plain and simple: dogs are retards
Satyr,
Explain to me how love is built on a myth when it is either already in our grasp or at best within our grasp. Anyway myths are stories built on truths from real people and real feelings. How does love stem from only anxiety or fear when it is the one thing that we ALL really want? How does fear even come into the picture except for never finding love or for losing love? And, yes, it is beyond your time because years after you perish and there is nothing but ashes left of you, the love you leave lingers. The force of love can move mountains and change hearts, except (of course) if you are the Sequoia. It’s a spiritual thing.
Deep Sandwich
Clearly, you haven’t met my dog.
Bessy
And this need is why we must raise ‘Love’ into a transcendental concept.
But what is life without food: Suffering, hungry, desperate, emaciated, waning, weak.
What is life without water: Dry, parched, miserable, intolerable, distracted.
Not love, but your interpretation of it.
Love is a biochemical reaction with specific purposes and reasons of being.
Love as being beyond time is describing it as a God, a saving grace, that which will lead to redemption.
The universe calling to us: “Unite, unite, combine, if you cannot exist as separate entities or lack the power to become self-reliant, sacrifice singularity to the whole and create something else.â€
Love is beyond time and space?
Love is dependant on consciousness, it is the interpretation of a chemical reaction by the mind.
What lies beyond time/space?
Because “ALL†are living, conscious beings suffering with the same anxieties.
All want food, is nourishment beyond time/space?
All want happiness, in happiness beyond time/space?
This is getting tiring.
If you cannot figure it out from what I’ve posted so far, then just forget it.
I was wrong.
Love is transcendental, a power beyond time/space.
Yes it is true.
When the universe collapses on itself or burns out, there will still be love.
I feel better already.
Satyr
I am so glad. 
I do see love as transcendental where you see it as temporal as meatloaf and mashed potatoes - this is where we differ. I am sorry you find it “tiring,” but I see love as a spiritual thing - you don’t. You see love as a manufactured process that our brains made up to make us feel better about ourselves. I have said it before , if there is a God, I see God as that force of love. You see love as a temporal emotion like jealousy, or anger. I don’t. Guess there is no sense in arguing about beliefs, but you are not right anymore than I am right. These are your beliefs, and finding it everso tiring to listen to others makes me wonder why you are here. Because you are God? You, Satyr, are the all-seeing, all-believing force of nature?
Didn’t think so.
Arrgh - Satyr’s record is stuck again…
Yes - but there’ll be no little Satyrs unless you get your morose head out of your equally morose butt and start giving flowers to the pretty ladies… Oh, but hang on, those pretty ladies are the self same Harpies who are all trying to crush you into the ground with their evil, passive/agressive womb-witholding ways… Perhaps you’d better adopt…?
Strange way of looking over love and fear. Why do you think that Love is opposite to FeaR? Don’t you think, that person, who is in love with another person doesn’t fear? Or maybe man takes courage only when he is with his girlfriend?
Satyr,
I have a sincere question. Do you find all women to be disdainful? Only to be used for one purpose (if you know what I mean?)
How do you know when you find love? You just know it. It is beyond your sensibilities and chemical equations. “Unsupported hopes” you say? Maybe… but how very sad and empty if you are right.
nofearinc,
How do you see love? Only between a man and a woman? God? A force of nature? That warm and fuzzy feeling? A meatloaf and mashed potato myth? I see fear as of this earth dwelling only in the absence of love. Love, to me, is bigger - not of this earth. Then again, I am a dreamer.
Bessy, I look in love through many windows. Love between man and woman, between mother and son, love in the country, love in singer (idolizing) and so on.
Anyway, I agree about situations like in the movies - man goes to fight hundreds of bad men to save his love etc. But what about other fears - phobias? Can love make you no fear from your phobia, for example?
And, finally I want to tell that I don’t have opinion on this subject - fear vs. love, so I want to have conclusion after discussion.
Tabula Rasa
You mean as opposed to this oldie but goodie by Bessy:
sniff * sniff* ….stop it I’m choking up.
How wonderful the universe is to the inebriated.
The stoned mind cannot even imagine coping without its fix.
There are two ways to enjoy a party: one stoned drunk and the other…
And what purpose would it serve?
What purpose would love have, then?
I’m not “stressing†anything.
I am logically turning back time using the imagination and seeing which emotion would best serve an emerging life.
Which would be the first necessary chemical reaction, how would the mind interpret the anxiety of survival, which emotion would best describe this anxiety?
I can imagine the first primitive being feeling its first emotion of love and then being eaten by the loved one.
But fear, fear would keep it safe until beings became so complex so as to require cooperation to survive.
Enter love.
Where, exactly, did I urge anyone to “throw away†anything?
