Aphorism 178

[Sauwelios]

Note again that I never turned against you, you turned against me. What I am against is your turning against potential allies, not you. You may look down on these potential allies, but what benefit do you have in driving them away? As, again, Nietzsche says,

"Where force is, there becometh number the master: it hath more force."
[Thus Spake Zarathustra, Of the Three Evil Things.]

This is what I have agaisnt what you call "potential allies".

Allying my self with Nietzsche, through you, is no potential at all. My relationship to him, as to anyone else, does not go through YOU and has nothing to do with YOU!!!

If an ally you seek, then speak with your own voice.

Why should I if Nietzsche has already said it sufficiently well? I have never tried to suggest that your relationship to him should go through me, or has anything to do with me. Though I may not be on a par with Nietzsche, at least I am alive... But perhaps I, unlike him, am just not your kind, and therefore not interesting to you. I can live with that.

Do you not want to---become master? If you don't, however, you are no bridge for me to the Superman. I will then take my business elsewhere. So kindly let me know.

Is not remaining true to one's nature the way to this ideal you call the overman?

Is that not what your dead master urges you to do?

If that were so, my remaining true to my (priestly) nature would as much be the way to the overman as your remaining true to your nature. Perhaps if the fool persists in his folly he will become wise. Perhaps the dedication you scorn is just my persisting in my folly.

The rest of your post is just thought-provoking (not word-provoking) to me at this time.

[Sauwelios]

What a hypocrite. Note that I never turned against you, you turned against me- out of nowhere.

Not out of nowhere. In my view you derailed a thread which I found important, with what I see (but apparently I am the only one? ) as utter nonsense, as I think I have shown in this thread.

[Sauwelios]

Wow Sauwelios. Nietzsche is literally your idol. You talk about nothing but Nietzsche. He is one of a hundred with whom I hold congress in the land of the dead... He would call you an over-sized, monstrous organ. For someone who takes his perspectivism so seriously you would figure you would have more real perspectives.

This must be another one of your 'jokes'. You talk about necromancy, and then tell me I need more 'real' perspectives??

As for Qabalah, I agree with Crowley:

The Qabalah, that is, the Jewish Tradition concerning the initiated interpretation of their Scriptures, is mostly either unintelligible or nonsense.
[Crowley, Little Essays toward Truth, 'Man'.]

Sadly, the same goes for Crowley's own writings in my view.

This correspondence is closed.

[Ascolo Parodites]

You aren't much of a Nietzschean after all, are you?

: "In the actual world, in which everything is bound to and conditioned by everything else, to condemn and to think away anything means to condemn and think away everything." (The Will to Power. p.316).

That is the essential tenet of cabalism.

[Sauwelios]

To not regard nonsense as nonsense: would that not be to think it away?

I have wasted enough time not regarding your nonsense as nonsense. If you really believe in it, however, I have wrongly accused you of being a fraud etc.

Maybe you are also just persisting in your folly.

[Koros]

Taking this to heart, and applying what you said in the other thread, these are my thoughts, Koros:
----

What do you mean they are your thoughts? They are Nietzsche's thoughts. You apparently don't have any thoughts.

Don't I, or don't I cloud them in metaphor trying to make them more than word-associations and pretentious dribble?
art, dear fellow, does not mask it exposes...and your "art" exposes you as a fake.

Explain it to me in Latin, because English fails you. Shall I go into Greek, to battle you?

Those that know of me know of my thoughts.

Clarity is what a true thinker seeks, not ambiguous claptrap, to hide the parroting and immitation.
If you follow more than one dead teacher then follow, for a while, Schopenhauer.
He had your number.

[Sauwelios]

Clarity is what a true thinker seeks, not ambiguous claptrap, to hide the parroting and immitation.

Thank you.

[Ascolo Parodites]

What I write is clear to me.

[Ascolo Parodites]

What exactly did I parrot, by the way?

[Ascolo Parodites]

It is funny that the line "a great thinker strives for clarity" came from the man who wrote Zarathustra. You and your master are so double-faced it is almost funny.

[Ascolo Parodites]

Why did Nietzsche fail every time he set down to outline his philosophy in academic terms. Why did he never publish the will to power- if we was a great thinker, if he had such clarity?

[Ascolo Parodites]

Taking this to heart, and applying what you said in the other thread, these are my thoughts, Koros:
----

What do you mean they are your thoughts? They are Nietzsche's thoughts. You apparently don't have any thoughts.

Don't I, or don't I cloud them in metaphor trying to make them more than word-associations and pretentious dribble?
art, dear fellow, does not mask it exposes...and your "art" exposes you as a fake.

Explain it to me in Latin, because English fails you. Shall I go into Greek, to battle you?

Those that know of me know of my thoughts.

Clarity is what a true thinker seeks, not ambiguous claptrap, to hide the parroting and immitation.
If you follow more than one dead teacher then follow, for a while, Schopenhauer.
He had your number.

Let me explain something to you, you insolent little weasel. I don't need your vindication. I don't need you to like what I write. I love the writings of Johann Hamann, or Robert Burton. They are like my writings. They are slow to digest, a lot of research has to go on, they are rhapsodies. You don't like that? I don't really care. I write exactly what I enjoy reading.


