So What Is Your Opinion of Me? Thread

Social Forums Non-Philosophical Chat
21

For the record, Contra did indeed deliberately misinterpreted my post on Sauwelios. He appears not in the least interested in honesty here. I wrote that I ignored the Lampertian angle for years until I discovered its significant merit. I bet CN did not miss this but simply used what he could use of my words to insult Sauwelios. If this was an error out of stupidity, that is even worse.

So CN - I stick with my words, you may be focused on clarifying the world in physical life - I can only take your word on that - but on the forums you’re doing the opposite with forceful deliberation.

Bottom line is that, as I observed immediately, this is a thread for the attention of Sauwelios. I transformed Smears Satyr-groupie/troll thread into an institution of struggle; theoretically we might try the same with this one, but that’s probably a bad idea. I am looking at the outcome of the other thread, where the clinically insane are now running around yelping at each other about doing good by traumatizing their family with knives in one breath and blubbering about how they reject struggle and embrace peace in the other. I have never seen worse cases of insanity, not even in people who ended up jumping out of windows. In fact people like these remind me that suicide can in fact be the sane, cleanly choice.

A choice these patients will unfortunately not make, as they are intent on raping their world until it resembles the utter wreckage of their spirit.

22

Perhaps we’re working to the same end?

You were playing the devil’s advocate, and I thought you were sincere.

My confrontation is fairly distributed among KTS and ILP.

I like to think I did my part to add fuel to the fire. :slight_smile:

The fire that burns down all excess.

You’re focused on the fire, I’m focused on what’s left after all else has burned.

I stood in the fire first, so it’s OK for me to put others alight.

Do you stand in the fire?

23

I was born there.

So long in it has caused all truths to burn away, all except the truth of true-making, valuing.

From this one truth I derived the principle of self-valuing.

How can one value, negatively or positively, without a standard-value? If ones valuing is aimed at integrating oneself into the world according to ones will-plan (image of self), then all valuing reflects back on a fundamental self-value.

Since I know this, my only interest is self-valuing, both in myself and in others. That is why I abhor a priori equality notions. Valuing is attribution of quality, quality is never defined by its equality, always by its inequality, particularity. In(e(quality)) - equality is only a special case of inequality.

24

C-N has been growing on me. I’ve gotten to appreciate his humor.

25

Like the force of time that erodes the paint from the Greek temples and sculptures reveals their true beauty, the notion of self-valuing (the seed of time) strips away all excess signification and leaves the pure will of the creator intact.

Never to define beyond ones perspective. All I can do is reveal to others the possibility of abandoning the ultimate prison.

26

Reactions to standing in fire:

Equality

And so much more…

I could have left the fire at any time, but I didn’t.

My psychologist’s thoughts about me, my father’s / brother’s / mother’s / sister’s thoughts about me, my own suspicions about me - were true.

I am a courageous man.

27

Acceptance

Respect doesn’t come in black or white.
There are two forms of respecting that exemplify the oldest ongoing war in the world:

  1. Degrees of subjective respect: -50 to +50 (Taoism).
  2. Degrees of absolute respect: 0 to 100 (Buddhism).
  • James S Saint

====

I really handed it to you at the end there, Fixed, eh?

Hence why it was the end.

Oh, but you don’t know me. Never heard of me.

FC’s intellectual dishonesty

In the Acceptance thread, he corresponded with me starting on Thu Feb 13, 2014 3:59 am

That’s just one conversation.

He has interacted with me quite a few times.

He read and responded to my first thread, Beyond Existentialism.

It was posted 2 years ago.

I’ve been on this forum 2 years, interacted with Fixed on multiple occasions at length, but he doesn’t know me, and never seen my writing.

Here’s a guy we can trust.

28

JS, have you considered that your name change operation may not have been the life-changing event for Fixed Cross that it was for you?

29

I had over a thousand posts - FC says, ‘You’re just some sock puppet’.

I linked him to a thread where I went at lengths to challenge Satyr and KTS members in no uncertain terms. My posts to FC before he feigned thinking I’m a Satyr puppet, clearly mocked FC’s compliments towards Satyr and appealed to FC to shed himself of Satyr’s inhibitions. FC says, ‘You’re a Satyr groupie’

I’ve had the same picture for two years. The same big colorful signature. The same language. I linked to multiple threads cueing my identity. My first thread, which FC participated in, was linked by me directly above him. In the KTS thread I linked to, I still went by Joe Schmoe. - FC says, ‘I don’t know you. Never spoken to you before.’

You’re really going to say wise Fixed Cross didn’t pick up on any of these connections, but still invested the energy to produce the ‘connections’ that I’m, according to him - A sock puppet, Satyr groupie & an unprovoked troll who he’s never met before.

