Philosophy Now Forum

Satyr wrote:I respect only my own kind...and she, nor you, are it.

How true. You are one of a kind. The lone wolf who will never be part of the pack, because other wolves are dogs at best, if not sheep.

reasonvemotion wrote:Taunting on the side line again. You are of no consequence.

What you obviously did not see and maybe this is because of your own lack of upbringing, to call a young girl or woman any one of the names Satyr chose is total lack of breeding. After your glowing description of Satyr's intelligence, you think you will be spared his venom, I dont think so.

Oh, are you trying to goad me? If you bothered to read this whole thread from the beginning, you would notice that I've already dealt with Satyr at length. I know who he is and where he stands. He has a point. It's a very small point with room only for one, and his venom is of no consequece.

As for calling each other names, I usually object to the use of derogatives, particularly those pertaining to gender or other physical traits, because it's disrespectful. In a perfect world, those words would disappear along with the attitudes associated with them. Satyr has very little respect for anything and I despise his philosophy, but I don't have to belittle his intelligence. I'm not going to join the pissing contest. ForgedinHell doesn't have a clue, and I think Kayla is woman enough to stand up for herself here.

Notvacka wrote:

Satyr wrote:I respect only my own kind...and she, nor you, are it.

How true. You are one of a kind. The lone wolf who will never be part of the pack, because other wolves are dogs at best, if not sheep.

There's always room for you, my dear.
Always room for one more.

There are a few of us in my forum Know Thyself.

I do not believe in absolutes so how can I believe in the singularity: "one" or "one of a kind"?

Did you notice:
The Knight in Filthy Armor considers a "real man" - I suspect he means a "modern man" - someone who is polite to "young" people. His ""to women" has morphed into a more politically-correct value.
It also appears that the only form of dominance the turd can comprehend is physical.
Getting your ass kicked somehow gets your ideas kicked out.
Therefore, if a lion eats a man the lion is superior to the man.

If you enter a rink - an intellectual one - and get your ass kicked then are we to accuse the one who did the kicking of being a brute?
It would seem kiddy gloves should be used to handle children when they mouth off inanities.
A pillow fight will ensue and we all, laughing and giggling, will hug and part the best of friends at the end of it.

I wonder:
What are women and children doing hanging around an area that might get them hurt?
Presumably to give a job to a douche-bag with nothing more under his belt but a plastic sword he uses to ward off dragons.

If you "despise my philosophy" then you despise reality.
Classic nihilistic attitude.
Are we discussing what we prefer and our ideal world or are we discussing this world and how it really is?

In the fantasy world we are all the same and equals and women are strong and independent and do not need men....in the real world a man is expected to come to a woman's defense when reality kicks her ass.
Luckily there's always a pussy, ****, around to come running with his fists flailing and his man-boobs bouncing.

"Take this thing back to Baltimore"

Notvacka wrote:

reasonvemotion wrote: I know who he* is and where he stands. He has a point.

*Satyr
Really? I have not detected one.

Satyr wrote:Turd,

try to vary your insults a bit

makes things sound a little bit less tedious

Satyr wrote:If you "despise my philosophy" then you despise reality.

True. And I do.

Satyr wrote:Classic nihilistic attitude.

Not at all. I believe in things like peace, love and understanding. Yes, I strongly believe in all those things you don't get, like equality and, yes, feminism. I even believe in God. And it's my mission to impose these things on reality.

Satyr wrote:Are we discussing what we prefer and our ideal world or are we discussing this world and how it really is?

Clearly it must be both. Where it gets interesting, is when the former clashes with the latter. We are shaping the reality around us, as surely as reality shapes us. But we don't exist in reality as much as in our shared illusion.

Notvacka wrote:

Satyr wrote:If you "despise my philosophy" then you despise reality.

True. And I do.

Satyr wrote:Classic nihilistic attitude.

Not at all. I believe in things like peace, love and understanding. Yes, I strongly believe in all those things you don't get, like equality and, yes, feminism. I even believe in God. And it's my mission to impose these things on reality.

Satyr wrote:Are we discussing what we prefer and our ideal world or are we discussing this world and how it really is?

Clearly it must be both. Where it gets interesting, is when the former clashes with the latter. We are shaping the reality around us, as surely as reality shapes us. But we don't exist in reality as much as in our shared illusion.

