Page 3 of 3 <123
Topic Options
#56177 - 06/22/11 09:41 PM Re: The LHP and Philosophical Minimalism [Re: Zophos]
MindFux Offline
member


Registered: 12/27/10
Posts: 172
To be honest Zophos, Paulo illustrates a point so I'm glad he dropped into this thread and I'm also glad of his reaction. He's the very definition of the problem. Somewhere deep inside he actually believes he's making profound points rather than poetically phrased platitudes. He's a caricature of a problem that exists in subtler and more eloquent forms all over discussions around the LHP.

 Quote:

In essence, it is - once again, to me - a little like the Taoist quest toward inner peace, only with the purpose of fulfilling one's Will rather than a spiritual circling of the drain.


Nemesis, I couldn't have put this better myself with only one caveat. Personally I dislike using the word 'Will' purely because of the social discourse, abstractions etc that comes along with it but I'm getting the impression we share a similar understanding of the concept.

 Quote:
I am very much rooted in the process of thinking. That is definately in my nature and the big questions have always been a part of me and I have dedicated alot of time thinking about them. I was never one who would just do something. I always analyze it and think about it from many different angels. This comes as no effort for me and it has both good and bad results. With that being said I am not passive either but my basic nature is definately one of an ideologue rather than an activist if I can draw a parallel with the political meanings of the words.


I too enjoy contemplating the 'big questions' but as a mental exercise and normally while high (but I digress). There's absolutely nothing wrong with it, but they call it 'pondering the imponderable' for a reason.

These intractable problems are tremendously interesting to think about, but how many times I've run down a path of thought and come to some startling conclusion only to realize it hasn't altered my life or actions one iota. Moreover, as anything other than an interesting point of discussion it is useless precisely because it transcends any meaningful validation. (You'll never know if you're right, or wrong, or more importantly if it even matters!)

That's not to say that it wasn't time well spent, merely that it's not relevant to what I perceive to be the LHP or Left Handed Attainment.

As I said, I've had experiences that have altered me far more than any thoughts that I've had run through my head - and so I try and spend more time doing than thinking about doing, and save my thought for retrospective analysis of actions rather than ex ante contemplation of things that transcend a human answer.

Or as Nemesis put it:
 Quote:

the cerebral part of it, it represents - to me - the contemplative level of the quest for self-improvement. You consider the results of the approach you took and the resulting outcome of your actions. Upon considering this, you gain a degree of insight into yourself and where you're going.


MindFux



Edited by MindFux (06/22/11 09:42 PM)
Edit Reason: Clarity and spelling.

Top
#56182 - 06/22/11 10:36 PM Re: The LHP and Philosophical Minimalism [Re: MindFux]
Zophos Offline
member


Registered: 03/28/10
Posts: 115
Loc: U.S.A.
MindFux:

 Quote:
To be honest Zophos, Paulo illustrates a point so I'm glad he dropped into this thread and I'm also glad of his reaction. He's the very definition of the problem. Somewhere deep inside he actually believes he's making profound points rather than poetically phrased platitudes. He's a caricature of a problem that exists in subtler and more eloquent forms all over discussions around the LHP.

This would be all well and good but for the fact that he has been posting this tripe for almost three years. I think everyone has gotten the point by now, and for anyone willing to read his logged posts, paolo has singlehandedly made the need for further confirmation obsolete.


Z.
_________________________
Nihil sit tam infirmum aut instabile quam fama potentiae non sua vi nita.

Top
#56183 - 06/22/11 11:02 PM Re: The LHP and Philosophical Minimalism [Re: Zophos]
Hegesias Offline
active member


Registered: 02/16/11
Posts: 725
Bare in mind I'm not disagreeing with anyone's personal and academically sound truths but affirming the positive that counterweights the negative in my personal view.

I will now attempt to slowly and carefully dig my own bottomless pit and in no way try to share Paolo Sette's.

People assume they can easily contemplate the expressions of others; art, literature, etc. it is only when attempting to express themselves (which is a very hard thing to do) that they realise they're so unaccustomed to thinking deeply about anything at all, revealing their abysmal powers of self expression and lack of imagination. Subsequently they will attempt to bring down that which they fail to comfortably comprehend or convince themselves that they can do better if only they really put their mind to it.

I admit that I don't assume to comprehend all that others write on here, I also do not feel it is necessary to portray a complex mind at work, it is almost impossible for me to summarise absolute conclusions. I usually get a dissonant musical natured thought process from Paolo Sette's posts and clearly consise affirmations from posters like Diavolo and Skaff. I can't affirm anything negative from somebody expressing themselves.

By the nature of humans predisposed with a short attention span "dead words" can often catch their attention for a solitary moments contemplation. Long enough to gain a general understanding.

I'd say Paolo Sette can often vector a how to think rather than a what to think; the inspiration being unable to be fully expressed through the limited media of words on a forum and that he is here to get a feel for his writing to go towards a revaluation before putting the realisations to book. I see his writings as vectoring undertones of a greater propensity and potentiality which is not a bad thing in my book so to speak. It's because I see a realisation being asserted consistently.