He took the time, as an intellectually honest philosopher, to discover and verify the ‘connections’ he attributed me with, but didn’t pick up on any of the cues I listed?

You must have a really low opinion FC’s intelligence, if you think the evaluation he made of me was a genuinely honest mistake.

And if it was all a genuinely honest mistake, any intellectually honest philosopher, of any honor or credibility, would certainly admit the mistakes, surely?

Le’ts look for where Fixed admitted his error… …oh wait, he didn’t.

He was in damage control.

What are you fighting for?

Truth, or safety?

You don’t need to protect FC, he was born in fire, right?

He loves struggle.

He’s the strong one.

30

I might be wrong, but it seems to me that you have a new-found optimism for life? or that you just got bored being negative? but regardless of which, it’s created a positive influence all round.

31

Fixed Cross, check exactly what you just accused me of in your criticism… I never for a second doubted your profession that Sauwelios interpretation grew on you. It would be kinda fucking retarded for someone to dispute such a claim. Closest I ever came to doing something like that was when I first joined this site under the name of Christian Overman, and convinced Taz (Christian) that I was one of the voices in his head… and he believed me.

That being said, even your average stupid retard isn’t that retarded, and its rather pointless to dispute if someone likes or is influenced from their own perspective by another’s work.

Sauwelios is quite free to explore a commentary or two, ten, twenty fir that matter… but dear God, unless he wrote it, he needs to diversify a bit. It can all be antithetical to my every position… just so ling as he gets some variety and isn’t a useless, brainwashed sheep. It’s like a art gallery with only two pictures on display, and one of the pictures has the other picture drawn in it. But he claims to of been worrying about several other authors… so I’ll back off and see if this great transformation of his becomes conspicuous. If not, I’ll have to resort to beating him with soap in a wet sock until he starts talking about someone else’s ideas… it can be Nietzsche related… fine, but it better be better than this broken record approach. Even Cazar reads and talks about other guys now.

And BJ Benny, or whatever your name is… when you talked about stabbing yourself, emotional problems, living in Australia… I immediately thought you were Taz… an Aussie Nietzschean who goes in and out of the insane asylum, and castrated himself. Not a 100% you, but you haven’t done any of his signature rhetorical moves yet.

It just means… they have Nietzsche shelved in a Santorium down in Australia. My best guess. That, or there is a actual Nietzschean psychiatric school down there. Something odd is going on.

32

‘You’re a Satyr groupie’

Ah, that is what you thought. No, I was referring to Smears groupie-ness, vis a vis Satyr. Him creating a thread to talk about him, and all.

I had no idea you were Joe. Not that this changes much.

33

A groupie is someone who’s likes a person who’s a celebrity of some kind and wants to follow them around and be on their dick.

I don’t like satyr, and I don’t follow him around, and I doubt even his wife wants to be on his dick at this point, and he’s far from a celebrity.

I’ll give you a pass because your english may not be completely up to par, but for fuck’s sake try a little harder jackass.

34

I tend to avoid the helplessly insane. But if it’s true (I can’t possibly tell) that’s a cool accomplishment.

Given that virtually no one here represents Nietzsche with some accuracy, and Lampert does, and Sauwelios does as well, I see no ground for your complaints.

On top of this, as far as Ive read, you have never said a single sensible thing about Nietzsche, so for you to expect me to take any stock in your commentaries on Sauwelios Nietzscheanism is absurd. Perhaps you are too used to butter-minded conversation partners that you can easily convince of your weight. With me you have a different caliber to deal with, so a bit more justification for your judgments is required.

Give me an example. Show me how you are producing original worth where Sauwelios is only reproducing. At this point I have no idea how to relate your claims to reality.

35

I was inviting others to stab me.

Big difference.

You’d never risk your own welfare, but will claim how hard you’ve got it.

How everyone should have sympathy for you.

But when offered a solution, you cower.

You don’t have the guts to change, Man-child.

Keep feigning strength, Man-child.

Don’t worry, no one can discern it, right?

Especially not your ‘junior’.

36

Smears, I am in no mood to bicker with you. You are so sensitive. When you create a thread to discuss someone in the future, you might want to consider how it makes you look. You can’t convince me in retrospect that you aren’t actually interested in him.

With everything I have to say against him, CN is the very last one I’d accuse of not risking his own welfare. That is hilarious. I could make a sketch out of that - someone wandering through the triangle of death with a broken leg set against someone who kneels down offering his own blood a knife to his chest … actual sacrifice versus the desperate escapism driving a boy to put all his own pain on the heart of his parents.