No wonder you have a hard time keeping up, you are a theist.

Notvacka wrote:

Satyr wrote:If you "despise my philosophy" then you despise reality.

True. And I do.

then you would also admit to being a nihilist.

My motive is not to find an ideal or to change the world to meet my needs - I leave that to daydreamers and stunted psychologies - my motive is to see, as much as I can, with no rosy-colored glasses, reality as it is, not as I wish it were, before I die.
I adapt by changing myself in relation to the real, knowing that I'm doing so and how far I can and am willing to go without losing myself.

Notvacka wrote:

Satyr wrote:Classic nihilistic attitude.

Not at all. I believe in things like peace, love and understanding. Yes, I strongly believe in all those things you don't get, like equality and, yes, feminism. I even believe in God. And it's my mission to impose these things on reality.

Such a romantic idealist governed by fear.
See, most can easily find fear in any comment about blacks or women but then they spout out this kind of shit and they can't see how fear has overtaken their judgments.

You are truly a nihilist, whether you know it or can admit it or not.
You dream of overturning reality; you contradict the real with your ideal.

Look:
Where you see fluidity, you dream of the static, the absolute.
Where you see inequality, divergence, creating multiplicity, you dream of equality, uniformity, leveling.
Where you see different sexual roles evolving different forms and attitudes and potentials, you dream of parity, blandness, a world governed by hypocritical civility and respect.
Where you see strife, combat, competition, battle, war all around you, forcing growth, adaptation, strength, beauty, you dream of peace, tranquility, blandness, boredom, stagnation, uniform weakness.
Where all around you ephemeral phenomena, mortality, death you dream of eternity, immortality, life forever...even under the yoke of a despotic deity.

You are emasculated, sir.
Psychologically you, are female, no matter what genitals you have.

You hate the world, sir.
You hate it and you are intimidated by it so much that you hope for its overturning.

Notvacka wrote:

Satyr wrote:Are we discussing what we prefer and our ideal world or are we discussing this world and how it really is?

Clearly it must be both. Where it gets interesting, is when the former clashes with the latter. We are shaping the reality around us, as surely as reality shapes us. But we don't exist in reality as much as in our shared illusion.

Ha!!!
See how you wish your weakness to be "shared" so that it does not shame you or result in your suffering?

We share in nothing but the world that cares not about how well we perceive and interpret.
Consciousness comes, like with everything else, in gradations not in absolutes. it does not evolve to trick you or to test your faith, you simpleton, it comes to aid you in survival.
Know why your lower level of consciousness persists?
Because it is protected from nature, from culling, from its own stupidity. You are protected, simpleton, because you are docile, simple, easily convinced of whatever flatters or assuages your fears and comforts your anxieties; you are a born follower, a sheep in a flock that can be fenced in or lead anywhere, even to its own slaughter.

You are the perfect citizen and automaton. Anyone who can be convinced with such ease with the christian childishness, while remaining critical in every other aspect of his life, is the perfect slave.

ForgedinHell wrote: No wonder you have a hard time keeping up, you are a theist.

Why are you gloating, turd, you are a moron no less.

Turd, I know mommy aught you to be a good boy and to protect little girls, but you are contradicting your own principles, feeble and ignoble as they are.

Turd, whomever comes here to debate has no race, no sex, no physical presence...he or she is only mind...MIND!!
If some **** comes here spouting shit like "Whomever is not a feminist is a sociopath" and is not put in her place must be put in her place...otherwise she'll spread that shit all over the place and make this world the fucking toilet bowl that it is...you being the turd.

Turd, if I or anyone else had posted:
"If you are not a Nazi you are a fag." what would you have done?

But when some **** posts the politically-correct bullshit she read in a book or found on-line and it felt good and it felt right so she now adopted it and posts it everywhere she goes as if its' some profound wisdom then you, turd, clap along...and all must respect her opinion, because she's a little girl.
Well not I, turd.

This "little girl" came here in a boy's arena to test herself.
If she came here to find a cock and you wish it is you, then she does not belong here.

Turd, if you want to live in a world where a child can slap a grown man in the face and all he is expected to do is take it or run to some authority to cry "He hit me" then you can....being the turd, and the faggot that you are, I don't.
Whomever is old enough and opinionated enough and confident enough to come here and say shit like that, should also be able to take an ass kicking.

