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 - Wraith

Interzone / Re: Creationists
« on: October 01, 2008, 04:22:29 PM »
Science doesn't deny that principles aren't demonstrable. By definition, it is impossible to demonstrate an abstraction. What is demonstrated is the actual from which we make abstractions and form principles using faculties of reason (i.e., the intellect -- Aristotle's nous). In science, this is the formation and testing of hypotheses.

How is this not scientific?

Interzone / Re: The Content of Character
« on: September 20, 2008, 03:18:46 PM »
Society, such as ours, comes together because the majority of people within that group will it to be.
You are not special.
You die just as easy as anyone else.
There is a way of thinking ,
that I believe allows you to pass through life with the most ease.
Your way of thinking, the beliefs generally thrown about in this thread,
Are inferior because you simply make it harder for yourselves to exist.

See here, your philosophy is flawed.

The "way of thinking that allows one to pass through life with most ease"
is called fatalism. People who slowly die in front of the television employ the same way of thought as you.

"Why leave the couch? life is easier if you don't."

Making life "more difficult" in this case only makes the quality of life greater for everyone.

Yet contrary to what you've said still,
life becomes a little easier just for this very effort exerted.

Is it not just a little amusing how this works?

I play Pac-Man and I watch T. V.
I'm so happy 'cause it pleases me
I couldn't really ask for anything else
Maybe my own chain of Taco Bells

I'm perfectly happy right where I am
I could live forever in a traffic jam
It doesn't really bother me to breathe the poison air
I'd choke anyway, I don't really care

Sometimes I think about getting away for a while
But when I return I will be out of style
You may say I'm not an ambitious man
But let me tell you I've got some plans
Like there's a new car I wanna buy
And a video cassette recorder, yet I'm not sure why
I wanna get married and have three kids
'Cause I'm lonely and I've got a hard dick

Commuter Man
Commuter Man

—D.R.I. "Commuter Man"

Interzone / Re: SMN Forum Woes
« on: September 11, 2008, 07:29:55 AM »
My understanding of nihilism may be different to others here, but my explanation of it may answer your question as to how a nihilist makes claim to what should be valued.

As I see it, the universe was born from chaos, i.e., without purpose. We have no God or objective morality to tell us how to live, and all things that we could value are impermanent due to the constant flux of becoming that is the universe. Therefore, we arrive at nihilism. Our existence is meaningless, and only death is real.

Nihilism is the realization that no inherent value in the universe is currently discernible rather then not existing. Nihilism is the destroying of all internal notions and building again from nothing and repeating this process ones entire life when inconsistencies within your new ideas form, here you profess knowledge that there is no god, rather than that God is currently not known and may not exist. Nihilism is never about absolutes.

You may have misinterpreted what I said. What I meant was that "we have no God ... to tell us how to live," not no God, though subjectively atheism is the path I've taken. If a God exists (especially a Judeo-Christian goD), it is by definition unknowable, so any morality derived from such a thing is still only speculation.

The only God I would ever worship would have to be synonymous with Nature, because as I see it Nature is the law that governs all joy, survival and growth.

Sounds like Absurdism; ever read The Myth of Sisyphus?

I fall into the third group. But, again, I do not fool myself into believing that my mode of existence is objectively superior to those of groups one and two. (I consider drug addicts and hedonists -- like the LaVeyan Satanists mentioned in the OP -- to be an extension of group one.)

I have, and sympathise with Camus' absurdism; The Stranger is one of my favourite books. However, absurdism seems an action of active nihilism while stuck in the mentality of the second. In Sisyphus, he ends up concluding that as existence is absurd, there is no more absurd action than to live it even though all things are impermanent. Inevitably, I think that absurdism, like nihilism, is something we overcome.

Interzone / Re: SMN Forum Woes
« on: September 10, 2008, 05:23:42 PM »
Quote from: More Celt Than Sassenach
What ASBO means is that even so the universe lacks empirical values men can still choose values that are positive to their strength of character. So while the hedonist may become fat, suffer from many STD's and have an extremely questionable character the realist will attempt to find meaning for ones self regardless of whether the universe provides such meaning or not.

what's wrong with being fat and suffering from STDs, what if the realist finds that his meaning is to fuck BITCHES and eat PASTRIES, is the man of virtue some how SUPERIOR to the HEROIN ADDICT? if so, this dude wants to know WHY he is superior, because, dawg, i just ain't seein' it!
My understanding of nihilism may be different to others here, but my explanation of it may answer your question as to how a nihilist makes claim to what should be valued.

As I see it, the universe was born from chaos, i.e., without purpose. We have no God or objective morality to tell us how to live, and all things that we could value are impermanent due to the constant flux of becoming that is the universe. Therefore, we arrive at nihilism. Our existence is meaningless, and only death is real.