I think most boys who grow up in families experience this need - I know I stood on the threshold for a while - but to go through with it would require that I relinquish my honor. What I did instead turned me into a man, an equal to my father, a guardian.

Masculinity is not recklessness or stubborn pride, it’s the will and power to protect your kin, no matter the relations. Relations and emotions about them are all part of the feminine aspect. What you did is what a little girl would do in a Greek tragedy.

37

I confronted Smears in the thread directly above your accusations too, FC.

Any more excuses for your intellectual dishonesty?

Stretch further and further as the evidence piles against you.

CN ‘hid’ in battles that weren’t his own, and claimed strength.

‘Look how brave I am, I’m in the Army’

All to cover his insecurity at running away from the battle he could never win - just like you.

Look how CN spoke of the army.

‘A mistake that fucked me up’.

Bravery? Strength?

More like compensation.

Cowards, both of you.

38

I dont have much of a welfare at this point to sacrifice, and cant do much with sympathy. I accept the absolute brutality of men, my who world view starts with this as my point of orientation. If Cynics have values that are more than sponraneous or grown from more than just emperical heterogeneous study of society from the independence and sustenance of the individual, its the recognition of the chaos and depravity some laws, character types, and situations that types of governments repeatedly undertake that causes them to act rashly.

But Fixed Cross is correct… I learned early how not to sacrifice my welfare, however limited it is. I know the cops and military better than they do tactically, and stay aloof in positions I can’t be easily surrounded or overcome. Criminals have little use for me as a target of anger or tool of exploitation. At this point, its more me studying the modes of their welfare and sustainability than vice versa. And its exactly the caution I learned from Iraq that makes it possible. I’m very pragmatic when it comes to my own security. Once bitten, you study the nature of every bite thereafter.

So no… pity doesn’t heal a broken leg, an infected wound. It wont get a thirsty man out of his situation. Might alleviate symptoms momentarily. I’ve always dug a little deeper as a result, as I’m certain the world won’t have shit to do with me when it comes crunch time. So I study the nature of crunch time. What wounds and debilitates men? Society? What festers and rots?

The Nietzscheans are a festering rot on society. Its not that I care an iota about some art theory, or philology, or a romantacusm on warfare taken from a medic in the Franco-Prussian War, but behind every sycophant and ruinous misfit of a leader or false messiah, I see the blunderfuck, selfish Nietzschean happily sucking the life and harmony of society down with them in some selfish, usually farfetched, barely thought out delusion. The Nietzschean is the Antithesis of a Cosmopolitan thinker, as a Nietzschean is the evil drive to the self affirmation of extinction. A lust after death. Everything else they do is but a sideshow distraction, a mockery of life, akin to shadow puppetry. I root myself in life, pathfinding to solutions of good government, sound economic understandings, good families… what is sustainable, good and fair… always the very best. I always auestion schemes of eugenics, isolation and killing of individuals, metaphysical political systems such as ‘Power’ that have no firm basis in reality. What harms a single man is a cause of suspicion for men… a Nietzschean is a weed in a field… purposely seeking paracitical relations without beneficial return.

But paradoxically still very much part of the human condition. And so such creatures, beneath a title of humanity in most light, too in time have to be incorporated and intergrated.

As the Nietzscheans are hardly unique and not without precedent, so are the responses of the Cynics, who have never entirely in any age cease to be, or formally be in totality. I have my predecessors to look to as well, who existed every step of the way. Difference is between us, I am much more cognizant of the origins and lineages of both movements in human history.

Sauwelios isn’t worth the title of evil, as he has never seen it. Too childish to pull it off. A few chants, sexual fetishes and theft… best he could pull off… he is not the sick, community wide strife of neighbor mutilating neighbor is a stinking third world shit hold that drove me to hate it.

39

Contra-Nietzsche, I must congratulate you: you have apparently been gifted with omniscience! And yet, it doesn’t seem quite accurate: sexual fetishes? I’ve never had a sexual fetish. And what theft were you talking about exactly?

40

CN - It’s coming into focus. I am seriously beginning to wonder if you might be asked the absurd but pivotal question of how the world should look like if it had strong rulers based on noble ideas. You say you are a Catholic. How literally am I to take that? Do you believe that there has been a man who is the Son of God, or are you a Catholic along the lines of say, James S Saint, who takes it allegorically but still extremely seriously?

I agree that Nietzsche can easily be used to cause the evils in the Middle East today, and it is clear that the Iraq war was heavily inspired by Strauss who is a Nietzschean. So I find your hatred of it, as an empirical specialist, valid and I will respect it. But this hatred does not make for a thought worth entertaining in a broader scope of ideas, where Nietzsche also has many things to say. I wish that you produce a counter-argument, in the form of a positive premise.