St. Valentine

Diebert van Rhijn · Post by **Diebert van Rhijn** » Wed Feb 14, 2007 10:47 pm

St. Valentine

What can I tell you about my Valentine?
Because she's all mine and only mine.

She's sweet as sugar, a dark beauty
Passing like clouds, almost always moody

How could nature be so frivolously bold
when she's normally so cruel and cold

Magic came alive, hunting high
and low, such a low blow, til you die

A train wreck blindly speeding toward its end
A broken bottle waiting under the silver sand

You couldn't make her up even if you wanted
She's imagination that leaves you haunted

Often she's just you and I
brave saint and Valentine

Pye · Post by **Pye** » Thu Feb 15, 2007 12:28 am

.

Love meant here has only ever meant romantic love and all of its attendant foolishness and riotousness: biologically dunderheaded; hopelessly attached.

Love held higher than that -- so high as to exceed the altitude of nietzsche's mountaintop (even over the agape greeks) -- this love disperses into the rarified air and understands at the cellular level of the self our interconnectedness and the intimate relations of all causes and all effects. This is not attachment-to but attachment itself - the actuality of physics - and it has every reason to call itself love, these singular pieces, each for themselves by one another, unified by the existence whole. Love is the human condition; all else is measured in juxtaposition-to, as in hate, dependence, regard, disregard, et al. It is the relation of all things, and held in this regard, becomes its counterpart in intelligence, compassion.

.

Elizabeth Isabelle · Post by **Elizabeth Isabelle** » Thu Feb 15, 2007 1:29 am

Dan has a whole pile of love poems on his website - sorry I can't give you the link as I can't find it.

Good time for a question though - Dan, why all the love poems?

Diebert van Rhijn · Post by **Diebert van Rhijn** » Thu Feb 15, 2007 1:41 am

It merely came to be through a five minute love fest with a Muse but still.

It wasn't supposed to be about some kind of love, high or low.

You could say it's about the world, no more, no less.

Dan Rowden · Post by **Dan Rowden** » Thu Feb 15, 2007 10:24 am

Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:Dan has a whole pile of love poems on his website - sorry I can't give you the link as I can't find it.

I deleted my Men of the Infinite web site out of respect for the stated wish of the guys at Future Philosophy to "dissociate" from us/me. I don't know if this will be permanent or not.

Good time for a question though - Dan, why all the love poems?

I wrote them as a contributuon to Kevin's Lovebase collection. I'll let him explain its purpose:

- THE PURPOSE OF THE LOVE BASE -

We live in an age devoid of ideals, devoid of dreams, devoid of hope. The dollar is our God, television our mentor, the newspaper our Bible. Drugs and sex make our heaven. Nobody even thinks of perfection as we strive headlong for mediocrity with workman-like efficiency.

We are dying.

The ideal of perfect romantic love is far from being the loftiest of ideals. It hardly compares with the ideals of true knowledge and wisdom. Yet the romantic ideal is far superior to the so-called ideals of material wealth and power. And like the king in Kierkegaard's parable, we may learn to risk everything in order to make love (perfection) possible.

An ideal is the most wonderful disease, for it makes one totally dissatisfied with life. Only then can one look higher, higher, and maybe . . . begin . . . to think.

Dan Rowden · Post by **Dan Rowden** » Thu Feb 15, 2007 12:47 pm

The Men of the Infinite website can now be found HERE

Kelly Jones · Post by **Kelly Jones** » Thu Feb 15, 2007 10:27 pm

Odd how some of the links on the Links page open in a new window or tab, and some in the same window or tab. I'd prefer them to open in a new one, if that's possible. A very small complaint.

Your link to your biographical sketch seems not to be working.

The romantic ideal seems to be about longing for the perfect human, using another human as a "guinea pig" for one's experiments in achieving it.

Dan Rowden · Post by **Dan Rowden** » Fri Feb 16, 2007 12:03 am

Thanks for the technical input, Kelly; I'll fix that.

The romantic ideal seems to be about longing for the perfect human, using another human as a "guinea pig" for one's experiments in achieving it.

I think it's an opportunity for a man to test his idealism and see if it matches reality. It is, in princilpe, what you say, but then, every "bride" is perfect". It's through women that men eventually give up on ideality...

And who the hell wouldn't?

Elizabeth Isabelle · Post by **Elizabeth Isabelle** » Fri Feb 16, 2007 12:48 am

Only a highly irrational person would expect a human to be perfect, yet some people find love beneficial when they find someone whose flaws are tolerable and whose qualities outweigh their flaws in a specific way that the benefits received from loving this person outweigh the costs of loving that person.

