary development of our psyches?

Timón Echurroneo
December 19, 2012

That Safe Place in your Mind – El enemigo es ese, y contra él peleamos furiosamente. Por lo menos en lo que a lo que importa concierne.

Timón Echurroneo
December 19, 2012

Coliseo – La participación pública sólo se puede dar en formato coliseo. Debe haber reglas que indiquen quién puede hacer qué, cuándo y cómo. Así, cada quien puede traicionar al sistema de su propia manera y, eventualmente, rendírsele por completo. Es porque el formato coliseo establece puntos de referencia que le dan contexto jerárquico (jerárquico aquí en su amplio sentido que incluye las jerarquías abstractas, hasta de abstracciones) al proceso.

Tanto los espectadores como los participantes tienen claro cuáles son los elementos que no cambiarán pese a lo que se diga, normalmente establecidas, incluso, presuposiciones sub y semiconscientes respecto al resultado final por declararse (aunque éste no sea el resultado que importe).

Timón Echurroneo
December 19, 2012

(I couldn’t help myself… edited an accent that wasn’t properly added in the original).

Locura – ¿Qué es locura? Es las partes desheredadas de nuestro ser. Todo sistema tiene la necesidad de dar espacio a las partes desheredadas de sus sujetos, necesita poder ponerlas en cuarentena; más, es común usar elementos desheredados y el desheredo en sí dentro del funcionamiento de apego al sistema.

No es entonces un escape o alternativa pura, sino un experimentar de los residuos de la fábrica subjetivizante del sistema.

Timón Echurroneo
December 19, 2012


Wow there with the powerful psychoanalysis!

Historicismo de pensar en pequeño – No es Chávez, no es la oposición, no es el imperio transnaciona- no, bueno, sí es el imperio transnacional. Él es el mánager de lo que es verdaderamente enemigo de nosotros: la vejez y la estupidez. En sí, esas cosas son eventos naturales que no pasan de ser estorbos, lo vemos en los viejos estúpidos que nadie se toma en serio. Son las tradiciones, recuerdos de recuerdos de cómo recordar, las que inspiran a nuestra joven curiosidad con sus obscuridades lo suficiente como para complementar al condicionamiento clásico en la receta de cómo ser un viejo estúpido poderoso.

No nos engañemos: el racionalismo, todo lo que vino de la ilustración, también es tradición.

¿Argumento contra la tradición?

Timón Echurroneo
December 19, 2012


Damn, fuck, I went deep.

Pecar – ¿Por qué las iglesias necesitan tildar de “pecado” a todo lo que es grande y aventurezco? Es como si sólo el peso de algo igualmente grandioso lo pudiera aniquilar: el “mal,” que es poco más que “prohibido” con una cláusula de “mientras más preguntes, peor.” El miedo al mal es, tout simplement, el miedo al castigo. El juicio moral (por ejemplo) es estrictamente a posteriori.

Timón Echurroneo
December 19, 2012


Oh my Lord. I’m gonna translate this one.

i Sin[/i] - Why must churches brand as “sin” everything that is great and adventurous? It is as if only something equally great could annihilate it: “evil,” which is little more than “forbidden” with a clause of “the more you ask, the worst (it gets).” Fear of evil is, tout simplement, fear of punishment. The moral judgement (for example) is strictly a posteriori.

Hahaha, I hope promethean doesn’t read that last one.

Spunky as a pristine philosopher
Maybe an the age of Spanish philosophy is at hand.

an the age. I like that.

I mean, its not like there isn’t a bunch of shit to be done there.
Over there in the Spanish world.