What conclusions you reach from my descriptions or how you deal with my definition of ‘love’ is your own reaction and has nothing to do with what I advise or think or would do myself.
If I describe death as the end of life with no possibility of an afterlife, this does not mean I am urging anyone to kill themselves.
Information is just that…information.
How one deals with it and what one does with it is a separate matter.
It’s unfortunate that most have spent their entire lives in a haze of romanticism so as to find any glimpse of ‘reality’ disturbing or morose or negative.
I wonder how awful a child feels when he is told by an adult that Santa Clause is a mythological construct meant to make Christmas more enjoyable.
At first saddened, then comes denial, anger, then depression, then, if it sees the illogic of its previous belief, acceptance.
nofearinc
I never said love was the “opposite†of fear.
This is how people’s reactions get confused for what I’ve said and words are put in my mouth.
I said love was a reaction, a countermeasure, an outcrop of fear.
Survival was the first and only concern for the first living entity. Fear became how it escaped threats and remained alert to dangers.
Later on, a leap of sophistication occurred, where this fear was placated was lessened, was defused through numbers which required a unifying, tolerating disposition.
Love came as a chemical reaction that enabled different entities to tolerate each others presence and as a way of cooperating and harmoniously coexisting.
In time, the natural unification process, which created multi-celled, creatures began creating multi-individual unities: species, herds, packs, flocks - in humans: groups, tribes, cities, nation-states and so on.
It was the meme evolving out of the gene.
No, I believe the fear is diluted through sharing.
Why is love only possible in a sexual context?
Cannot men love other men or women other women?
Bessy
Out of what context does that question arise?
Where did I say such a thing?
And here we come, once again, to the essence of the topic.
Is reality or ‘truth’ preferable to illusion and a partial reality or ‘truth’?
Which interpretation of reality is preferable to another?
No subjective thinking, based on fear, here folks.
Here we see how fear works insidiously behind every human thought.
“If this deplorable hypothesis is true, then how would I deal with it, how would I cope, what would that mean to my well-being and peace of mind?” the mind thinks.
“Better not even entertain such notions” it concludes – self-censorship, reaching an institutional level through multiple unities, comes forth to save the mind from its own thoughts -, better to not delve that deeply, better to remain on the surfaces where things are understandable, comforting, where solutions can be formulated and where Apollonian illusions can mask Dionysian horrors, better to remain in civilization, civil and polite, far away from the ‘Heart of Darkness’.
Better to just believe in what comforts and offers hope and justification and redemption.
And here we see the parables of Adam and Eve and of Silenus and many, many others, coming forth in a new light.
To bite the fruit of knowledge (wisdom) is to give up paradise.
One sacrifices happiness for power or one escapes ignorant bliss to find actual bliss.
The Hindus sought escape in the denial of both pain and pleasure. The conundrum of existence is escaped by denying it all.
Through this, they hoped, the cycle of infinite rebirth is ended and a final resting place is found in oblivion, in the Self.
If you want empirical evidence of how fear plays with the human mind, then reading Bessy is a good place to start.
She inadvertently and naively exposes the truth of the opposite with her adamant defence of her belief.
Watch how she fears life would become without her fix, without her safety-blanket:
Watch how love is made possible and how addictive it becomes to a species meant for social interactions and group living.
The need is mistaken for a purpose.
Her premise rests on her “spiritualâ€, distinct nature, as opposed to a “dogâ€.
Diogenes would smile.
Love, for her, is transcendent, beyond time and space; a God connecting her to eternity, making her life worth while and tolerable, offering her a way out of the inevitable.
It’s not that fear is destructive or negative, it’s that most cannot cope with it, it engulfs them, dominates them to the point where myths are the only way to find solace.
Fear is simply an emotion that facilitates a survival, just like hatred and envy and love and all emotions.
Fear is behind progress and action and creativity. It is the fire that spurns man into the unknown hoping to find the means to deal with the known.
All emotions participate in a union of consciousness, with the mind as the arbitrator.
To, then, imagine a being castrated from fear and anger and hatred would be to imagine an inebriated fool, smiling in that way drunks do, in complete obliviousness as to what is going on, unaware of danger, devoid of care and caution and respect, a retarded minion laughing and hugging and gaily running through the meadows …until a snake ends his ecstasy with a single innocent bite.
I, most certainly, am not God - only god-like - nor am I omniscient.
But it isn’t I who is claiming transcendent knowledge or absolute certainty or one-dimensional thinking, here.
In a world of warm baths and comfortable pyjamas, I thought it would be fascinating to see what a dose of cold reality would do to the drunken, fools safe in their cocooned universe.
‘Reality’ doesn’t care about us, about how we feel or how we can cope with what it is.
Reality is just what it is and if we turn away our eyes from its completeness, from its entirety, then we are certainly happy, in the short-term, but destined to fall victim to our own foolishness and cowardly naiveté.