Now, turd...I live in Montreal.
When will you be visiting?

Satyr wrote:

ForgedinHell wrote: No wonder you have a hard time keeping up, you are a theist.

Why are you gloating, turd, you are a moron no less.

Turd, I know mommy aught you to be a good boy and to protect little girls, but you are contradicting your own principles, feeble and ignoble as they are.

Turd, whomever comes here to debate has no race, no sex, no physical presence...he or she is only mind...MIND!!
If some **** comes here spouting shit like "Whomever is not a feminist is a sociopath" and is not put in her place must be put in her place...otherwise she'll spread that shit all over the place and make this world the fucking toilet bowl that it is...you being the turd.

Turd, if I or anyone else had posted:
"If you are not a Nazi you are a fag." what would you have done?

But when some **** posts the politically-correct bullshit she read in a book or found on-line and it felt good and it felt right so she now adopted it and posts it everywhere she goes as if its' some profound wisdom then you, turd, clap along...and all must respect her opinion, because she's a little girl.
Well not I, turd.

This "little girl" came here in a boy's arena to test herself.
If she came here to find a cock and you wish it is you, then she does not belong here.

Turd, if you want to live in a world where a child can slap a grown man in the face and all he is expected to do is take it or run to some authority to cry "He hit me" then you can....being the turd, and the faggot that you are, I don't.
Whomever is old enough and opinionated enough and confident enough to come here and say shit like that, should also be able to take an ass kicking.

Now, turd...I live in Montreal.
When will you be visiting?

No, I am living up to my principles. This is no "boys arena," it's an internet debating site. You think that's manly, do you? In my manly-man handbook, manly men do not go to debating sites, but hang out at fight clubs instead. What is so "manly" about debating? You delude yourself into thinking the words you write here make you a man? Damn, you must be wearing panties 24/7.

This an arena open to everyone, and gender has nothing to do with it. Using one's brain power is neither a manly thing nor a feminine thing, it is a human thing. It is also a human thing to confront bullies, wherever they appear. Bullies are among the lowest of the low, not quite as bad as child rapers, who are just another class of bully, but close enough to make them scumbags worthy of condemnation.

From what I can see, you offer nothing. A two-year-old could write the same gibberish as you, and while that two-year-old would impress certain fans of yours on here, the comments would be as equally pointless as the ones you write.

Here is the essential difference between you and Kayla. Kayla shares personal information about herself. Now, that is a brave thing to do. She is smart enough to know she faces ridicule when she does. Most of the time, people do not share back. The person who exposes herself on here has shown more courage than you have shown. While she is brave enough to let us know about her, and what she is going through, you do the opposite: You hide behind petty nastiness. I admire Kayla's courage, which is why I wrote the smart money is on her, and I detest your cowardice and childishness.

ForgedinHell wrote:No, I am living up to my principles. This is no "boys arena," it's an internet debating site.

Yes, turd, and therefore debate, conflict must be had.

Turd, that you are emasculated and womanly is obvious, despite the bravado from afar.
You are a fucking coward, afraid to see the real.

ForgedinHell wrote: You think that's manly, do you?

I'm a paraplegic.
The only thing I know is that I am more aware than you, turd.

My definition of manhood, moron, is not muscles and cocks...it's an attitude, a way of becoming, a way of being in the world.
You are a female, turd.

ForgedinHell wrote: In my manly-man handbook, manly men do not go to debating sites, but hang out at fight clubs instead. What is so "manly" about debating? You delude yourself into thinking the words you write here make you a man? Damn, you must be wearing panties 24/7.

Shit turd...what color are yours?

Turd, you are so stupid you have no clue about how stupid you are.
Turd, not once did I even claim to BE a man.
Not once. for all you know, turd, I might be a woman. Turd, you've allowed your own fears and insecurities take over and you've dropped your panties for me and for everyone.

Turd, I'm a paraplegic...this still does not make you anything more than a brain-dead imbecile.

ForgedinHell wrote:This an arena open to everyone, and gender has nothing to do with it.

But sex does. Turd, gender is sexual roles being applied within social and cultural contexts.
You've accepted yours as a fag with gusto.

ForgedinHell wrote: Using one's brain power is neither a manly thing nor a feminine thing, it is a human thing.

