The Myth of Primordial Salad

[Ascolo_Parodites]

And by the way, as long as a person is not an asshole, I can be quite respectful. That also depends on how many narcotics I have in my bloodstream.

[Lucis_Trust]

You can assess as long as you want, it’s all original.

I could just give you some quick, haphazard analysis of this, but I’d rather understand it’s meaning fully. I promise I’ll get back to you sometime today or tomorrow. Of course I’m delighted that you would share your original thoughts with me.

[Ascolo_Parodites]

I write to share my thoughts with the world, even though most of the people in it make my stomach turn. I sacrificed seven years of my life to write the book mostly for people I fucking hate. And all I want you to do is admit that I didn’t steal the fucking thoughts.

[Lucis_Trust]

I write to share my thoughts with the world, even though most of the people in it make my stomach turn. I sacrificed seven years of my life to write the book mostly for people I fucking hate. And all I want you to do is admit that I didn’t steal the fucking thoughts.

I can tell you’re a very passionate sort of person who takes things very, very seriously. If you know in your heart and mind you didn’t steal them, what need do you have of my opinion, especially when I’ve never read your works? Nevertheless, I will read them, simply because I am fascinated by the unique thoughts and perspectives of others.

[Arcturus_Descending]

@Lucis Trust

7. Also, interdimensional travelers may have migrated here to engineer life.

You live your signature, don’t you?
Only kidding.
If you wrote a book, I might just read it.

[Lucis_Trust]

Vanity often becomes so interwoven with our happiness that where we cease to feel vanity we are unable to recognize that we are happy.

Hence your name Vanitas. Without great expectations we can never hope to achieve anything of great value. However, where there is potential for great happiness and satisfaction there is also for disappointment and frustration. There’s nothing wrong or stupid with having high expectations but vanity entails more than that – impossible or near impossible expectations and standards. Unless you’re a masochist, I do not see the point in your philosophy. That being said, it’s fairly original. I’m not an expert in anyone’s opinion but my own, but I’d venture to say no philosopher hitherto has upholded the “value” of vanity as fervently and explicitly as you have.

[Lucis_Trust]

The great remedy.-- The ancients knew very well that grave danger itself draws off the heart’s laden excess: unhappy lovers used to jump into the sea from the promotonory of Leucadia and, if they were saved, took their survival as a sign of Apollo’s favor and were relieved the pang of their unrequited love.

It seems you recommend only replacing one passion with another, as opposed to supressing or repressing your emotions, accepting your fate and moving on. This is the philosophy of unrestrained and uninhibited pathos. For you, contrary to my original assessment, death is the ultimate horror, far greater than unrequited love or any other tragedy, sufficiently horrific enough to make us forget the prior cause of our suffering, that and make us appreciative of the life we still have.

[Lucis_Trust]

Art and moral suffering.-- The more ingenious that man’s delight in form becomes, so the need to endow meter, tone, and figure with the significance of higher ideals drawn from various moral and philosophical visions of life is equally strengthened. For in this way man’s delight in form is rescued from a deterioration into the primeval joy of intoxication and madness, to instead flower as a more “spiritual” exaltation of man’s greater instincts: only in this way can a culture significantly advanced endure art with a good conscience. A consequence of this, however, is that the entire sphere of man’s moral and philosophical understanding must be extended to the same depths and heights of art, including no less the great tribulations of that consciousness: the suffering of this understanding, and of this whole obverse side of the heart of man, must finally attain to that boundary point where his joy in form begins. Art, which began in intoxication, which later communicated spiritual exaltation, always ends in an terrible affirmation of that consciousness of moral and spiritual suffering which artists, in their primitive naiveness, have sought to provide a small redemption from, or else it is faced with a return to the barbarism of intoxication.

So here, I believe you’re talking about tempering art with reason, understanding and philosophy, otherwise, you fear we will be lead completely astray by our passions. As a consequence of philosophy following art… it sounds like you want to use philosophy to explore the human condition, soul and passions. To shine new light on them. To know from whence they originated and to where they are going. I’ve never heard anything quite like this before, but I’m sure I’m not nearly as well read as you. Of course, this could all be just a misinterpretation of your philosophy. For you, tis pathos that can give us the greatest insight into the human condition, not logos.

