Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Imposition

[1] 2 ... 14
Interzone / Re: Tell me about your education.
« on: April 22, 2014, 04:14:53 AM »
Well fine. I have told you how it is with me.
You have told me how it is with you.
My position hinges on it being by far the best thing I have come up with, by way of being able to live my life, in a way that provides immense satisfaction and peace. Nothing else even comes close.
How well does yours work, for you?

This is called solipsism, and is ironically close to what your favourite writer, Mr Brett Stevens, posits as underlying the 'decay of civilisation'.

This wouldnt be a problem, if your opinion was not all pervasive around these forums. Every thread is defined and judged upon whether it meets your extremely personal and unusual standards. The criterion is no longer something mind independent, where discussion is open to transcedence and growth, it stops with the preferences of some bloke based on what ideas have made him feel good. But there are so many different ways to live and so many starting points and contingencies that what makes some one individual feel content can be so utterly arbitrary.

Interzone / Re: Tell me about your education.
« on: April 21, 2014, 02:45:16 PM »
Some of you characters are still in the education system, or not so long out of it.
From what I am coming to understand, education nowadays is more about indoctrination than about education.

I am running into more and more young people, especially on forums, that seem completely unable to learn anything that they don't already know.
There is this whole thing now, focusing upon proof for every single word, being demanded, before consideration of the message even takes place.
What is this? What's going on?

People tell me politics is a big subject in schools. Biased leftwards, from what I can see.
It seems generally unpopular, but from the evidence, it warps kids anyway, into equality-obsessed machines that become enraged at anyone who mentions things they know nothing about. What they really do know about, is being so utterly self-centered that it boggles the mind.

Is there truth in this? Can anyone shed light?

I simply do not understand how you  can think a concept like indoctrination can go hand in hand with the concept of demanding proof. They're pretty much opposites, aren't they?

If kids you are talking to are demanding proof, then that means ideas are being put to the test, and selected for. If yours don't cut the mustard, that isn't necessary because your audience is 'indoctrinated'. Quite to contrary if these kids are, in fact, demanding proof.

And for what it's worth I don't like the tendency towards anti-intellectualism that is so often displayed by non-leftists, which you yourself seem to buy into Crow. I observe the forum heading this way. Rigorous argument, use of 'proof' and evidence, and a skill in rhetoric should not be the property of the hard left with the right having only vague mysticism and far-removed philosophy with a distrust for debate and intellectual battle.

Interzone / Re: More on nihilism.
« on: April 21, 2014, 04:12:14 AM »
Thank you. A bit intellectual for me, but I'll work at it.


Do you feel the universe operates without purpose?
That it is completely random?

Do I feel this? No. Do I think this is the case? Maybe.

There are two levels of cognition operating here. Intuition and rational reflection.

I know why I may feel (i.e. intuitively) that the universe operates without purpose, because i've done a lot of evolutionary psychology, and I know i'm 'hard-wired' to process things, on an intuitive level, in terms of agency and intentionality and purpose (because, in our evolutionary history, most of the patterns and structures we were confronted with WERE put in place by agents - traps, marks in the sand, artefacts, etc).

But I don't believe the universe acts 'randomly'. I think there are patterns, and that there is structure. Whether these patterns and this structure is at root informed by intentionality is another question - one which I don't think about much these days. These patterns and the order and structure manifesting them are interesting, aesthetically beautiful and compelling to me whether or not they were initially caused by some process animated by a prior purpose.

Interzone / Re: More on nihilism.
« on: April 21, 2014, 03:51:28 AM »
I can, if you're willing to you're willing to consider the response carefully.

(First off, who cares? Nihilism is, in my opinion, a mistake. It's a nice idea in theory, but fails to take into account human psychology and the need for 'illusions'. Sure, go through a period of 'freedom' in order to 'choose' your battles, but this, like like Sartre's existentialism, assumes that after you violently dislocate motivation from its point of contact with 'reality' (i.e. after you go through the process of nihilism, or 'cleansing the doors of perception' to see the Void) motivation just doesn't wither and die. In other words, if you dwell on the fact of the matter than objective meaning is an illusion, it might be quite difficult to ever give a shit about anything ever again. For, how can you simply forget the fact that objective meaning is an illusion after you have realised this? That would require a process of 'getting dumber' again after you have 'gotten smarter'. Also, some people who i've spoken to around here seem to think that after you learn the facts that deconstruct objective meaning, you will suddenly be able to see that certain values are somehow objective (authoritarianism, paganism, perennialisn, deep ecology, or whatever), while other values are somehow not (liberalism, christianity, humanism). If nihilism is true, no values are binding whatsoever. Certain values may preserve the natural world better than others, for instance, but so what? It is a further leap from this to the conclusion that you SHOULD follow them.)