No, tud, how you use your brain matters; how sharp your brain is is sexually based.

Turd, how you use your broom-handle is what makes you a faggot; humans use broom-handles in many ways each way based on each human's essence.

ForgedinHell wrote:It is also a human thing to confront bullies, wherever they appear. Bullies are among the lowest of the low, not quite as bad as child rapers, who are just another class of bully, but close enough to make them scumbags worthy of condemnation.

A bully, turd, is a **** who goes on-lkine and m,akes this absurd statement, in effect dismissing all opision and belittling anyone who might contradict her delusions:
"Whichever man is not a feminist is a sociopath"!!!!
See that ****?
THAT is a bully. A Bully with a slit between her legs.

See it, you ****?
She, this innocent, young, sad, weak,, deserving of respect and love, **** comes here in public and declares all who contradict her principles, based on delusions she's adopted but never thought through, because they felt right, declare, you stupid ****, all men sociopaths if they are not her footstools.
THAT, you stupid coward, is a bully. Did anyone confront this bully in your schoolyard, or did you lower your eyes and pretend she was right, or agreed with her, emasculated as you are, because she's a precious young bitch?
Did some of you knight harbor a secret lust, a hope that she might cast a caring glance in your direction or find you attractive?

Do you know what a bully is, you ****?
It's a turd, like you, who comes here declaring God to be the absolute authority all must bow to; a delusion all must acquiesce to...THAT, you **** is a REAL bully.
What bigger bully is there than the christian God, you ****?
And those you follow him are his minions.

Now, this ****, is a moron, no doubt. She repeated words she had no understanding of, supporting a Bully of a state that is spreading lies and myths and castrating males all over the world.
I, for one, mean to stand up to that bully and his many, many, minions...you included, you ****.

Satyr wrote:My motive is not to find an ideal or to change the world to meet my needs - I leave that to daydreamers and stunted psychologies - my motive is to see, as much as I can, with no rosy-colored glasses, reality as it is, not as I wish it were, before I die.

So, your aim is to observe and digest, to be an attentive student in this reality show of humanity?

Satyr wrote:I adapt by changing myself in relation to the real...

I suppose everybody does that, one way or another.

Satyr wrote:...knowing that I'm doing so and how far I can and am willing to go without losing myself.

Fair enough. It's nice to believe that you know what you are doing. I don't think I quite understand the notion of losing oneself though. It implies some kind of ownership, or at least some sort of grasp, in the first place. You claim to be concerned mainly with reality; do you consider yourself "real"? I'm not talking about your physical body of course, but your "self", that which stops you from going further, lest you lose it.

Satyr wrote:Such a romantic idealist governed by fear.

Only the person who knows no hope, knows no fear, since they are the two faces of uncertainty. You are either hopeful or afraid, usually both, unless you are indifferent, in which case you might as well be dead already.

Satyr wrote:See, most can easily find fear in any comment about blacks or women but then they spout out this kind of shit and they can't see how fear has overtaken their judgments.

You speak of fear as if it was an entirely bad thing. Some simple fears, such as fear of heights, are rational and make us duly cautious in dangerous situations. And without fear, there can be no bravery.

Satyr wrote:You are truly a nihilist, whether you know it or can admit it or not.

So you keep saying. I gather that a nihilist is a person who doesn't believe in anything or something. Since I have already stated several beliefs, what is it that you think I don't believe in, that you think I should?

Satyr wrote:You dream of overturning reality;

Oh, I wouldn't presume to something as grand as overturning it, and certainly not me alone. But yes, I dare to dream. And I do change reality. We all do. Planting a tree or cutting one down is changing reality. We all change the world in some small way, and are changed by it, for better or worse.

Satyr wrote:you contradict the real with your ideal.

Of course. That's what ideals are for.

Satyr wrote:Look:
Where you see fluidity, you dream of the static, the absolute.
Where you see inequality, divergence, creating multiplicity, you dream of equality, uniformity, leveling.
Where you see different sexual roles evolving different forms and attitudes and potentials, you dream of parity, blandness, a world governed by hypocritical civility and respect.
Where you see strife, combat, competition, battle, war all around you, forcing growth, adaptation, strength, beauty, you dream of peace, tranquility, blandness, boredom, stagnation, uniform weakness.
Where all around you ephemeral phenomena, mortality, death you dream of eternity, immortality, life forever...