Perhaps what some poets write about is that ideal, which is delusion - not reality. Anything one convinces himself is ideal would ultimatly lead to realization that there is no ideal. Ultimate Reality is too ugly to love - not just women (that's only a small part).

As for Kevin's assertion, I have never found love poems to be heartwarming.... unless you want to count heartburn.

BMcGilly07 · Post by **BMcGilly07** » Fri Feb 16, 2007 5:38 am

That's odd that they would have you remove your Men of the Infinite page and still have this on their website:

note: deleted link to website that is a work in progress for the upcoming audio series- linked to the dharma cave from the future philosophy website.

Dan Rowden · Post by **Dan Rowden** » Fri Feb 16, 2007 12:03 pm

They didn't ask me to remove anything. I did it simply to respect their stated wish for disassociation. Though, to be fair, this was more Naturyl's attitude than Philosophasters...

It's hard, at times, to keep up what what those guys are thinking. Also, where exactly is: "note: deleted link to website that is a work in progress for the upcoming audio series- linked to the dharma cave from the future philosophy website."

I've never seen that...

Elizabeth Isabelle · Post by **Elizabeth Isabelle** » Fri Feb 16, 2007 12:07 pm

Dan Rowden wrote:It's hard, at times. to keep up what what those guys are thinking.

Dan, you keep forgetting the main point - they are on sabbatical from thinking. Actually in the Hoot 'N Holler section of SW they sound like they have become vehemently anti-thinking, and are showing their rebellion with increased emoticons and a higher valuation of puppies.

Dan Rowden · Post by **Dan Rowden** » Fri Feb 16, 2007 12:11 pm

Yes, I do keep forgetting that they have taken said sabbatical. I just wonder when we'll hear Nat announce that he's becoming a Xian. That's the road he's walking at present.

Dan Rowden · Post by **Dan Rowden** » Fri Feb 16, 2007 12:21 pm

Ok, well, thanks for that - not! :) I made the horrible mistake of actually looking at that thread. It's evil, just totally evil. How anyone can write such utter pap and talk about the smugness of others is beyond me. But then, that's where unconsciousness gets you.

Dan Rowden · Post by **Dan Rowden** » Fri Feb 16, 2007 12:26 pm

Kelly Jones wrote:Odd how some of the links on the Links page open in a new window or tab, and some in the same window or tab. I'd prefer them to open in a new one, if that's possible.

These should be ok now. Let me know if you have any further probelms.

Katy · Post by **Katy** » Fri Feb 16, 2007 12:49 pm

Dan Rowden wrote:Yes, I do keep forgetting that they have taken said sabbatical. I just wonder when we'll hear Nat announce that he's becoming a Xian. That's the road he's walking at present.

Somehow I don't see Nat becomeing a Xian... he's still pretty against that, as evidenced by the Sid thread.

Dan Rowden · Post by **Dan Rowden** » Fri Feb 16, 2007 1:12 pm

Well, I wonder. I couldn't see him becoming so anti-intellectual either....and yet..

Katy · Post by **Katy** » Fri Feb 16, 2007 1:16 pm

Perhaps. I think he's become more anti-online-debating than anti-thinking though. Though I could be wrong.

Dan Rowden · Post by **Dan Rowden** » Fri Feb 16, 2007 1:19 pm

I think he's become a poster boy for Cloudy's particualr brand female dementia, frankly. I hope he comes to his senses soon...

Shahrazad · Post by **Shahrazad** » Fri Feb 16, 2007 1:23 pm

I see no reason to believe that Nat will embrace God. After all, one cannot unknow what one knows.

Katy · Post by **Katy** » Fri Feb 16, 2007 1:25 pm

I wish everyone would stop fighting. :(

Shahrazad · Post by **Shahrazad** » Fri Feb 16, 2007 1:26 pm

Dan, he will, sooner or later.

Dan Rowden · Post by **Dan Rowden** » Fri Feb 16, 2007 1:43 pm

Katy wrote:I wish everyone would stop fighting. :(

Life is a battle of values, Katy. There's no getting round that. That's all that's really happening - value wars.

Jamesh · Post by **Jamesh** » Fri Feb 16, 2007 1:47 pm

You folks all keep talking as if there is permanent value in anything you or others do.

Get a death, for God's (my) sake.

Katy · Post by **Katy** » Fri Feb 16, 2007 1:47 pm

Dan Rowden wrote: Life is a battle of values, Katy. There's no getting round that. That's all that's really happening - value wars.

If it's about values, why is it so personal?