I’ve already explained this here and elsewhere, but I will try to explain it once again because trying to explain important things in as many different ways as possible is always fun.
We’re going to talk about cowardice.
Cowardice is the incapacity to accept what one is, what one truly wants, it is the incapacity to follow one’s instincts, to accept the consequences of one’s past decisions, including the decisions made by one’s ancestors.
Cowardice is the desire to reinvent oneself.
Instead of the real, the past, the instinctive preceding the ideal, the future, the reasonable, we now have the ideal, the future, the reasonable preceding the real, the past, the instinctive.
One desires to learn without making mistakes, to develop without making sacrifices.
Pretension: reason preceding instincts.
Hyper-rational folks such as iambiguous, phoneutria and Trixie do nothing other than this, the only difference lies in the way they do it.
Reason is no longer considered a process, no longer considered something that follows and works with instincts. Rather, reason is something one has to do before one acts.
No instinct is allowed expression because instincts reveal one’s reality, one’s inferiority.
When instincts become too overwhelming, too painful, too constipated, the brain either endures them through detachment or it fragments itself by attaching to a group of instincts it considers “good” in order to deny the remaining group of instincts it considers “evil”. The first endures chaos/pain, the second denies it through premature order/pleasure.
Bothered by its conflicting desires, the individual seeks a way to limit/deny some of its desires such that inner peace can be established.
This is repression, or desire not to desire. This is different from suppression in that suppression is a conflict between desires, not a desire not to desire. Repressing means creating peace, whereas suppressing means creating conflict.
Desires are limited/denied by something I call “artificial order”. Other names for it are “morality”, “thou shalt” and “memetic identity”. I prefer the former because it is more abstract (i.e. more general.) It is a set of “rights” that define what is allowed and what is not allowed. The opposite of artificial order is natural order which arises from one’s instincts.
Artificial order is always forceful because it is counter-instinctive, it denies instincts. But artificial order can be enforced by the other or self-enforced.
The easiest way to impose artificial order is physically, through simple reward and punishment system. In this way, the individual is distracted from his inner conflict, and for this reason, and no other reason, he is made content.
Women like to be treated like shit because it distracts them from their inner chaos. Though the experience is painful, they find it agreeable because it gives them the hope that their problem lies somewhere else. It allows them to get rid of responsibility by falsifying the reality of their need.
If a physical variant is not working, one can try a mental variant. One is no longer punished by the other, but by oneself. One simply has to learn what is good and what is bad and administrate punishment and reward accordingly. Christianity is a classic example.
Such an artificial order can be adopted from without or invented on our own. The more creative one is, the more appealing the second option is.
Drugs come in many forms, and one of these forms is the form which appears not to be a drug . . . this is the kind of drug iambiguous is addicted to.
It appears as if he has finally acquired the necessary courage to follow through his instincts. He rejects all authority on the so-called moral decisions and claims that such decisions are rooted in “dasein”. He can now do whatever he wants, whenever he wants, whichever way he wants, noone can stop him . . .
But is this so?
Has he freed himself from self-denial or did he simply move his “point of denial” from one place to another?
You see, social interaction provokes certain reactions in people. We don’t exactly know why, the reasons are too complex to be understood in entirety, and they vary from individual to individual, but it does and it makes people uncomfortable.
We are interested to know what other people think, we are interested to know what is and who is superior and inferior, but past a certain point, such genetically acquired interests become a burden and one is motivated to simply deny them . . .
One no longer desires to know what is superior and inferior . . . what other people think . . . these desires, very natural desires, become buried so that they no longer disturb us.
And then these retards proceed to call themselves independent and in tune with their instincts . . .