I can understand how you see it that way.

Satyr wrote:...even under the yoke of a despotic deity.

Not at all. My view of God is not the conventional one, but I think that's a bit off topic here.

Satyr wrote:Psychologically you, are female, no matter what genitals you have.

If you say so. I don't mind. Actually, it's a compliment. However, if I were all that female, I would probably not waste my time on this forum, since it's mostly a male thing, I think.

Satyr wrote:See how you wish your weakness to be "shared" so that it does not shame you or result in your suffering?

Weakness is merely a lack of strength. Shared weakness does not result in more weakness, but less. And where you see weakness, I see strength. If the weak share what strength they have, they become stronger together. Furthermore, there is no shame in weakness, unless you pride yourself of strenght. Pride and shame are two opposite faces of the ego. If you let go of the ego, there is no shame in anything.

Satyr wrote:We share in nothing but the world that cares not about how well we perceive and interpret.

There is no clear line between "us" and "the world". We are part of the world; it is what we make of it, and we are what it makes us. I don't need the world to care as long as I care.

Satyr wrote:...you are a born follower, a sheep in a flock that can be fenced in or lead anywhere, even to its own slaughter.

Perhaps. Fancy yourself as the wolf then. It's just a metaphor anyway. If you follow the metaphor, you see that the wolf serve the sheep by culling the flock, while the sheep serve as food for the wolf, one as much a prisoner of its own nature as the other. Notice, however, that the sheep can do without the wolf better than the wolf can do without the sheep. As for slaughter, everybody dies.

I don't waste my time on simpletons of your caliber, unless they have something new to offer. Your christian nihilism is old and worn-out.
This shall be my last response to you, unless you offer an angle which is more sophisticated or creative.

Notvacka wrote:So, your aim is to observe and digest, to be an attentive student in this reality show of humanity?

Yes...and to use what I observe to benefit me in the areas I aspire to benefit from.
My ambitions are not communal ambitions.

Notvacka wrote:I suppose everybody does that, one way or another.

Yes, some bury their heads in the sand hoping it'll all go away, and others look closer to figure out what it is and how to get around it.
It's a good thing burying your head is beneficial to others, or else your ass would be grass.

Notvacka wrote:Fair enough. It's nice to believe that you know what you are doing. I don't think I quite understand the notion of losing oneself though. It implies some kind of ownership, or at least some sort of grasp, in the first place. You claim to be concerned mainly with reality; do you consider yourself "real"? I'm not talking about your physical body of course, but your "self", that which stops you from going further, lest you lose it.

Yes, I consider myself real, girl.
Your nihilism is peeking, again.

What is real is what is active.
What is active is what is real...even a delusion is real as a delusion.
The world is what is active and perceived, via sensual data interpreted by the brain, in reference to what lies outside the brain's willful command.

I know you want to denounce that world as an illusion to be done with it, poor nihilist, but here's a test for you:
Dick a hole, stick your head in it, and pretend the lion coming your way is an illusion...or jump off a building and flap your hands, pretending gravity is an illusion.
Your self-hating nihilism cannot save you, girl, it can only make you oblivious and numb to the world you deny but cannot escape.

No, losing one's self only demands an ambiguous delusion.
Take the inebriating effects of love, and how it numbs the brain to facilitate boding and to repress the earlier evolved fight/flight mechanism: you don't meed to comprehend it, look at how many deify it and mystify it...all you have to do is surrender to it and lose yourself in it.
All base minds, animals included, lose themselves in emotion and instinct and sensation.

The more sense of self you have, the more self-conscious you are, the more sophisticated the mind, all the more unable it is to give itself up to an illusion or an otherness or an ideal or a promise with no reference to anything experienced.

Notvacka wrote:Only the person who knows no hope, knows no fear, since they are the two faces of uncertainty. You are either hopeful or afraid, usually both, unless you are indifferent, in which case you might as well be dead already.

How dramatically Christian of you.
Yes, hope is an antidote to fear.

But then there are delusional hopes and more realistic ones.
I hope to live another day in comparison to I hope to live forever in a beyond more 'real' world and an after life... an after death life, is also a hope.
The more extreme the fear and the more unable the mind is to cope with it, all the more fantastic the hope given or adopted or constructed, must be.