Knowing what something is, does diminish the thoughtless pleasure in it – this is for sure – but it does not completely obliterate it nor does it lack a recompense.
One can still love, even though he/she knows what love really is.
One can still enjoy a rose, even when one knows it grows on manure.
If ever you are in a situation where things surprise you, where you are hurt and disheartened by people and events, think not that there is a flaw in human kind or in the world or in reality, think better that it was your own superficiality and one-sided desire to interpret things in accordance with what you wanted them to be, as opposed to how they actually are, think more that is was your denial of ’ the entirety’ of you turning away from the uncomfortable or distasteful, that caused your pain and surprise and heightened it and made it inevitable and will repeat it.
But, at least, you will be content until then.
What did Nietzsche say about Forgetfulness?
How I sometimes envy my dog.
So I guess that means I’m off your Christmas card list? 
b.,
but I see love as a spiritual thing - you don’t.
If I may add just a small thought that might bridge between “love is a spiritual thing” and “love is biochemicals in action”. By spiritual can we say, “that which brings bodies together”? Would not “biochemical” love just be an example of a larger bodies-coming-together process?
Dunamis
Of course, love between man and woman is not the only meaning of ‘love’, just was giving an example.
Btw this reminds me about wars- the subject of the war is always “For the country”, “For your children”, “For the President!”, so that’s love, they risk their lifes for their motherland, for example. That is love, too.
Dunamis,
You always have a way of centering everything just so. I appreciate you. Thanks - btw, I never took the bodies out of love, but honestly you don’t need them to have the spirit of it.
Gotta Love Satyr…*
…Sitting alone in a dark corner… But… “Watching the naive sheeple unwittingly enact their absurd rituals of self-blinding, re-scaling their eyes lest they glimpse the gaping abyss that is life…”
Did I get it right Sir…? Did I…? Did I…?
You’re putting a chicken before its egg here. You say the first useful emotion was fear. But to fear, you must have something, which you hold of value, to lose. At the dawn of days - Namely, your life. And what do we feel for those things we value above all else…? Love.
If a (sentient) being holds its existance of no value, it has no fear. No will to survive. The will to survive comes out of love of self, fear arises from that love of self. Love first, fear later. And as you spread those little wiggly/eggy parts of self throughout the world - you love them too - for they are but extensions of your self in space. Love grows, fear grows apace, but still, love first, fear later.
What purpose does love have…? Cohesion. Keeping shit together. In first cases, your own ass. In secondaries - the asses of your genetic kin/sexual partners. And at a tertiary level - your community - that which helps support your collective asses… etc. etc. etc.
Fear’s the opposite - it pushes things apart. Fear makes you good at running. Ever fought someone who’s desperately afraid…? They fight like shit, their brain goes out the window. “Love your enemy” say the religious types “Respect your enemy” say those more military - But, “Fear your enemy”…? those that said that, are dead.
Love first, 
anxiety later…
We’ve had this conversation before, and I’ve had it with others too… You use the same responsibility avoidance tactics as a purveyor of weapons - “Hey…Don’t look at me…! I just make the stuff…” 
It’s information without hope, it’s partial information. To whit:
Once again - just because some people such as myself, choose (please note active verb) the romantic, doesn’t mean your little tirades are something they haven’t already thought about. Two of your greatest crimes Satyr , one: You constantly underestimate your audience. And two: Your philosophy doesn’t evolve.
I’ve read quite a bit of you, on different threads and topics - you’re very happy to descend on any optimistic fluff, and hammer it flat with your tombstone syntax - “It’s all chemical - it’s all fear - it’s all selfish” And, you’re right to do so. But you leave it at that - a little gloating and poof ! You’re gone. Deconstruction with no reconstruction. All that intelligence, and you leave the job half-done.
It’s you who seems unwilling to see past your comfortable darkness, that though chemicals and the baser animalistic drives, lay at the foundations of many if not all of the fluffier emotions and illusions of life… This does not detract from them. Did the first mammals, after a few millions of years of wandering about on their new-fangled-leggy things, suddenly wake up and say:
“Hang on a minute…! - These legs are nothing but, but fins in disguise…! What a fucking con…! - Stuff this Hubert - I going back to the water - If I’m a Goddamn fish in disguise, I’m gonna act like a goddamn fish…! It’s, It’s somehow…Purer…”
If they did - they drowned. (Well - okay, except for the whales 
)
My point: Love, on a purely selfish level, preceded fear. Love, on a more transcendental hocus-pocus level arose out of that fear. Who knows what will spring up next…?
Turn yer head around mate, your words are looking in the wrong direction.
*Note on stress ie: “You gotta love Satyr” = Satyr - you have got to love.
b.,
but honestly you don’t need them to have the spirit of it.