In the absence of a self, there are no preferences, predictable characteristics. It is not possible to know the desolate one as there is no one there, hence all I say is arbitrary as I am based on stimulation and impulse, and as consequence, a myriad of unpredictable stratagems, mechanisms of the disguised forms of the will to power. Paolo Sette's quite the interesting rhetorician in my book and I often feel what's behind his contributions is a mind apart, not aiming for the promising plentitude of credibility, not trying to convey anything but to express what is true to him, which is a very hard thing to do, especially among what might be seen as intellectual heavyweights.

In no way am I disputing that Paolo's expressions are difficult and withdrawn to his way of thinking and most certainly useless to many Satanist on here, but I can't say anything negative about his expressions because I'll always look to what is positive.

I think Diavolo summed it up best when he said "you're just some guy who comes in and says something random and walks off again", I saw that as a positive affirmation that he is not talking to anyone, he is only speaking. If he appears even somewhat generic to more book learned people, I don't think this is down to him copying anyone but that's just my opinion.

Instead of constructive criticism all I can see is pulling down. Nobody is perfect. I'm not saying this out of modesty, but through actually thinking about it.

Some of my posts, while not related to, were partly inspired by Paolo Sette's ability to create atmosphere due to his projected intuition; certainly not spoon feeding dead words and plain text towards unnecessary complexity. Nonsense to some it seems— quickening dark mental activity in others.
_________________________


Top
#56278 - 06/27/11 12:52 PM Re: The LHP and Philosophical Minimalism [Re: Diavolo]
Hegesias Offline
active member


Registered: 02/16/11
Posts: 725
I'd just like to vector something in a simple way that others may stumble across and therefore be devastated enough to think for themselves and therefore create new value where there was none before or to simply conclude their irreversible decay.

Nihilism can be one of the most difficult terms to define in philosophy and is often shrugged off as something completely unrelated not only because of Nazarene academia portrayal but to sooth cognitive dissonance that comes of nihilisms looming uncertainty, a myriad of unpredictable mechanisms of the cloaked forms of the will to power for starters.

We deface the Judeo-Christian morality that Mundane society uses to keep themselves from becoming completely neurotic from their fear of socio-anarchy. That is still very much much around yet they prefer soothing wishful thinking and subjugation of the weakest kind of themselves.

The attempts at morally blackmailing those of perfectly natural human functioning are often without distinctions as to whether the one they attempt to pull down is of a nobler or despicable kind. A means by which the meek Mundanes use to control and subjugate one another, infect one another with pity etc.

They who are mundane, will cry “all people are equal!” or "you can't do that!", these are nay-saying subjugations, pre-emptive attacks in the form of disguised will to power, characteristic of a meek reaction to uncertainty, looming anarchy. Dependent on minutiae pertaining to control and addiction to contentment, the mundanes have enslaved themselves.

In the presence of socio-anarchy we are the wolves and likely to act pre-emptively and rationally, stimulated by our nature to dominate. But fear is felt differently by Mundanes and causes Mundanes to act neurotically.

Mundanes express quite compromised will to power i.e moral blackmailing and solemn, genuine kindness, which is nothing more than a manipulation regime cloaked in denial and hubris ego gratification. They derive solace in this oblivious manipulation that often works two ways between two parties fearing one another. Quite different to respect derived from a nobler display of power between two wolves. Outward causal forms are paper cut-outs, scattered blocks of disorder that can be mechanised to express the will to power, and assert new order.

I conjecture that Mundanes can never have true comrades because there has been no test of a comrades validity that would be of a nobler kind, sinister or otherwise.

Wishful thinking manipulations of each other. Wishful thinking pretends that humans are altruistic and avoids death affirmation, socio-anarchy, inequality and eventually the cold hard reality of cause and effect itself.

The society of the Mundanes would have you believe that your impulses toward "all" things "transgressive", whether noble or despicable, are lumped into a moral cesspit called “evil” and that being "nice" to "all" people is the promising plentitude of the only "good" in this world— these are hateful manipulations, disguised "passive aggressive" forms of the will to power as expressed by the those in self deceit or otherwise consciously without ethos.

The Mundanes society and their jobs (for which they are hubris about being a victim and having monumental responsibility) cater to the lowest common denominator, and so lapse into a utilitarian "making the best of a bad situation" that produces dross architecture and philistine art, or what passes for arts.

Mundanes have a neurotic, corrupted value and purpose, expressed to convince others and themselves that they are an altruistic "good people", a subjectively created reality that steadily drifts toward passive aggressive, disguised forms of the will to power, and whether they are oblivious to it or not, they are always repressed in the expression of the will to power. Why? Because evil is unacceptable, or at best, something for the Mundane dabbler to glance at in a peasantry fashion.