Notvacka wrote:You speak of fear as if it was an entirely bad thing. Some simple fears, such as fear of heights, are rational and make us duly cautious in dangerous situations. And without fear, there can be no bravery.

No, i speak of fear as what it is: the primary emotion out of which all emotions stem from. Fear, like love and hate and envy, is either constructive or destructive, depending on how it overwhelms or not reason.

In a Christians mind it is overwhelming to the point where he or she can use one standard when judging all things and then change the rules and completely forget how to judge when it comes to immortality and God and goodness and paradise.
Orwell called it "doublethink", I call it compartmentalization or a form of schizophrenia.
The ability to use one set of rules to judge one thing and a completely other set of rules, contradictory ones in fact, to judge another, with the only justification being, but never admitted, that it feels good or one cannot live without God or one is afraid of a world where morals are subjective and survival mechanisms, or one cannot accept death as the end, is what Schizophrenia starts as and is perpetuated by social systems.
Schizophrenia, after all, is a disjunction between perception and interpretation.
When one hears voices in their head whether they call this God speaking to them or aliens makes little difference.

For instance, if you are going to base your conceptions on a principle like a "beginning" or a cause that has no effect, or a start...then you should be, at least, able to define and show an example of one.

Show us a one, for instance, upon which all modern science is based.
The problem is the human brain and the dualism and absolutes it needs to make sense of a fluid world.
Language, being representations, symbols of these dualistic absolutes, also fails to adequately express the world, and so relies on constructing absolutes which have no reference to reality, like:
Here, Now, I, God, One, Whole, Beginning, End, Zero...if taken literally language buries reason in mysticism.
Language, like all art-forms, is symbolic, metaphorical.

Notvacka wrote:So you keep saying. I gather that a nihilist is a person who doesn't believe in anything or something. Since I have already stated several beliefs, what is it that you think I don't believe in, that you think I should?

No little girl, a nihilist is someone who denounces or denies the world as it is, replacing it with a more preferable, ideal one. A nihilist is someone who takes sensually experienced reality and turns it on its head just because she fears it:

The fluid becomes static.
The uncertain becomes certain.
The changing becomes unchanging,
The mortal becomes immortal.
The multiplicity becomes oneness.
The real becomes unreal, an illusion, and the fantasy becomes a more "real reality".
This world becomes a staging point towards the actual world.

There are two types of nihilists:
-The honest and pure nihilist, who simply denounces life and the world as inadequate or unsatisfactory.
I call him the 'positive nihilist' because his negation of the world is direct and obvious.

-Then there's the hypocrite nihilist who denounces this world but dreams of a "better" one...in fact he is certain of its truth.
He's a 'happy' nihilist, a negative nihilist as two negatives result in a "positive".
Christians are full of 'cheer' and 'good tidings'. It's how the meek those who would never have been born at all or survived long enough to wonder about what the world is, comfort themselves that they 'deserve' life, no matter how unable they are to cope with it outside human constructs such as religious myth, social sheltering, cultural conventions and affirmative action inebriation.

When you denounce war and violence and superior/inferior and male competitiveness, you are, in fact, denouncing all the elements that made humans dominant in the animal kingdom.
this is anti-nature, in the form of self-hatred. You hate what this past made you out to be and so you pretend that it does not matter; you dream fo changing it, in fact annulling any future manifestations of you or people like you.
That you worship peace, love, brotherhood, humanity, altruism, oneness, God, is an indication that you now want to change the rules that made you possible, thinking that this will not change anything other than it will make things "better".
See, the future, being forever in the unknown future can be imagined, hoped, as being anything. The more detached it is from the past, all the more soothing, and promising it is for those who feel their won inferiority and vulnerability and cannot cope with this self-awareness.

So called "progressives" are really conservatives,a s they wish to return man to the primordial soup of undifferentiated, uniform nothingness.
Change requires no effort as it is a part of the towards entropy, the fragmentation we call the arrow of time.
It is order which requires effort,energy, resistance...masculinity.