You need them if you want to communicate with someone who has centered their conception of the world around bodies, in otherwords, in order to bring your “body” in relationship to that “body”. 
Dunamis
You envy your dog because your dog does not have to carry the suppressed emotions which years have put on you. Your dog lives in the now while you still live in the past.
Satyr,
I don’t want to get into psychanalysis. I’m not trained for it. I would certainly agree that all of us suffer illusion and self delusion. That said, I would like to ask: Other than apriori assumption, what makes fear the prime motivation? It seems to me that, regardless the logic, to say fear is our prime motivator is simply belief, an article of faith and a construct of mind without means of verification.
Your construct is well thought out, but it rests on the same foundation of sand as all theories of the nature of nature.
It would seem that Tab’s theory of love as the primary motivator is just as valid, even though it has no more verification than your views.
Finally, the issue comes down to the cup half full - cup half empty scenario. You’re welcome to see the world through your particular shade of colored glasses, but each individual has the same privilege. I can understand disagreeing with the views of others, (I disagree with yours) but it does not follow that you are right and others are wrong, and to suggest they are wrong simply because you believe them to be wrong, is the first wrong…
JT
Hey look somebody else has figured me out and now dismisses me as ill.
How….convenient.
How convenient that everything that frightens us or disrupts our contentment is the product of illness.
Imagine what it would mean if this wasn’t the case.
tgbvfr97531
What do you think?
Thanks. Let me write that down.
Purely as phenomena and parts of the human condition.
The personal stuff is all yours and for those who, like you, choose to avoid certain perspectives.
“Love vs Feat�
Now I can see how Love gets all the cheers.
I never presented this as versus.
I never said “Do not love†or “Love is bad†or “Love is evilâ€.
All I said that love is a reaction to fear and that fear is the original emotion in which all others are rooted.
If this shatters your delusions or disheartens you or causes you stress or destroys your already established belief system, that’s none of my business.
Philosophy isn’t about making others feel better or humouring the imbecile so as to not cause him/her pain or discomfort.
We aren’t here – or we shouldn’t be if we are – to comfort each other and pat each other on the back and intellectually hug each other or to make friends or to socialize. We are here to explore existence and to compare notes and views and opinions, we are here to test our personal perspectives.
We aren’t here to compare education levels or to interpret the words of others or to compare our understanding of other peoples opinions, although even this can be helpful if it does not become the focus. We are here to speak about our personal mental struggles with reality and to juxtapose them with another’s.
Exactly.
Therefore what is love?
What is fear?
Interpretations.
Of what?
The way I try to distinguish reality from illusion is by comparing it to an external source or an external stimulus.
We all create mental models of reality through the interpretation of sensual stimulations.
Depending on how accurate or precise these models are and depending how powerful our analytical abilities are we construct strategies and perspectives with the investigation of said mental models.
In turn we test these models, if we have intellectual integrity, with those of others and with phenomenal ‘reality’, with empirical reality.
The rule of ‘Survival of the fittest’ holds true in the battle between ideas.
We don’t tolerate a stupid idea, just because it might offend someone or cause them pain or embarrass them. This form of self-censorship creates the false illusion that all opinions are equally valid and worthy of consideration.
I never fully express my opinions.
I find speaking ones mind openly and completely and honestly is a sure way to get into trouble.
The sensible thing to do is to remain silent or allow the other to believe that you think as (s)he does.
This is why anonymous Forums like this are so helpful .Here one should be more open and honest with ones real viewpoints.
Yet, most minds are so indoctrinated intro social norms that not even anonymity allows for complete disclosure and their opinions are formed through social necessity.
Their perspectives have been formed through social forces, guided by communal morals and instinctual needs.
I just explained the process by which, in my opinion, fear came before any other emotion, as the original survival tactic.
If you can describe a logical theory which would explain how love would serve a primitive creature, then proceed.
If love is a leap in sophistication, in the survival game, then it most certainly came afterwards.
First the creatures must run. Then it strategizes or builds tactics.
Those are questions for the higher mind, questions a more complicated creature would consider.
In fact, as far as we know, no animal except man has asked it.
But if survival is not the primary concern then why love? Don’t tell me selflessness, I’ll puke.
There is no ultimate purpose to life. Life is a continuous process of self-propagation. Life begets life, life feeds on life, life is both dependant on and opposed to life, life is both predator and prey of itself.
The snake eating its tail.
In order for you to live, something else must die.
In order for you to eat, something else must not.
In order for you to find a job, someone else must lose one or be turned down.
So p-lease spare me the “selflessness†and lovy-dovy bull.
Deny it to yourself to maintain that conformity with your moral system, but don’t call it philosophy or thinking. It’s pathetic.