To the question. There are two meanings of the word 'meaning'. On the first, 'meaning', is just the way in which a language represents/refers to the things it does. The meaning of 'cat' is the cat over there. The meaning of 'happiness' is a certain mood grounded by certain neurological processes. The cat being happy means the cat over there is in a neurological state. Obviously even a nihilist accepts this sort of meaning. His words still refer to things due to being involved in a language community which has conventions regarding what words refer to/represent/mean. 'Cat' in my language convention that i share with other speakers of English means a certain mammal with four legs that has been bred from other mammals over a long period of time to chase mice and balls of string and shit on your carpet while only being concerned with your existence when it is time for dinner. 'Cat' (i.e. the set of symbols c-a-t) in the language convention that speakers of French share means nothing - it picks out or refers to no object in reality (I know not what set of symbols in French picks out the appropriate mammal).

On the second meaning of 'meaning', meaning means(!) purpose. Then what does purpose mean? Purpose means some prior intention informing an activity. You moving your arm to pick up the beer is an activity informed by a prior intention (your intention in drinking the beer). A nihilist uses the conventions of his language ('meaning' in the first sense) to convey the idea that there is no purpose informing his activities other than his own wishes and desires. Similarly, he uses language to convey the idea that there is no purpose informing the activities of the universe because those activities are not caused by an agent, and only activities that are caused by agents can have purpose.

Interzone / Re: Bill Hopkins: The Divine and the Decay/The Leap!
« on: April 17, 2014, 01:10:46 PM »
I was lucky enough that the university I attended had a copy in its library. Other than that I have had no luck on the internet apart from amazon, where it us 200+ dollars.

It's one hell of a read. And I would like to find it again.

Metal / Re: camel - the snow goose
« on: April 08, 2014, 01:36:26 AM »
Nice one. Camel are fantastic. I prefer Mirage and Moonmadness to Snowgoose but all three represent their best work.

ELP, Yes, Gentle Giant, Van Der Graaf Generator, Crimson (esp their most recent album!), Genesis and Camel are all truly amazing.

Interzone / Re: "The poor": kill them
« on: April 01, 2014, 11:58:19 AM »
My immediate intuition is indeed to think otherwise. But I admit it is just a snap judgement.



are the first two google returns from the query 'has crime decreased since the middle ages?'

Also, you're thinking might be different if you live in America, which is known for much higher crime rates and personal insecurity than other western societies.

Interzone / Re: "The poor": kill them
« on: April 01, 2014, 06:45:54 AM »
Are you suggesting there is more crime and insecurity (per capita) in Western societies today than in the pre-modern era?!

Interzone / Re: "The poor": kill them
« on: April 01, 2014, 05:01:28 AM »
Many of these poor are just thieves. They go to voting stations in droves and always elect candidates who falsely claim it is moral to steal resources from stable working families for poor people and their useless social programs.

Your claim that the cause of social welfare is the mass movement of poor people to the polls such that parties that do not give out welfare cease to get into office is amazing.

I would vote for a party that had social welfare programs over those that don't. Why? Because it means poor people will not come into my fucking home with a hunting knife wanting my computer. People like a (certain) safety net, so that our towns and cities don't turn into some Johannesburg slum. For christ's sake.

Moral: it's not just poor people who vote for social welfare. It's people who have some (realistic) idea of social realities.

Interzone / Re: Deep Ecology is bullshit
« on: March 31, 2014, 02:45:25 AM »
My questions for the deep ecologists here:
- As long as civilization prevails, why should we give a damn about the continuation of any plant or animal species?
- To those who point to the beauty of nature in its defense, what does it really have to offer that Virtual Reality won't eventually be able to match or surpass?

'What nature has to offer' that virtual reality won't EVER be able to match or surpass is simply the property of existing-prior-to-man.

It isn't transcendence, as I see no reason why any virtual reality could not be engineered to produce experiences that equal, or exceed the challenges imposed by 'nature'
It isn't 'the world', as the world is experienced, and virtual reality can be experienced
It isn't 'inherent value' - in the strong sense - as there is no such thing (there is, however, a weaker sense of 'inherent value' - insofar as the concept 'inherent value' is understood as value stemming from something that comes before individual choice. This weaker sense of 'inherent value' is value stemming from intersubjective psychological archetypes).

Put another way, what nature has to offer is something that fits into that part of human psychology that places value in prior structures - the same 'impulse' from which religion springs*. This is the stark opposite psychological impulse from which existentialism springs - which holds that prior structures are not only non-existent, but undeserving of value (undeserving because then the agent so valuing is operating under 'bad faith', believing that his actions and value judgements are not completely and utterly free and self-chosen - so the theory goes (see Sartre, if you dare)).

