If you are saying the body is like action-reaction and the emergent (from nonlife will) mind makes the living choices …
… then the body is dead. And the mind was never like the body (dead).
So why would you think it ever will be like the body?
Gee. I sound familiar.
Life is not reaction…only.
It has an objective.
It wills.
This is what differentiate it from non-life.
Death, simpleton, is the cessation of will.
Intentionality ends.
And yes… life is a constant struggle against death.
dude. you said nature is dead, or not alive
Nature, simpleton can refer to all that lives…or it can refer to the cosmos…all that exists.
Nature is chaos/order.
When used as a term to refer to life it refers to self-replicating self-ordering organisms.
Heeeee’s a wiggler, that one.
You have learned from the best hypocrites of ILP.
Ha!!
Nature, moron is not a thing…it is a state.
Parts of nature are alive… but the majority is not.
Question is…what is morality and how did it emerge?
Does it require a intentional creator, or could it have evolved, via natural selection, as a set of necessary behaviors, that were subsequently encoded, into language, by man?
Every valuer is equal in value to every valuer because every valuer values…
…their physical context is encoded in the language of DNA …
…such incarnate encoding and context represents embodied original personhood upon which every valuer is patterned.
If you imagine your entire life from zygote to the state of your body at death, you can imagine the entire universe the same way.
If you can imagine thinking every moment of your life (as you know it) at the same time, but you have to pick one of those times to think every moment of your life in, it would have to be the state of your body right before death in order to be able to recognize every moment as belonging to you.
The one who exists in every moment doesn’t have to pick a moment to think all of those moments. They are the one existing those moments (in collaboration with the beings subject to time). And they are the only one upon whom the pattern is based, and always act(s) in accordance with what it (the pattern) encodes.
But they get called the absolute as if they are abstract and empty of the concrete. That is a mistake. They are the fullness in which everything else (each contingent valuer) is unfolding… as long as they willfully accept the pivot of self = other (what the pattern encodes)… which is evident when they likewise pivot.
@Jakob … sound about right?
I think Iakov has found another acolyte, of the usual level of intelligence and vulnerability to superstition.
No, we’re like Newton and Leibniz, except I’m more like Kant, and he’s more like Nietzsche… or was.
Plus he’s into astrology (or was), and I just like astronomy.
What are you into Silenus? Everyone’s a critic.
I am into truth and exposing hypocrites and liars, especially arrogant pretentious twats, using word-games to appear to be saying something profound and original…when they are speaking nonsense, of the most unoriginal kind.
But, I guess, it works on psychologies, like your own… primed to believe in word-based nonsense, by over 2,000 years of Afro-asiatic superstition.
Preying on the weak and desperate is what charlatans do well…and this religion and all its variants, including these latest attempts to invent a new strain, use the “magical effects of words” on gullible impressionable minds…like your own.
So. What’s the truth? How do you embody it?
Or are you just a temple-smashing critic with nothing left to stand on?
Stick to the question I asked, Bluff and Bluster.
I begin with perceptible falsifiable actions.
I begin with physis and then move to metaphysis in support…I do not start with metaphysis and then try to fit physis into my self-comforting, self-serving theories.
Everything I’ve said begins by using words as connectors between perceptible phenomena and concepts, in the mind, i.e., ideas.
Like I did with ‘free-will’ and ‘morality’ and ‘god’…and on and on.
I define words to clarify, simplify, not to obscure and to unnecessarily complicate.
Socrates mentioned actions/words that are fake. So did Kant. So did Jesus.
What you really want is for motives to line up with actions and character.
What I really want is to know your motives. Are they serving you? Are you satisfied?
Are you parasitic on others because you have nothing to offer? Are you starving? Are you ready for something … more substantial?
You poor starving little puppy. Poor starving ferocious little puppy.
What you really want is for motives to line up with actions and character.
No…I want words to refer to perceptible actions that can be independently verified or falsified.
Character enters the picture when someone repeatedly uses words in contradiction to actions.
What I really want is to know your motives. Are they serving you? Are you satisfied?
I told you, TRUTH, but this does not satisfy you, does it?
My broader motive is to cleanse western man from this mental disease, by exposing it and those who transmit it, in order to exploit and manipulate.
Are you parasitic on others because you have nothing to offer? Are you starving? Are you ready for something … more substantial?
Projection…no, I am revealing the parasite.
I gain nothing personally, except the satisfaction of exposing liars and charlatans…like the feeling of popping a zit, or pulling wax out of your ears…or like pulling leaches off the body…or crushing tics.
Of course I offer nothing…but this.
I am nobody’s guru, or friend… I seek no followers…I ask for nothing other than for others to verify my words on their own.
I am here for one reason only.
You poor starving little puppy. Poor starving ferocious little puppy.
You are projecting, sweetie…you are starving for salvation, and a father in the sky…so needy…for love…for appreciation…to be given ‘value.’
Ha!!!
You are the kind of “victim” these con-men, priestly, messianic, types, prefer to prey on…and this is proven by your submission to Christianity.
I am not here for you, dear…you are a lost cause.
There’s no hope for you.
You go from one messiah to another.
All they need is a positive word…a hook…and you will take the bait.
Your hunger is so deep, your need so great, that you’ve lost all common sense.
I am here to address others through your superstitious ramblings and your worship.
You have proven to be exploitable, and I will make use of you to expose the exploiters…so that others will not fall into the same mind-traps.
So, thanks for the questions.
@Kallikantzaros ^ you forgot that part. I give you grace, though, but you have to seek/receive it. I can’t force it on you. But, even if you wanna pop it like a zit, you can’t diminish it.
marked safe from the cleansing of western man
You highly prize common sense, don’t you?
What about uncommon sense?
All Value Judgements refer to an objective. An objective often idealized.
Ethics are value judgements based on an objective, an ideal.
Nothing has intrinsic value; all has relative value, founded on an objective, an intent, an idea(l).
Man does not invent morality, it is part of all social species, but he encodes these behaviors, transforming them into semiotics which can be amended, thusly converting them into manipulative tools; weaponizing shame and guilt.
This shift affects how the mind evaluates, appreciates; by altering the standard of its judgements, it determines its subsequent choices, its will.
Ergo Nietzsche’s “trans-valuation of values” implies a shift from the idealization of the Christian saint, to the idealization of the pagan warrior; from untermensch, to uberrmensch; from slave ethics to master ethics, or aristocratic ethics.
This is why his critique of Christianity is really an indirect critique of Judaism, the source.
From “an eye for an eye; a tooth for a tooth” European man was intellectually circumcised, adopting the “turn the other cheek.” Ethics of slaves.
He was emasculated.
As such he, Nietzsche, was anti-antisemitic, because Semites are not always Jews, and Jews are not always Semites.
A parasitical ideology/dogma has latched onto western man’s brain-stem, altering the way it uses language; affecting how it judges and wills; it has zombified western man, convincing him that this foreign entity is part of its culture…its ‘western culture,’ and that without it it would revert to being a brute.
UNCOVERED: How ISRAEL Revealed the TRUE Jordan Peterson
Psychology has always been the science of indoctrination, adjusting human behaviors to the prevailing socioeconomic and cultural norms.
Peterson began as a defender of gender identity and has now exposed himself as being a defender of Judeo-Christian ethics - slave or victim or feminine ethics - which have been identified as “western” when they are the antithesis of Hellenic/Roman ethics, i.e., master or masculine, or aristocratic standards of evaluating, judging, acting, willing.