Because then there would be nobody here to ask that question.
The first living entity didn’t have the mind to have a choice.
All it understood, just like you, is need. It had no language to label it but if it did it would, just like you, call it feeling.
Is radioactive material alive? Is it conscious? Is radioactive material a chemical reaction?
You are a girl, right?
Replication is, again, a sophistication in the existence game.
I never attempted to define what life is. I attempted to define what love is.
But here is my take on Life:
Matter is a manifestation of the time/space continuum. It is space warped by time.
Perhaps matter is space at different temporal speeds or vibrations, such as in Superstring theory. The slower the speed the harder the manifestation of the material.
Perhaps it is space/time seeking out perfection or the most stable form.
We can therefore imagine matter in a constant flux, joining, separating, destroying, creating, forming and deforming in a soup of constant change.
Physical laws are simply the manifestations of these unconscious struggles.
I believe Schopenhauer described this process accurately.
Just like in evolution a singular mutation that offers an advantage is established and gains momentum, it is propogated. At some time, in this flux, a combination occurred where matter became animated. This advantage was established and it reproduced itself, firstly by division.
The process became more and more sophisticated, until some form of consciousness came to be as a way to make the survival process more efficient. Matter is no longer governed by happenstance and chanced but, with consciousness, it can choose and strategize.
This was an added leap in sophistication in the entire flux game. The process of separation and combination was made more efficient through thought, through sensual awareness, as it interprets reality.
This resulted in multiple types of animated matter and, in time, conscious life.
Those which were successful became moiré numerates, those that were not perished and were absorbed by the others.
This, in turn, created conflict between, the now, animated matter.
Fear became the feeling of anxiety which kept the individual safe, through heightened alertness [stress] and caution.
The stronger one was the more it remained self-reliant, there was no need no necessity for unity. The weaker ones were consumed and absorbed, just as inanimate matter is by what is more powerful.
A new leap in sophistication in the survival game.
Weakness, either by accident or by design, congregated into groups, just as all things which share a common interest do (like this Forum). An advantage was found in such a congregation.
Species eventually came to be, through this congregation, sexual intercourse replaced division as the new mode of self replication.
This made it necessary for there to be a prolonged period of interaction, of cooperation, of sharing space and resources and for tolerance.
Enter love, compassion, and so on.
Chemical reactions in the brain suppress individuality and ego and enable social living.
This new emotion, just like the new brain it was produced within, was, in time, worshiped as a God.
It’s advantage to weakness so great that it was deified, raised as a virtue, made transcendental.
Even if we are to assume that we are all unified by participating in a single universe, in a single reality or a single perception of reality, one cannot deny that this common source produces diversity.
Not all matter is the same. Not all beings are the same.
There is conflict, there is change which produces sophistication.
The underlying essence of life is common, yet life is also conflict.
We are all similar but multiplicity reigns.
Genetic experimentation ensues.
One consumes another life, to persist.
The essence of life is struggle and need.
The individual entity, whether conscious or not, needs and struggles to meet those needs.
This need is felt as suffering. What need suffers and all that lives needs.
When one need is met another takes its place. There is no respite, to total and final satiation.
Sometimes, as in the case of love, life makes Gods of his needs or devils or it makes them into virtues or vanities in accordance with how it perceives the need and by how it benefits from it.
The process of combination and separation continues.
Weaker entities become absorbed into larger unities, thusly becoming part of a stronger whole.
Cells, as they participate in the human body, are a good example.
We can imagine them existing as independent entities, prey to stronger predators and with little sensual awareness and no consciousness.
Their participation in unities brings about the possibility for consciousness, where the singular entity is absorbed and diminished, as an individual, within the larger entity but which, as recompense, gains the advantage of consciousness, through specialization.
Shall I go on?
There’s more.
Everything is diversification. There is no state of inertia.
You are not the same person you were a day ago. Your cells have been replaced, your knowledge enhanced or diminished your experience enlarged.
Memory is what maintains the sense of consistent self, the sense of unity.
An individual is the sum of his past, in essence the sum of his past instances of self.
Self is a myth, as is the sense of the present. There is no self except for a unity of forces and cells and histories participating through memory and consciousness in a single Becoming.
As the present is defined by the conscious awareness of a singular past or it is the infinite, unknowable interior between the brackets of past - ( * ) - future. So self is the unknowable, infinite interior between the brackets of two thoughts.
Sartre’s Nothingness resides within.
Shall I go on?
There’s more.
Dear friend, I am trying not to sound condescending and trying to remain polite but you make it difficult.
Meditation is only possible for creatures with higher brain functions.
Original life had no way of dealing with the anxiety of survival by… meditating.
Its existence was simple, terrifying and brief.