One more example of how the nihilist turns reality on its head.
A so called "progressive" wants change, he thrives on the ideal of change, because he hopes that this always leads upwards...when in fact entropy means fragmentation and a decline towards chaos. So, all he truly wants is to surrender to the flow of change, which occurs whether he wants it or wishes for it or not. He is a conservative in that he wishes to conserve the natural flow and destroy all resistance, all ordering, which reacts against it.
In some of its form,s a progressive dreams of immersing himself in the void, the emptiness, the void....or being a minion, a nobody, in God.
To surrender rot god is a form of emasculation, for men, for He is the notion of the absolute male. Females are naturally drawn to Him, for nature is a flow towards fragmentation and the absolute void which is never attained.

Notvacka wrote:Oh, I wouldn't presume to something as grand as overturning it, and certainly not me alone. But yes, I dare to dream. And I do change reality. We all do. Planting a tree or cutting one down is changing reality. We all change the world in some small way, and are changed by it, for better or worse.

I know, little girl. and your dreams are always of changing others, the world, not yourself in relation to the world...but the world in relation to you and your fears and your hopes and your preferences.

Notvacka wrote:Of course. That's what ideals are for.

WHAT?!!
You have got to be kidding me?
You didn't just say that, did you stupid?

Ideas, twat, are mental models constructed by taking sensual data, finding patterns in them, and creating, using apriori methods an abstraction. this abstraction can then be projected into the future or the unknown.
See, we are all projecting, sweets, only some of us are doing so without their emotions and delusions clouding their analysis and injecting their mental models, their abstractions, with garbage.

Ideas are not ideals, you idiot.
My idea of life as being mortal is not my ideal.
My idea of my self is not my ideal. It is that it is NOT my ideal that makes me strive and struggle and suffer to become more.

Notvacka wrote:Not at all. My view of God is not the conventional one, but I think that's a bit off topic here.

Who the fuck cares about your little mystical nuances, sweets?
You believe in an absolute consciousness.
You are HIS bitch...or a figment of HIS imagination, if you ascribe to the idea that you are a part of Him and he thinks you into Being.
You require Him to give meaning to your suffering; you require Him to make your life have purpose.
Because you are too weak, cowardly, stupid to offer yourself meaning and purpose.

The moment you claim that there is a superior then all your actions do not matter; you are absolved, you sins forgiven, your weakness do not matter...this is His gift to you, you imbecile.
He makes you feel better about how pathetic you are.

Notvacka wrote: Weakness is merely a lack of strength. Shared weakness does not result in more weakness, but less. And where you see weakness, I see strength. If the weak share what strength they have, they become stronger together. Furthermore, there is no shame in weakness, unless you pride yourself of strength. Pride and shame are two opposite faces of the ego. If you let go of the ego, there is no shame in anything.

See what a self-hating bitch you are, sweets?

Ego is a word derived from the Greek (εγω) meaning self. If you denounce self then you denounce what makes the experience of living...which is need/suffering.
You would rather be nothing than suffer and need.

Sweetie, they've trained you to be ashamed of yourself; they've trained you to thing being self is a bad thing.
Idiot, all acts are acts of self, they are selfish. Even when you kill yourself it is you acting and so you are acting in accordance to what you think benefits you.
When you dream of being God's bitch it is your ego that does this...an ego so frail, pathetic, cowardly and sickly that it cannot accept itself.

Notvacka wrote:Perhaps. Fancy yourself as the wolf then. It's just a metaphor anyway. If you follow the metaphor, you see that the wolf serve the sheep by culling the flock, while the sheep serve as food for the wolf, one as much a prisoner of its own nature as the other. Notice, however, that the sheep can do without the wolf better than the wolf can do without the sheep. As for slaughter, everybody dies.

What a sad creature you are.
A slave claims that being a slave is just as good as being a master, because the master exploits the slave and so he needs the slave.

In a world with no absolutes - including your God that makes you slavishness into a virtue, like a good despotic solipsistic, nihilistic deity that He is - what you strive towards is your essence.
You can never be omniscient but if you strive towards knowledge then this is a part of your persona, your character, your ego.

Therefore, you are proud of being a sheep, you love being one, you find meaning in being one, you find clever ways of comforting yourself before a wolf that exploits your weakness...and so you can never be anything but what you are...a sheep.

Never change.
It suits me that way.

Ta, Ta,

Satyr wrote:I don't waste my time on simpletons of your caliber, unless they have something new to offer. Your christian nihilism is old and worn-out.
Never change.
[shit deleted, unread]
It suits me that way.

Ta, Ta,

That was a pretty long fucking post for a person not wasting his time!
Fucking moron.