The point to my first post is the following one. From the initial experience of love- one in which all things are strictly interpreted on the basis of whether or not their sacrifice would bring eros closer to his object, the beautiful.. from this initial experience springs up an unaquit passion (once the ultimate limit of the beautiful is discerned, with eros's self-sacrifice in the name of beauty) that is nonetheless not registeed as pain- for it does not bear the usual salt for the old would of solitude- a wound in which formerly all pains were interpreted by the lover as healing salts, ie. eros himself is abnegated, who by this time has becoming nothing more than a vestigial organ perceptible of mere pain. I am talking about the entire dynamic of desire's self-abnegation.


Also, again I stress: what kind of Nietzscheans are you exactly, constantly deploring my word-play?

[Ascolo Parodites]

And the several Latin quotations were describing how this self-abnegation is not to be confused with the effect of woman herself: obsessions, seduction, extravagance, shows of power, etc.

[Ascolo Parodites]

So there you have it. I can break my thoughts down into 'English' if I need to. But I wanted real readers.

[Ascolo Parodites]

But "it is hard to understand another's blood."

[Peachy Nietzsche]

It is funny that the line "a great thinker strives for clarity" came from the man who wrote Zarathustra. You and your master are so double-faced it is almost funny.

sometimes, aiming for 'clarity' means that you have to simplify your writings so that they are more easily accessible and understandable for your audience.
As for the writing of Nietzsche's Zarathustra, this meant taking up the task of writing in a narrative, symbolic, and poetic manner.

As for your aphorisms, it seems that your writings are designed for an audience that does not exist - you seem to wish for a readership who will handle your thoughts with the utmost care; an audience that is awed by your words and treats them as a delicacy.
However, it seems that you have put your aphorisms on this forum while being fully aware of the fact that we will criticize them as being overly-complex and complicated at an unnecessary level.

When you translate the Latin and revert your sentence structure to something less rhetorical, it is no more complex than a children's book. Therefore, I must dismiss you, like Sauwelios did, as an imposter.

[Ascolo Parodites]

The point to my first post is the following one. From the initial experience of love- one in which all things are strictly interpreted on the basis of whether or not their sacrifice would bring eros closer to his object, the beautiful.. from this initial experience springs up an unaquit passion (once the ultimate limit of the beautiful is discerned, with eros's self-sacrifice in the name of beauty) that is nonetheless not registeed as pain- for it does not bear the usual salt for the old would of solitude- a wound in which formerly all pains were interpreted by the lover as healing salts, ie. eros himself is abnegated, who by this time has becoming nothing more than a vestigial organ perceptible of mere pain.


That is simple?

[Peachy Nietzsche]

"Love stinks, yeah yeah"
-J. Geils Band

[Ascolo Parodites]

Did I say love stinks? No.

[Koros]

It is funny that the line "a great thinker strives for clarity" came from the man who wrote Zarathustra. You and your master are so double-faced it is almost funny.

who said this comes from anyone but me?

so used to imitating, you are, that you asume everything is a quote.

What I write is clear to me.

Then post it to yourself.

Let me explain something to you, you insolent little weasel.

Is this kind of language allowed in a place dedicated to civil discourse, as this forum pretends to be?
No moderators now.

I do believe I've touched a nerve, somewhere deep inside your rectum.

I don't need your vindication. I don't need you to like what I write. I love the writings of Johann Hamann, or Robert Burton. They are like my writings. They are slow to digest, a lot of research has to go on, they are rhapsodies. You don't like that? I don't really care. I write exactly what I enjoy reading.

Is that a critique of your own "art"?

The point to my first post is the following one. From the initial experience of love- one in which all things are strictly interpreted on the basis of whether or not their sacrifice would bring eros closer to his object, the beautiful.. from this initial experience springs up an unaquit passion (once the ultimate limit of the beautiful is discerned, with eros's self-sacrifice in the name of beauty) that is nonetheless not registeed as pain- for it does not bear the usual salt for the old would of solitude- a wound in which formerly all pains were interpreted by the lover as healing salts, ie. eros himself is abnegated, who by this time has becoming nothing more than a vestigial organ perceptible of mere pain. I am talking about the entire dynamic of desire's self-abnegation.

See, that wasn't so difficult now was it, retard.

Perhaps abnegating the eros of narcissus that echos in your projections, is a good start.

Also, again I stress: what kind of Nietzscheans are you exactly, constantly deploring my word-play?

Am I a Nietzschean?

Let me display:

Absent are the lyre's of pan strumming across the water's of Lethe, still the boatman stretches his chiseled arms, like bows, singing in a silent voice:
"Ο καθε μαλακας ερχετε εδω να παριστανει τον σοφο...μα ειναι παντα μαλακας. "

Goat men rush to the silent sound, wanting to see what the fuss is all about, and find one more wretched dying manchild wanting to be what this age denies him the right to be.

[Ascolo Parodites]

Go try to think Koros. Come back with some thoughts and I will take you seriously.

[Ascolo Parodites]

Better yet come back to this thread with your blood.

[Ascolo Parodites]

All I see is people without their own philosophy coming to try and get their piece out of me.

[Koros]

Go try to think Koros. Come back with some thoughts and I will take you seriously.

A sure sing of a fool, is his inabiltiy to adapt to circumstances and to his audience, if a performer he fancies himself to be, or cannot adapt to the others.

You've obviously mistake this place for a place of thinking.
that was your first mistake.

My ideas, fool, are reserve for the places and the people that can appreciate them.

This is a place for fun and happy hunting.
A protected park.

[Koros]

Αλλος ενας ιλιθιος.