/lit/ - Literature

GOD IS A BANANAFISH: a topos or SUN-SPOT on the face of Muspel (the non-ontological lux): how do we conceptualize a properly heretical break with the World, separation-without-performation? By making Kant sleep outside: life in this mixture just is life in a radically heterogenous field where Love, Murder, and the glue of Love and Murder coincide: thought functions as an AUTO-POSITIONAL binding agent (dis)joining identity and non-identity under an invariant schematism: rooted in a chora or “degree-zero” of ipseity that operates as the quilting point (… line, tube) of an “OBVERSE = PERVERSE” forebrain: that spirit of sufficiency which stitches (transubstantiates) the given into a givenness: extension is here the most diabolical principle, Achad saw through Crowley's scheme to feed his followers to Nuit, the demoness of space... Samsara is beginningless because it's minimally existent like advertising is: nonzero “clicks” are guaranteed so long as there's something TO click, always ash in an ash tray and always a bananahole for a bananafish: remember that the tetralemma applies to primal matter, the Zoroastrian Devil (who exists because he sub-sists, kind of like a certain Idea of Evil), and the Void of Buddhism: Lacan wrote the manual on how to wire humans as sex-death machines, properly Manichaean depositories of light: only with Mani could we think an anthropocentrism that is at once an anthropology of evil: of death “congealed into subjects” syntonizing their slavery to a non-all, one face of the Necker nod: some just belong to the hell of themselves, animals surely: the history of the subject is really the history of the transcendental production of an INVARIANT cognitive field, the pornographic screen of the synthetic a priori (extracting figures from grounds and forms from figures): but categories make no sense as logical operators: an organ itself is a category, or a power of phenomenalisation publicized: we're growing veins for organs we don't even have yet: “tongues are older than stomachs”: Laruelle's evil is sufficiency, Adorno's inertia: but what if the production of invariances itself were an invariant, radically “naturalized”? I determine the Real as something that I'm not, the terror & terrorism of the circle: not the Platonic chimney, a ladder laid flat on an archipelago of modes: “Jehovah dictates, Christ underdetermines”:

GOD IS A BANANAFISH: a topos or SUN-SPOT on the face of Muspel (the pre-ontological lux): how do we conceptualize a real heretical break with the World, separation-without-performation? By making Kant sleep outside: life in this mixture just is life in a radically heterogenous field where Love, Murder, and the glue of Love and Murder coincide: thought is an AUTO-POSITIONAL binding agent (dis)joining identity and non-identity under an invariant schematism: rooted in a chora or “degree-zero” of givenness that functions as the quilting point (… line, tube) of an “OBVERSE = PERVERSE” forebrain: extension is here the most diabolical principle, Achad saw through Crowley's scheme to feed his followers to Nuit, the demoness of space... Samsara is beginningless because it's minimally existent like advertising is: nonzero “clicks” are guaranteed so long as clicking is possible, always ash in an ash tray: remember that the tetralemma applies to primal matter, the Zoroastrian Devil (who is real because he does not exist, kind of like a certain Idea of Evil), and the Void of Buddhism: Lacan wrote the manual on how to wire humans as sex-death machines, properly Manichaean depositories of light: only with Mani could we think an anthropocentrism that is at once an anthropology of evil: of death “congealed into subjects” syntonizing their slavery to a non-all, one face of the Necker nod: some just belong to the hell of themselves, animals surely: what we talk about when we talk about subjectivity is really the “self-intrinsic” emergence of an invariant and UNILATERAL cognitive field: the pornographic screen of the synthetic a priori (extracting figures from grounds and forms from figures): but categories make no sense as logical operators: an organ itself is a category, or a power of phenomenalisation publicized: we're growing veins for organs we don't even have yet: “tongues are older than stomachs”: Laruelle's evil is sufficiency, Adorno's inertia: but what if the production of invariances itself were an invariant, radically “naturalized”? I determine the Real as something that I'm not, the terror & terrorism of the circle: not the Platonic chimney, a ladder laid flat on an archipelago of modes: “Jehovah dictates, Christ underdetermines”:

Looking for something that's at least psychologically realistic/interesting, along the lines of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. I've been interested in finding something good on this subject for a while but book searches basically only turn up romance novels.

GNOSTICS ARE THE SHIT OF BEING: recall our new resident schizoposter's definition of excrement: that which is in the body but not of it: recall also what Sloterdijk calls THE paradigmatic statement of what might be termed the “gnostic difference”: "to be in the world, but not of it": in my flight from the “demons of reality” I shit myself down my own interior: even the gnostic is not safe from the economy of excrescence: I am my own passage Outside: the well of my heart is the escape hatch.

Wizard of Oz thread

I do not understand how someone could enjoy this man. I've spent this last month reading his works. I cannot get past his ego. It's enormous. Look out everyone, "I" am humanity's spokesperson. He drowns in self-indulgence to the point of rambling. Nature is good. Nature is the ultimate teacher. There is solace in nature. Childhood ruled. He has no message outside of this. Blake and Holderlin, for example, are infinitely more concise, enjoyable, and didn't write with an ego. I understand his significance, but what am I missing? Where's the appeal? inb4 you don't have to enjoy everyone anon, yes I know I just want to understand why people do

“This is what you shall do;
Love the earth and sun and the animals, despise riches,
give alms to every one that asks,
stand up for the stupid and crazy,
devote your income and labor to others,
hate tyrants,
argue not concerning God,
have patience and indulgence toward the people,
take off your hat to nothing known or unknown or to any man or number of men,
go freely with powerful uneducated persons and with the young and with the mothers of families, read these leaves in the open air every season of every year of your life,
re-examine all you have been told at school or church or in any book,
dismiss whatever insults your own soul,
and your very flesh shall be a great poem and have the richest fluency not only in its words but in the silent lines of its lips and face and between the lashes of your eyes and in every motion and joint of your body.”