This creates a crisis that we must resolve, which can be done in 3 ways:

1. Kill yourself -- existence is meaningless and death is inevitable, so why postpone the end?

2. Passive nihilism -- existence is meaningless, so nothing is objectively worth doing, and I will live out this meaninglessness as the truth of existence; c.f. fatalism.

3. Active nihilism -- we have been granted life through chaos, and existence is a sandbox for us to play with and find joy; let's craft meaning that grants us the greatest and longest fulfillment in life.

In my eyes, you either decide you enjoy living, or you don't. If you don't, kill yourself. If you do, then realise that existence and joy is a goal and that there are certain ways we can prolong both. We could just live out shallow hedonism as per the second step, but if we're here we may as well make the most of it by recognising that all meaning hitherto has been constructed and we can do the same. So we create values that will give us the greatest joy collectively and individually for the limited time we have.

As per nihilism, the fat slob with the STDs = the pastry-eating bitch-fucker = the Ubermensch. However, as people who value existence and joy, we recognise that the AIDS-infected slob would not enjoy life, and that a society which values STDs and obesity would not last long. Similarly, the pastry-eating bitch-fucker may enjoy his actions, but joy is a secondary phenomenon that comes from a direction. As they're utterly transient, between his eating and his fucking, he's going to feel like shit because his life feels empty without any values. The Ubermensch, on the other hand, is liberated from all constraints in his constant cycles of self-overcoming, and because his life is continuous growth and has self-defined direction, chances are he'll experience joy. The heroin addict is not an Ubermensch because he is not overcoming himself, and is stuck in a stasis of liquid bliss.

We have overcome nihilism and become post-nihilists by choosing to create value rather than receive it or to live in meaninglessness, but are still nihilistic in that we realise that all values are essentially baseless and that we have chosen this path for our own enjoyment.

After all, why the fuck not?

Interzone / Re: Beyond Beherit
« on: September 10, 2008, 04:33:25 PM »
Kraftwerk reminds me of HLTO-era Burzum (though historically, it should be the other way around), as do Klaus Schulze and Tangerine Dream at times.

The drill 'n' bass (sometimes described as IDM) of acts like Squarepusher, Venetian Snares and Aphex Twin are highly deconstructive, complex and disorienting, like grindcore and death metal. Apart from Kraftwerk, Suicide, and ambient and some industrial music, I couldn't listen to any electronic music until I heard Venetian Snares, purely because they were so "metal."

Interzone / Re: Creationists
« on: September 10, 2008, 04:23:44 PM »
Science is metaphor as well, wouldn't you say? Both science and religion are abstractions used to describe the way the world functions. Science is more rigorous and self-critical than religion, I'd say, but it lacks teleology unless you count Darwinism as such.

This is where the Dawkin school of atheism fails.

Hurrr, science = God, but we're all equal.

lol wut?

Interzone / Re: What is Beneficial to humanity?
« on: September 10, 2008, 04:19:48 PM »
His ten points are questions for solutions. I'll have a (very brief) shot at it.

1. The only benefit of overpopulation and mass blind immigration is to increase our standing in the military and economic contest between rivalling nations. However, with it we acquire environmental and social decay, leaving us prime for the conquest by rivals anyway. We need to reduce our population and to give different ethnicities a chance to attain autonomy and agency (i.e., self-determination).

2. I don't see much wrong with philosophy except for dogmatic quarrels akin to Left/Right politics in those studying consciousness. In fact, I'm a big fan of the postmodern philosophers who through discursive analysis, deconstruction and post-structural analysis, have pulled away from the self as God of reality and looked to holistic constructions of meaning (intersubjectivity > subjectivity). Religion is saturated with new age hippies and individualism. In the West, the first step we could take is to convert Christians to Gnosticism.

3. Romanticism of equality has created a "ceiling effect" in education. We need to strip this ridiculous notion of equality and relativism and restore pride and elitism.

4. To much of a focus on abstract individualism made to look collective (human rights) and not on what is beneficial for the society. We are not equal, and are therefore not equally valuable. Society needs to decide whether it has values or is an anarchistic, relativistic wasteland.

5. Music's problem is (and always has been) the invasion of populism. Solution: as with most things, learn from the past, but move forward almost unconsciously. The best artistic works in history are produced with little rumination over what is being crafted. The unconscious has an idea which the consciousness realises in the creative process.
Entertainment's problem is intrinsic; nothing is gained from the experience as it is just entertaining. Entertainment needs to realise that it is not art, and why.

6. I'm not sure what you mean by survival, but this is my take. We have lost our survival instinct; to assert ourselves within an environment we need to adapt to it. If our methods and our ideas are not sustainable, then our society will collapse. Our reproductive methods have lost significance. Where we once believed that we were together "til death do us part" and in hard work because the marriage is all we have, we now believe in "freedom" and divorce because it's easier to give up and start another franchise elsewhere. Needs to be more of a focus on long-term effects, not superficial gratification. We have lost struggle as an ideal, and forgotten that all great things are gained through it. Society needs heroism.