The Mundane immoralist has an innate awareness about manipulating morality to express disguised forms of the will to power, the only differentiation being the higher factor of denial of the will to power by moralists, and of their addiction to self appeasement that comes of a belief that morality bestows them status of "good person".

The moralist is hubris about his invincible ignorance that amounts only to an abysmal expression of the will to power. He is comfortable pushing his luck within the comfort zone, he is bound and he assumes others are too, or at least tries to impose such by morally acceptable blackmail. Even peasantry criminals will revert to the slave morality when caught out, expressing feelings of moral resentment, but expressed as blame.

Good and evil does not exist but as anything but to be used against the Mundanes. By the oblivious way they play their own game, who is to say we have to remain oblivious to what's really going on? Subtle and direct powerplay and nothing more.

There is only the will to power and if Mundanes wish to denude themselves of it's relevance and harbour illusions about moral absolutes. Morality is their prison that they may very well be forever institutionalised and happily so, expressing the will to power in a compromised (good) or peasantry (despicable) way.

With this revaluation underway.

I conjecture that the idealised maxim of evilness is ever elusive, and it is this affirmation of a lacking that causes those who would "go under" to perpetually emerge as Overman; always becoming stronger, more evil, and more profound; throwing off the negatively equivocal Judeo-Christian morality and to confer honour, regardless of race, creed, by deeds and nothing more.

Instead of the ideas about reality imposed by the Judeo-Christian liberal equality pathos, there shall be no ambiguous nay-saying about what is good and what is bad, for "good" shall equate to nobility, those exemplary of perfectly natural human functioning, and "bad" shall be indicative of despicableness, ineptness (peasantry evil).

Inexplicably felt as a lacking which causes the nihilist to always become more extreme, always towards the ever elusive maxim of his nature to be so. With this, the nihilist rejects what society wants to believe, and instead focuses on what it is logical to deduct from the world with an epistemic distrust of the openly visible, related to but not limited to, misanthropy.

Active nihilism is a rejection of narcissism and solipsism. Extreme scepticism of societally imposed "ideas about reality" all around being spoon fed as "actual reality". An epistemic inquisition seeking to burn to the ground, a Judeo-Christian morality cloaked in white lab coats.
_________________________


Top
#71583 - 10/06/12 10:01 AM Re: The LHP and Philosophical Minimalism [Re: assault_ninja]
Le Deluge Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/05/12
Posts: 1790
I think this is a sound observation. "In the real" I operate only at the level of abstraction necessary to apply my craft. LHP praxis involves a series of experiences, challenges, intuition, ritual etc, to foster self-growth.

My time on this site has kind of validated the abstraction theory mentioned. I can "go maximalist". It hasn't been terribly long since the pedagogical courses (as I defined my own education in academia) in rhetoric, philosophy, etc. It has helped me kind of "peg down terms" I hadn't given much thought to in years. At the end of the day, the practice remains the same. I have found myself picking up the odd tome since using the internet more for source material. It certainly doesn't hurt me, but I would say I am more of a minimalist in practice. I love learning. I will continue pedagogical study as the need arises. As mentioned gnosis >>>> episteme.
_________________________
Apres Moi ... Le Deluge

Top
#84008 - 01/16/14 04:05 PM Re: The LHP and Philosophical Minimalism [Re: Diavolo]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 6370
Loc: Virginia
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
Personally I like to think. Not only is it a cheap hobby, I'm usually carrying my brain around anyways. Many people might think I'm a philosophical maximalist since I can ponder about the most ridiculous abstract subject but in daily life, I function on quite simple philosophical parameters.

D.


I can relate to this point of view. Social Trending is fickle, flighty and can change at the drop of a hat.

At one time, 'thinking' (in the maximalist sense) was glorified as something to aspire towards, where philosophical minimalism was downtrodden as 'low-brow'.

This thread appears to be a few years old but I think the topic is still very much a focus.

Perhaps it just boils down to personal preference. One can kick ideas around in platforms like these which gives the appearance of Maximalist tendencies but it's actually Minimalist in practice.

Words vs. Deeds.

I think, (just an observance really), that some people do not prefer to put their thinking out there.
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#84017 - 01/16/14 08:01 PM Re: The LHP and Philosophical Minimalism [Re: SIN3]
Le Deluge Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/05/12
Posts: 1790
The supposition some folks make about these forums amazes me. As a general rule, they have fuck all to do with our lives as a whole. Sure, the exchanges are entertaining. One can offer life stories as anecdotes. I would make no assumptions beyond that. Conflating rhetoric is just a form of chat when push comes to shove. I don't downplay the value of debate, but one has to make an honest assessment of what it is and is not.
_________________________
Apres Moi ... Le Deluge

Top
Page 3 of 3 <123


Moderator:  TV is God, fakepropht, SkaffenAmtiskaw, Woland, Asmedious, Fist, Fnord 
Hop to:

Generated in 0.023 seconds of which 0.002 seconds were spent on 20 queries. Zlib compression disabled.