P.T.A.S.I.A.T.W.A.A.Q.

Pezerocles · May 3, 2012, 6:24pm

Ok, my hissy fit is over. Let’s try this again:

iambiguous · May 3, 2012, 6:39pm

The part after the colon—are you being deliberately vague?

Tab · May 3, 2012, 6:42pm

Lol, no - pezer can be vague completely undeliberately.

Pezerocles · May 3, 2012, 6:51pm

Moved to another thread.

Pezerocles · May 3, 2012, 6:52pm

lol, here I thought it wasn’t vague at all… When you’re in the zone, I guess.

iambiguous · May 3, 2012, 7:15pm

FilmSnob:

People that are smart in a transcendent way are always quacks.

But you, you sane people, are always asking for transcendence: for that key to that door which will finally open the doors for you and flood you with knowledge that you are supposed to have but somehow don’t. You want an other-ness, a thing that already is, but is completely separate from everything you know now, a truth that nobody else can have because they don’t have the spiritual force that you do. Except, of course, the guru that will illuminate you.

But you are surrounded by gurus! And you call them all quacks; not because they cannot reach the heights that you demand, but because what you demand isn’t heights. You believe that if you can just resolve this question, you will finally be set free, but your question has already been answered a veritable multitude of times. Quacks are your deformed children, and you are guilt-ridden abusive parents. Perhaps if you didn’t simply constantly have sex among each other… Perhaps if you allowed some new genetic codes into the mix…

But that optimistic tone is a lie. Because you aren’t even the ones asking the question! The question isn’t an expression of your own incompleteness, it is a clever manipulation by your authority figures to deal with the incongruence between what they offer you and what you get. When you aren’t looking, a lackey gently introduces a demand, a question. When you look back, you immediately embrace it because your feelings respond so perfectly to it: it must be your own.

When you realize that the difference between an authority figure and a pusher is no difference at all, you will be able to overcome this lie and understand what it is you actually crave.

“Oh, but pezer, stop being an asshole and tell us what it is we do crave!”

It’s not that I won’t, it’s that I’m unable to.

All of this might well be true—but true about what exactly?

Would you situate these words in particular contexts regarding particular beliefs you have regarding particular folks you construe to be gurus and quacks and authority figures and pushers. We all have the capacity to crave. But we often crave different things. And we have no way of knowing which things we should or should not crave other then in examining why we think we came to crave the things we do and then noting the reactions of others who either do or do not share our own.

And then figuring out what to do when cravings come into conflict.

Pezerocles · May 3, 2012, 7:28pm

You keep asking me to do your thinking for you…

iambiguous · May 3, 2012, 7:37pm

No, I keep asking you to bring your thinking down to earth.

Pezerocles · May 3, 2012, 7:43pm

Why do you read my posts?

Go back to your threads where you can blissfully keep repeating “up there” down here" up there" but down here!" until you get arthritis.

iambiguous · May 3, 2012, 8:20pm

Well, you seem you be conveying something interesting but I am not sure how it would be interesting down here. Would it be?

Pezerocles · May 3, 2012, 9:31pm

It would be the same thing.

iambiguous · May 3, 2012, 9:44pm

Okay, then cite some examples of the point you are making by embodying it.

Pezerocles · May 3, 2012, 10:10pm

Ought I?

Pezerocles · May 3, 2012, 10:10pm

Hey iambiguous, I’m creating an “up there” “down here” thread. Please, stop injecting your own philosophy into this thread.

iambiguous · May 3, 2012, 10:36pm

I would never suggest that you ought to…only that it might help some of us to better understand the points you make.

iambiguous · May 3, 2012, 10:44pm

Huh?

How in the world can we read the philosophy of others and not interpolate our own philosophy into the reaction to it? Indeed, my whole point revolves around the manner in which as dasein that’s all we ever do.

The crucial distinction then is between what we think we know is true and what is in fact true whether we think it is or not. Our capacity, in other words, to reasonably demonstrate that distinction.