[Lucis_Trust]

In general every period of contemplation that has been known to a nation endures for the least amount of time- it is by far the most ephemeral of all periods, and always arises only after the ages of darkness, of secrecy, of fear, of war, of luxury, have all lent their own colors to the soul of a people, enriched and fertilized it. This fact demonstrates that the real value of world-history for the philosopher is that, through its study, the distances and the gulfs within perspective and knowledge that have been born open throughout the ages can finally be transposed within the soul of an individual and grasped inwardly, as a passion, as pathos. The inclination and disinclinaton for knowledge, the refinement of the spiritual life, the discovery of the nuances of the passions, in short the essential instruments for the practice of thinking- this all depends upon the capacity to grasp inwardly the divergence of those drives which could never be isolated, delimited, and set upon a peculiar development in the course of a single life. The more immense a consciousness a philosopher has of the world, and of the ages of the world, the more immense are his powers of creation: the Greek soul had to be fructified with the profound history of Asiatic conquest and self-conquest before the poets and philosophers could be born. For in grasping inwardly this divergence and isolation of the drives, in the effective diversification of them, in the enlargement of man’s sphere of consciousness over the drives, so the inner turmoil of the heart becomes greater: the contradiction of man’s drives urges new sufferings, passions, and longings without name to struggle for expression, urges the realization of new ideas in whose image their war can be arrested.

The unlived life isn’t worth examining.

It sounds like you believe our innate passions somehow carry the collective memories of our civilization. For you, without friction, opposition, the winning and losing of figurative and literal battles fought both outwardly, collectively and inwardly, individually, there’s nothing or nothing worth analyzing. I think your primary interest may be in psychology, particularly understanding the nature and origin of our motivations. For you, above all, philosophy is know thyself. You seek to gain greater knowledge of yourself and the human spirit. You’re not the type to coldly, dispassionately analyze things from a distance. There’s great emphasis on will. Perhaps you believe we are in that brief age that affords us leisure to reflect upon all our culture has gained and lost. Existence lies in the unfolding of history and a persons life, it’s not something cold and abstract, it’s something that has to be lived up close and personal, I don’t know, it kind of reminds me a little of the way transcendentalists saw things (funny how I brought up Whitman), that nature and human nature must not only be observed, but felt, lived. Knowledge and feeling are inseperable for you. Well, perhaps I’m reading things into your philosophy, I could be way off, anyway, that’s what I got out of it.

[Lucis_Trust]

Your philosophy is not utilitarian, not rational, you’re not a calculative man, you believe life is fraught with both pleasures and pains, not hopelessly or tragically so, on the contrary, for you, pleasure is impossible without pain. You’re probably one of those who seeks to deprive themselves of something only so the enjoyment of it will be appreciated and felt more intensely and succintly upon satiation. Pain and suffering aren’t the worst things for you but nothingness. It is non-existence or an ascetic, passionless, cold, calculative existence you fear. Your life is that of a beast, an animal. You uphold reason, yet for some other purpose than a man like statiktech upholds it. Not to restrain, give direction and guidance to the passions, I’m not sure what need you have of reason - to know the them - to study them? Perhaps you value knowledge but not wisdom? Maybe you excersize just enough reason just to keep yourself alive, realizing it is necessary for men to do so, just long enough so you can feel greatly, whether positively or negatively. Nature is cyclical for you, reminds me of the philosophy of Heraclitus or Nietzsche. The world is not progressively or regressively moving toward some heaven or hell, on the contrary, according to you, heaven would be hell, for it is in the striving you feel most alive. This isn’t a new philosophy, in the main, perhaps uniquely expressed, but not new. Life is born of death, victory from struggle, joy from striving, our survival mechanisms from threat of obliteration. You do not seek to end the struggle between dualities but to uphold it, to carry on the dance. The opposite mentality would that of the Buddha or Christ, the resignation from life. All in all, it seems reminiscent of Nietzsche - kind of reminds me of Marquis De Sade, Albert Fish or GG Allin. I understand this philosophy because I once lived it and believed it. Yours is a philosophy of strength, vigour, youth, vitality, courage, passion, zeal, lust, hunger, of pure pathos. The opposite of your philosophy will probably always exist for as long as we continue to exist. Men grow tired of life, weary of it. There is a time for all things under the sun, no? A time to rest, a time for peace, relaxation, comfort, quietude, pondering and reflection. A time for mitigated pathos. There is a pleasure quite alien, quite foreign to you in passivity, tranquility and abandonment. Also in seeking to maximize the overall pleasures vs pains, promote health and extend life. I’m not opposed to your philosophy, I think we ought to strike a balance, a compromise between pathos and logos, but I gather moderation is something you don’t do very well. In summary, live fast die young.

Well, that about does it for me.

[Lucis_Trust]

Now where the fuck did you go you cunt? I gave you all that and no response? I may be way the fuck off, but I bet I’m one of the 1st on this forum who seriously tried to understand you and your philosophy objectively, without imposing my values on it.

[Ascolo_Parodites]

I was trying to sleep Lucis, but my jaw is going to keep me awake, apparently. I will respond to everything you said, just chill. When I get this pain settled down.

[Lucis_Trust]

I was trying to sleep Lucis, but my jaw is going to keep me awake, apparently. I will respond to everything you said, just chill. When I get this pain settled down.

No worries, take your time.