This first emotion, the feeling of anxiety concerning danger or the desire to exist, is fear.
Can you imagine an amoeba coming to be and loving its way to success?
In fact, unmitigated, undiscriminating love is a sure way to die quickly. It is naiveté personified.
If we are to think about that original single cell organism we seed it as vulnerable, even if independent. In order for it to participate in larger, multi-cell unions its individuality, its independence had to be sacrificed. It gained a survival advantage through numbers by diminishing as an individual.
This is true of all unities.
Marriage, tribes, families all entail a certain loss of independence and individuality for a more harmonious inclusion.
This is why participation within larger entities forces specialization, like cells had to specialize in certain tasks so that they can participate in the unity of the human body, for example. This, in turn makes them more dependant on the whole because specialization is possible only by focusing on specific talents and abilities while others are left to atrophy.
In truth, those with the least character and independence and free-thought are the most malleable and able to adjust to larger groupings. They are Tabula Rasa’s where anyone can write whatever programming necessary to fit them into a greater whole.
Those more independent and possessing stronger characters are assimilated with more difficulty.
Remember: Weakness is consumed and absorbed.
The path of least resistance, rule.
I cannot. That is why I come here.
Next question.
My mind and my unyielding scepticism that doubts even this.
How do you do it?
Making Love into a transcendence is not being sceptical nor careful nor mindful.
It is a mind grasping for safety so as to just be and forget about the questions and doubts.
I seek out and analyze and ponder the “basis of the choiceâ€.
This is philosophy, this is thinking.
Do you?
Here we go again.
It seems that some people like to paint me as an absolutist, when it is them that exhibit absolutist tendencies the most.
I repeat:
Name one instance, one thought which is not subjective.
What we are doing is comparing subjective interpretations and seeing which one is the most objective.
I never said that I cannot be wrong.
This is you, projecting your anxieties and insecurities upon me.
I will not analyze that piece of psychological need.
I, particularly, like the “blind acceptance†part.
Who is blindly accepting what, is a matter for further speculation.
How comforting it is that some peoples ‘reality’ or “objective†opinions seems to benefit them in so many ways.
How convenient that the universe is governed by forces so benevolent and pleasing to the human mind, like: love, compassion, unity, equality, etc.
Yet, it is I that is “blindly acceptingâ€.
Dear friend, Newtonian physics are proven wrong under certain conditions.
What is your point, except for trying to undermine my “certainty†by invoking the Pascalian wager:
“What if you are wrong and there is a God? Can you afford to risk it all on behalf of a theory with no redeeming qualities?â€
Here we see the mind debating itself.
Its fear urging it to turn away from certain perspectives.
“What if?†It asks, without being able to justify it.
Yes that must be it.
And Nietzsche went mad because he thought too much.
And Kant was a recluse because he deconstructed too much.
I would say that I have always been far too emotional for my own good.
It took many years and a lot of effort and Will power to harness my emotions through reason, as far as I’ve accomplished such a daunting feat.
I believe that if you read some of my more artistic essays like: “Postcards fro Purgatory†you will find me very emotional.
But I’m not doing art here.
Or the fear of not wanting to be a victim to their blindness. Like…you are.
I know the need to escape comparisons forces you to find some saving grace in your total obliviousness. For instance, it is a well known strategy to claim superior ‘happiness’ where inferior awareness cannot be denied.
What did I say about fear, dear friend?
It is just as much a part of you and of every living entity as it is of me.
The difference is in how we deal with it, what strategies we devise to escape its constraint, how we accept it and are honest with it.
I first say that the underlying flame, heating all thought, boiling all progress, cooking all interest and all knowledge, welding all creativity is fear and then……I’m accused of it.
Like…duh.
I assure you, Russell was motivated by fear when he entered the study of logic.
Michelangelo painted to express, to absolve himself of his anxieties.
Freud rationalized his own fears.
Trump accumulates wealth to deal with his feelings of weakness.
A sure way to discover who is the least contented is to watch who is the most active.
And how do you deal with your emotions and fears?
Do you have a point?
Isn’t that the entire premise of what I’ve been saying all along?
Tell you what I don’t do though: I don’t make my fears into pretty angels nor do I push my face in the pillow to escape the creaking door or the mysterious sound in the dark.
I get up and I go looking. I face it.
I leave you behind with the women-folk, mystifying the ordinary and gouging out their own eyes so as to not see the horror.
Surpassed emotions?
Dear friend, it took me decades to learn to control my emotions. Not that I have completely.
I still have to bite my lip so as to not bash someone’s head in.
Especially when they are uttering stupidities and thinking they are being smart.
But thanks doctor.
I’m sure you are a well-spring of gushing emotion. I sense much health in you.
Funny how civility is the feigned state of suppressed emotion and being polite is the suppression of deeper emotions wanting to lunge out, and here you are telling me about suppressed emotions.