What we loose by going virtual is a type of (subjective - but also intersubjective (archetype), and hence half way between subjective and objective), or source of, meaning. And because this is the same source of meaning that gives rise to religion, absolutism, and the unique emotion of reverence that is intimately tied up with this archetype, it is something that is going to be highly valued around here - whether or not you can give arguments for why the same amount of UTILITY could be gotten from the virtual.

Death and black metal are art forms, along with some others, that are reverent, in that they worship, or in other worlds in that they celebrate what is given (as opposed to what is merely chosen).

Human beings crave reverence. This explains the gia movement, hippies having bush doofs/raves, people getting 'back to nature', good metal, and you can fill in other social movements. Obviously one can raise the issue of whether or not each particular one is actually (in the sense of truthfully) celebrating 'the given' - but I think it all stems from the same psychological 'archetype'.

In short, Deep Ecology is not 'bullshit'. It has its roots in a more general human impulse (for prior structures).


*Why then are religion and environmentalism often opposed to each other in public debate? Because for the particular religion involved, Monotheism, the environment is merely God's creation - and so not the prior structure (which is God Himself).

Interzone / Re: The Occult History of the Third Reich
« on: March 27, 2014, 04:10:05 AM »
There is an element of aesthetic grandeur that no one completely pussy-whipped by social norms (or who is, of course, a member of one of the groups targeted by the Nazis) can be insensitive to when it comes to Nazi Germany, but I do no champion the Third Reich.

This documentary will be of interest to anyone who has read Evola, for instance, and who would like to see an empirical manifestation of one possible social embodiment, by a modern, organized state, of such ideas.

Probably the best documentary I've seen on the Nazi's, due to identifying first causes in a set of ideas - the 'occult' (read: Germanic perennialism/Aryanism) as opposed to economic factors. I.e. it is a rather Hegelian take on this whole period of modern history, as opposed to the somewhat more usual Marxist takes that would seek to identify economic or 'material' causes of Nazi Germany and WW2.

Interzone / The Occult History of the Third Reich
« on: March 24, 2014, 11:12:40 AM »
The documentary contains mainly black and white as well as some color archival footage, with narration explaining the influences of alternative belief systems (occult, paganism, mysticism, etc.) on the Nazi ideology and Hitler's personal philosophy. It also documents the history and development of ideas and symbols and of the eugenics movement.

In the early 20th century, the young Adolf Hitler was just one of many German-speaking people attracted by a new Germanic mythology that combined ancient legends and esoteric cosmologies with cutting-edge theories of genetic science. In the hands of the Nazis, the result was a new ideology that saw racial purity as the key to human destiny.


Part 1: Adolf Hitler

Part 2: The SS: Blood and Soil

Part 3: The Enigma of the Swastika

Part 4: Himmler The Mystic

Metal / Re: A request: "Proto-underground" recommendations?
« on: March 06, 2014, 12:23:51 PM »

Destroyer 666 - Violence is the prince of this world http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wXt9MT1I1mg
Blasphemy - Fallen Angel of Doom.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZA8q8jga5xo
Blood - O Agios Pethane http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NncldH6ZY7Y
Bestial Warlust - Vengeance War 'Till Death http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UiV6_IaGd0U
Spear Of Longinus - Nazi Occult Metal http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INf4lBHN6bY

Some of these are post 1990, but are pretty much proto stylistically, and good.

Metal / Re: A request: "Proto-underground" recommendations?
« on: March 02, 2014, 03:56:48 AM »
Sodom - Persecution Mania
Kreator - Pleasure to Kill
Slayer - Hell Awaits, Reign in Blood

And perhaps, on boarder of thrash and death:

Napalm death - From Enslavement to Obliteration

Interzone / Re: Conformal Cyclic Cosmology
« on: March 02, 2014, 02:26:32 AM »
Roger Penrose explains his emerging theory of conformal cyclic cosmology
Short version: Roger Penrose is promoting a view of cosmology similar to the eternal recurrence. The two driving principles are a reinterpretation of entropy and the observation that in the absence of the Higgs Boson the universe lacks a natural metric, thus any concept of distance or time becomes meaningless. In light of this, the state of the universe at the beginning of the big bang is identical to that as time approaches infinity. The universe is self-sustaining and cyclic... maybe.

I was quite happy to find a serious attempt at driving physics forward on this topic without resorting to string theory shenanigans.

Thank you. Will watch with great interest.

[1] 2 ... 14