7. This is tough to summarise neatly. Our individualism, entertainment and jobs that physically destroy our energy have left us feeling isolated. This isolation makes us feel worthless and unable to make changes in our world. Where we once knew everyone who lived around us, now we know celebrities overseas. The solution to this is a return to our communities. A greater focus on local communities will leave us feeling as though we have a sense of purpose in our immediate environment by working together and connecting with those who experience the same things we do, silencing fatalistic crises that are so often distracted with masturbation. More can be achieved and gained through localisation, such as the ability for communities to have their own unique differences without affecting the others' wellbeing. Local communities will be arranged by an overarching power in cases where unison is required (e.g., warfare).

8 & 9. Economy and technology are the same. We have confused the means to an end as the end in itself, losing focus of our goals as a society.

Nothing more to add.

Metal / Re: Digitization of Metal
« on: September 09, 2008, 05:29:57 PM »
Even though I got into black and death metal through the internet, I have to turn on my roots and say that the digitization of metal -- and the internet in general -- has been bad for metal because it allows for the further invasion and corruption of populism.

When black and death metal was in the underground, their music and ideas were part of a tight-knit circle which understood the connection between them. When they escaped the circle of people who understood it, the music was adopted by listeners and musicians with only a superficial understanding of the ideas behind it. What they failed to realise is that the ideas are the impetus behind the music; that is, the artform is simply an abstract communication of these ideas, and so both are inseparable.

What followed was a flood of mimicry that lacked the spirit the original movements possessed, and came out as shallow. Even worse, bands came that accepted the music while rejecting all of its ideological background, effectively creating metal while expressing ideas that were clearly unrelated to it. To anyone with any understanding of metal and what it communicates musically, this is clearly schizophrenic, comparable to someone screaming a nursery rhyme with their fists clenched.

Populism has destroyed every great musical art form to date. Keep it underground!

Metal / Re: Doomy Death Metal
« on: September 09, 2008, 05:05:26 PM »
While we're on the subject, does anyone else think the classification "death/doom" is largely misapplied?

In that most of them play more like Candlemass but with the chug of speed metal and growls from death metal?


However, I think that "doom metal" is a bit of a misnomer itself. It's really just any genre of metal played slowly and made gloomier. Doom seems to be more defined through a spirit (often defeatist) and tempo than the other genres, which have their own spirit as well as differences in musical technique.

But doom metal generally sucks due to its pity-romanticising defeatism, which is far less directive or constructive than anything else in metal. At least when Burzum's weeping on Filosofem he's implicitly hailing another age.

Metal / Re: Help with Death Metal
« on: August 26, 2008, 07:26:35 PM »
How could anyone miss Demigod?


Metal / Nodebliwith?
« on: August 13, 2008, 07:24:31 PM »
Ever since I've heard Morbid Angel's "Thy Kingdom Come", I've always wondered what was being sung in the first lyric of the second verse. The inlay of Blessed Are the Sick and all other sources I can find state it's "Twisted oath nodebliwith", which would lead me to believe this is correct. But this causes problems in itself; namely, what "nodebliwith" is. I'm tempted to think it's a typo, but I find it strange that Googling "nodebliwith" hasn't returned anybody asking the same question as I am, as if this "word" was just glossed over. I tried to decipher some live recordings of the song, but the quality was too low to make anything out.

Does anyone have any idea what is being sung here, and if it's "nodebliwith", what this actually signifies?

Metal / Re: Deicide
« on: January 10, 2007, 05:20:24 AM »
Was I the only one who enjoyed Scars of the Crucifix based completely on music?
I do realise that the titles and lyrics were completely childish Christ-bashing.

Metal / Re: What's next and who's doin it?
« on: January 08, 2007, 03:39:28 AM »
Bathory? Burzum? Darkthrone?

Metal / Re: Post-rock roots of metal
« on: January 07, 2007, 05:37:56 AM »
hardly overrated, i think black sabbath have fame beyond there worth, led zeppelin are my replacement for sabbath, although black sabbath have historical importance beyond led zeppelin (towards metal) they are musically very bland and boring

As I've always thought, though simultaneously I think that was the point -- to make music that was monotonous and emotionally dead. I must confess I've never given them much more than a few glances, though. Led Zeppelin I've given much more attention to due to the complexity in their music (when compared to Sabbath, at least).

Metal / Re: Post-rock roots of metal
« on: January 06, 2007, 04:15:34 AM »
I would've thought these were closer to progressive rock rather than post-rock, though post-rock doesn't really have a clear definition anyway.

I'll name Led Zeppelin, but I just know I'm going to get "OVERRATED" screamed at me.