In an adjacent thread, yet on a related topic, Natural Order wrote:
Kermit the Frog, oops I mean Jordan Peterson, is an obvious believer in the Post WWII Liberal Order, although he is not entirely comfortable with the Logical Conclusions of Liberalism that are currently unfolding, e.g. anti white and anti masculine hostility. The thing that put him on the map was when he refused to refer to a trannie by their preferred pronoun. If he had done this just five years ago nobody would have batted an eye. Now he's considered a heretic and has earned the ire of the establishment. This proves just how quickly the Social Marxist disease has spread.
I use this as a point-of-reference, to indicate
a turn within our Hyper-Modern Present.
There are numerous advantages, or shall I say one gets favorable results, when one pokes at your Spider's Nest, esteemed Diebert. True, you disappear and reappear from some hidden passage in the labyrinth but as you do so you necessarily reveal the essence in your position. Thus the effort is not a vain one, that is if we take ourselves, the events of the day, and the condition of our civilization seriously. My assertion is that -- and you are the emblem of this, you clearly indicate that it is so and to some extent why it is so -- we have *separated from ourselves* and have lost the track of what is *important*. What force has brought this about? And what does it portend? Important questions, it seems to me.
Perhaps it's easier to get to the deeper mysteries of the universe than to discover who I am exactly...
Here, we see
nihilism as it combines with
narcissism. The implication is that this peculiar self is so mysterious, so deep, that it is in fact beyond being seen or apprehended. Discover me! but you will not be able to! you might say. This is part of the philosophical sham and part of the elaborate pose you carry out. But I do not per se blame you since, as I assert, you are under the stress and strain that we all deal with. And that is really the core philosophical problem of importance. In my view, we have to confront it and
overcome it. But this will not happen, certainly not, with your peculiar stance of neurotic self-emulation.
'Little boy lost, he takes himself so seriously...he brags of his misery, he likes to live dangerously...'
I suggest therefor that the structure of this *position* (a
non-position really, as all nihilistic options are) should be punctured. Ideally, you'd do that yourself but it seems that you are incapable of it.
My attention is increasingly, as far as politics and culture are concerned, on the post-human, on whatevercomes next.
Well, let's work the Metaphor Field again, shall we? The Spider has constructed endless labyrinths as a neurotic mechanism to deal with having been knocked off the foundation of Self. You are definitely not alone in this. It is a problem we all deal with and must face. And yes, from that position, one's only option is to develop phantasies that deal in an abstracted posthumanism. Really, you'd have no other option, would you? It follows from the philosophical tenets, doesn't it? But I suggest that these are not philosophical choices but rather existential reactions that are bolstered by
pseudo-philosophical assertions. This is where the deviousness, the self-deception of your manoeuvres, can be seen. It is not hard really. But I admit that you have one of the most complex and illusive false-structures that I have encountered so far. A 'false-structure' is a neurotic structure and the emphasis is, obviously, on the operational term neurotic.
Now, the Philosophical Spider indicates he is a
shape-shifter! Some sort of transhuman Lizard perhaps? Endless
pose with you Diebert. Unending labyrinths of
game.
Here, we are dealing with social neurosis or perhaps 'civilizational neurosis'. But as philosophers the real question is How has this come about? And why is it that you represent it as a logical next step? The transhuman leap -- a weird twist on Kierkegaard! -- is
not the next step and should not be seen as such. Here, with this odd assertion, I do notice that you share a similarity of position with Pam, but moreover with the entire mood, or impetus, that has inspired the Founders of this forum. The reason it is important to focus on this is because this
manoeuvre, as I call it,
demands a response.
It's just perpetual opposition and verbal destruction of whatever you think you are seeing here. You are seeking enemies in writing instead of allies and partners mainly caused by the inability to keep your own story straight. Like in real life, people normally politely keep distance from blatant inconsistent verbosity. People will not engage for very long. Which possibly is something you know but my conversations continue with everyone because I can forgive the utter despair of the human mind.
You are seeking enemies in writing instead of allies and partners...
Very much so! Exactly so! My assertion is that we
must oppose these neurotic manoeuvres whose purpose -- whose neurotic purpose! -- is to conserve the self by splitting away from the self. We must engage
polemically. This is part of what has befallen us, and the *us* refers to *our civilization*, the result of a long causal chain, but as it pertains to Europe (we begin to suspect) to the after-effect of the devastation of two destructive World Wars.
Somehow, the edifice of civilization, which is also the edifice of the Self,
cracks. And cracking portends the dissolution of self, the end of the possibility of conceiving value, and the longing for death to come and solve our existential problems. Weakened, the self also comes under attack. And succumbs. That is why I refer to you as a
Dead Soul. A moribund chatterbox with a crackerjack philosophy. You are, however, very alive as you course around in your deadness. But that is what goes on in a dying body: it lights as inanition overtakes it. The dead do speak! You overteem with death. That is what 'nihilism'
means...
KENT: Where did you learn that song, Fool?
FOOL: Not i' th' stocks, fool.
Yes but you actually wrote: "except that our physical world, family, house and flag ... are precisely the field of life, and there is nothing outside of those areas". Which was a way more interesting statement than a general call to have more focus on this as a recovery process from some overdoses of nihilism, some floating away from earth in some disembodied space suit. Which would be an interesting topic if that was your topic. However I think your topic is no topic at all.
Okay, but the Question here -- the necessary question -- has to do with describing our situation, getting clear about what it is, and how it came about. And in order to regain that clarity one has to begin with some assertions, some sound predicates. Don't get too fancy here, Diebert, don't get to *philosophical* [sic]. The ground I define will be recovered through another manoeuvre but I did not say it would be easy! To define what the counter-movement is, now that is the real question. And it is the only question that should be asked. In that sense we have to return to those things that are most essential. And that is why emphasis is placed on
physical world, family, house and flag, and here I quoted you. This is all that you scorn obviously, but then
so did our lovely Founders (childishly). This is what results when, through a long causal chain, one is severed from one's own matrix!
I am following up here to what has amounted to a 10 year voyage. I do so in the spirit of service. Amazing though this is it really has taken a long time to get clear about things. Maybe someone else would have done it more quickly. (But I do not think so). In any case it has taken me a complete cycle of time to get just to the beginning of the possibility of a recovery process. For you, of course, there is no recovery. Just saturation in the trajectory of the mood that has you captured. I do not say that the next steps are easy, they are not. But at the very least the territory is defined.