Have you been reading Freud, dear friend.
I’m sure that now you’ve figured me out and can completely dismiss my opinions, as a result.
Isn’t that what you are really after?
The line starts there, behind psyche.
But thanks for, inadvertently, describing your assessments of my positions as “Logicalâ€.
I’ve never been so wonderfully insulted in my life.
And since I’m “logical†that would make you……?
If you wish to participate in illogical discourse, governed by unfettered emotions, then please do.
I believe Bessy is available.
But isn’t this Philosophy?
Shouldn’t emotionless thought, as much as this is possible, and logic be the basis of discourse.
Or should we wail and cry and laugh in triumphant glee that we are so loved and fortunate to exist in such a harmless, benevolent universe?
One more sign concerning the deterioration, the domestication, the Feminization of man.
Let us cower behind illusion and hope … hope!!!, that everything will turn out right.
Let us bath in positivity and have faith that it will not lead us astray.
Paradise, dear friend, was meant for the meek and for those that never dare bite the fruit of knowledge (wisdom).
What is life for you, dear friend?
What is it really?
Tell us about it. Share your wisdom.
The burden of awareness is one many have described in the past. It is the burden of a man you becomes self-conscious and exits the proverbial cave.
Nothing is given; it must be taken or earned.
Live, if you must, in your oblivious state of inebriated bliss.
I envy you, many times, as I do my dog.
But I don’t respect you.
Isn’t it curious though, that we like our dogs and we even love our dogs but we do not respect them as we do the wolf.
Why do you think that is?
Isn’t domestication the castration of a being, in the Deleuzian sense?
Beasts are made harmless, more productive, passive, malleable, similar, predictable so as to incorporate them within a demanding system.
And along with beast are not humans also domesticated?
We like that conforming, passive, docile, tax payer, law abiding neighbour, but, deep inside, we don’t really respect him.
Here’s another doozy: Isn’t respect a hidden fear, an intimidation?
So, you would caution against Socrates and his advice and say, in opposition: “Know NOT, thyself!!!â€
Bravo!!! Dear friend. Bravo!!
How well you represent ignorance and the need for delusion.
This is where you begin pitying me and my miserable state of mind, so as to excuse yourself from your inability and offer yourself a reward for your ignorance.
See, like Tabula does.
It is I who is confused?
Ah yes, it must be.
She’s accepting it?
How can you accept what you never see?
She isn’t accepting what love is and then indulging in it anyways, as I urge everyone to do myself, she is denying what love is and creating a romantic ideal that suits her interests and makes her feel good.
Does a blind man accept the lights brightness and then moves on, or does he fail to perceive the brightness and appears as if he’s being brave when he’s simply blind?
But I love how you’ve grasped onto that ‘radioactivity’ and ‘half-life’ as your ace in the hole.
It reveals how thoroughly you misunderstand my views.
How, exactly, do the properties of radioactivity disprove anything I’ve said?
Yes, and how is love not an illusion, then?
Please proceed to the coat-check to get your back patted and your hand shaken.
Are you declaring victory?
I’m sure many will applaud.
Einstein said time and space were an illusion?
Which books have you been reading?
Or is this your attempt to sound profound?
Ah yes, it is my suppression of emotion that makes me write well. Not my mind. Not my experiences. Nothing that would emphasize your mind in comparison to mine.
In fact it is a negative, that makes me so, as opposed to your positive.
I completely agree, actually.
Your obliviousness cannot fathom anything beyond a certain point and so it is unburned with thought or the need to find solutions.
I agree.
Isn’t ignorance the bane of creativity and progress?
Why would anyone struggle or think or create or build if they are totally contented or they cannot perceive a problem?
Is that why you write so unwell?
Is it because you freely express emotion and cry openly and laugh and become angry with no hesitation or thought?
Like animals, for instance.
Imagine a child being raised with all the luxuries, all its need fulfilled, all its basic desires met, what do you think this child would grow up to be?
Arrogant, demanding, naïve, thoughtless, pampered, delusional.
Let us go outside and see.
Ah, here it is the nation of the well-fed and contented. The U.S.A.
Here we see the consequences of undeserved abundance and unrestricted privileges.
The full-bellied does not care about anything beyond Football, sex and food; a consumer basking in the lethargy of his contentment.
Would this dude vote?
Highly unlikely.
What does he care if his fringe is stacked and the T.V. distracts him from his engorged emptiness?
Result:
This guy becomes malleable.
He will not question a war thousands of miles from his home, supposedly for his freedom.
“How is my freedom threatened by….Iraq?â€
He will not ask this.
He associates his freedom with goods and comforts.
He will not question the concepts of ‘evil’ and ‘good’.
What about his son?
If you tell him the truth that he’s risking his life and killing people, over in Iraq to defend his peoples right to drive their fat ass a block to pick up smokes in their SUV’s, would he bleed for you?
No.
You have to keep him convinced that it’s because of his freedom, which he cannot define.
Can you imagine a nation of intellects being talked into war?
No, what you need is a nation of retards, of feeling beings, of fat, contented automatons who become so hooked on consumer goods and their own hedonistic needs that they can be influenced like a child.
Stupidity and instinct, dear friend, is what empires are built on.
.
…or your understanding of my previous statement.
I said love is an outcrop of fear, not that they are different.
One question, at this point:
Are you for real?
No…really.
It is sometimes surprising how the world seems to fit into my understanding of it.
How delightful to watch those trying to contradict my assessments, actually verifying them without even realizing it.
Yes, and watch how economics is governed by fear and anxiety and need.
Why self-help?
Because one fears to be inferior or diminished or constrained.
“Emotions are superior to intellect�
Yes, of course.
Look how man has progressed trough feeling his way through existence.
I mean the greatest humans have been the artists.
Intellect! Bah……We should lobotomize ourselves and simply feel, like animals, simple intuitive, instinctual, reactive living.
I think I understand you now, dear friend.
And the dead, freer still.
The fool does not feel fear?
Does an animal feel fear?
I understand you more now.
You want to tell me you are freer than I because you are a fool.
I already know this but I would substitute ‘freer’ with happier.
“Tis true, friend.
I never loved nor have I been loved or am loved.
How fortunate you are.
I don’t have friends, I’ve never gotten laid and I live in total seclusion.
Feel better now?
Well, feeling is superior to thinking so you are indeed fortunate.
Indeed, dear friend. I have never felt pleasure. I can never enjoy anything.
Once again your ignorance saves you from my plight.
And your lack of experience and wealth and privilege would explain why you are so naïve and dense.
Necessity is the driving force behind all growth and change, after all.
And your inability to rationalize is what made you feel your way into delusion.
It is how you achieved safety in numbers where you didn’t have to think or prove yourself or be different or superior. All you had to be is mediocre and the same all you had to do is find solace in communal agreement.
Why are you now trying to rationalize away my opnions?
Shouldn’t you be feeling your way through?
But thanks for figuring me out.
I feel so……so……naked.
Trust me, it is better that I am “suppressing†my emotions, right now, or else I would really tell you what I think of you.
Be grateful to my disease.
Bravo.
Now go away and feel a tree or something.
tentative
I see it as a logical progression, if one considers evolution.
I once heard a friend describe emotions as the connecting point between the mind and the body.
I think that’s a very good definition.
Consciousness interprets physical necessity through emotions.
For me, the primary concern for any living entity is staying alive.
Procreation, ingenuity, creativity are all the result for this need to survive.
Love, also such a result.
I, particularly, find it fascinating how certain vantage points become the targets for psychoanalytical defences, whereas others pass by with no such necessity.
For example, if I were saying that love is transcendental and eternal and omniscient, nobody would even consider what experiential events or traumatic experiences lead to this opinion. It would be considered “healthyâ€, normal, everyday.
And?
At least I have constructed a theory and not relied on transcendence and emotional hopes.
All life rests on a bedrock of sand.
Isn’t that why we ask these questions and deconstruct these ideas and remain skeptical and open-minded and we contemplate and search?
Isn’t discomfort and displeasure why we act?
Why would the truly contented and happy act at all?
Why would he ask, or ponder, or struggle or build?
That life is displeased and suffering is proven by how it strives and hopes and fights and thinks.
Paradise is stagnate and inert.
It is imperfection that forces action.
How so?
How would that first conscious being that felt its first emotion of love have used this emotion to survive?
Imagine that it is alone, solitary and struggling to exist. Then it feel…….love?
It runs to the first thing it sees and hugs it, in loving ecstasy. The other eats it.
Now imagine this same creature feeling fear. It sees the other and hides, it runs in fright, it survives, even if stressed.
Later on this same fear forces it to congregate in groups with creatures it can relate to in weakness.
The solitary predator lurks in the shadows, the weak cower in the dark, they find their survival is enhanced. The mutation is established.
But how can dissimilar entities relate and maintain harmony in groups?
Enter love.
Perhaps the association with dissimilar entities came out of the procreation necessity. Procreation necessitated interaction with another. Later on more complicated entities required a period of weaning, which also necessitated association.
This, in turn must have been projected to a larger whole.
wow… ok… this thread has gotten out of hand
the original intent for this thread was for someone to provide support for their belief or disbelief in the following statement:
“Fear and Love are the true alpha and omega when it comes to human behavior and emotion.”
and thats not the same kind of love like between a man and a woman