Any good werewolf stories?

A simple child,
That lightly draws its breath,
And feels its life in every limb,
What should it know of death?

I met a little cottage Girl:
She was eight years old, she said;
Her hair was thick with many a curl
That clustered round her head.

She had a rustic, woodland air,
And she was wildly clad:
Her eyes were fair, and very fair;
—Her beauty made me glad.

‘Sisters and brothers, little Maid,
How many may you be?’
‘How many? Seven in all,’ she said,
And wondering looked at me.

‘And where are they? I pray you tell.’
She answered, ‘Seven are we;
And two of us at Conway dwell,
And two are gone to sea.

‘Two of us in the church-yard lie,
My sister and my brother;
And, in the church-yard cottage, I
Dwell near them with my mother.’

‘You say that two at Conway dwell,
And two are gone to sea,
Yet ye are seven!—I pray you tell,
Sweet Maid, how this may be.’

Then did the little Maid reply,
‘Seven boys and girls are we;
Two of us in the church-yard lie,
Beneath the church-yard tree.’

‘You run above, my little Maid,
Your limbs they are alive;
If two are in the church-yard laid,
Then ye are only five.’

‘Their graves are green, they may be seen,’
The little Maid replied,
‘Twelve steps or more from my mother’s door,
And they are side by side.

‘My stockings there I often knit,
My kerchief there I hem;
And there upon the ground I sit,
And sing a song to them.

‘And often after sun-set, Sir,
When it is light and fair,
I take my little porringer,
And eat my supper there.

‘The first that died was sister Jane;
In bed she moaning lay,
Till God released her of her pain;
And then she went away.

‘So in the church-yard she was laid;
And, when the grass was dry,
Together round her grave we played,
My brother John and I

‘And when the ground was white with snow,
And I could run and slide,
My brother John was forced to go,
And he lies by her side.’

‘How many are you, then,’ said I,
‘If they two are in heaven?’
Quick was the little Maid’s reply,
‘O Master! we are seven.’

‘But they are dead; those two are dead!
Their spirits are in heaven!’
’Twas throwing words away; for still
The little Maid would have her will,
And said, ‘Nay, we are seven!’

Were they the greatest of all time?

EXEGESIS OF THE WHITE LAMB: a bolt of metanoic lightning has shattered the Black Cube, CHRISTOS descends into the combinatory engine of time just as the redemptive topology of the subject - that stanchion that qualifies man as the Allogenes, turning the duck of the archontic power-system into the rabbit of liberative negation: move and counter-move: Kant's transcendental “I” defined against the objectivity of the empirical self; knowledge of the transcendental subject qualifies as the knowledge of a kind of pre-propositional self-acquaintance or “conceivability”: which poses the question: what grounds the circularity of this acquaintance, and what is its relation (if any) with a gnostic soteriology? In Buddhist terms: how to understand the retroactive illumination of what-always-was? Univocity of inner sense hosts the combinatory field of the human: mirroring the cosmic khora in which transgression, perversion, and Evil become concomitants of the teleological production of novelty: Adorno: Evil is the identity of triviality and inertia: Abraxas/the Brahma Lung: that effectivity against which “nothing stands opposed ... but the ineffective ... his effective nature unfold[ing] itself freely”: from a Vedic perspective, heat death signifies the exhaustion of the khoric “algorithmics of connection” inherent to this epoch: already anticipated by capitalism's combinatory simulation of signs: libidinally charged bathwater, ahegao toasters: zygosis psychosis of the White Lamb: the commitment to Empodecles' God of Love BEFORE Strife's perforating “passion” for transgressive access; but Lacan: if freedom lacks the knowledge adequate to transgression, that purity must in some way be “immature”, stillborn, ie Darkness stands in a relation of objectivity to the Light: inverted by Sethianism: Light alone understands Evil's major malfunction … Carpocratian thermodynamics: before the end of time, all possible horrors will be fulfilled, just because they are possible; that space yawns to abide the murder of flesh by non-flesh … man makes himself findable in the world to the utmost limit: it is not an illusion that capital inverts the constitutive relation between image and world: Valentinus would agree: the light-image of the Anthropos precedes the demoniacal construction of homo sapiens in time: Derrida: writing's correlation with onanism: that obscene, simulative power of the presence/absence binary switch: anime weaponizes the synthetic-pareidolic function against itself: but this “retroactivity” is not without soteric value: just as someone whose never heard of rabbits will suddenly perceive one in the Duck/Rabbit figure after being told what they are, so do avidya and liberation work on the same principle: the Rabbit and Duck are consistent with the same “stimulus identity”, it is KNOWLEDGE that makes effectual: axiological variance within invariance; alternation in constancy:

EXEGESIS OF THE WHITE LAMB: a bolt of metanoic lightning has shattered the Black Cube, CHRISTOS descends into the combinatory engine of time just as the redemptive topology of the subject - that stanchion that qualifies man as the Allogenes, turning the duck of the archontic power-system into the rabbit of liberative negation: move and counter-move: Kant's transcendental “I” defined against the objectivity of the empirical self; knowledge of the transcendental subject qualifies as the knowledge of a kind of pre-propositional self-acquaintance or “conceivability”: which poses the question: what grounds the circularity of this acquaintance, and what is its relation (if any) with a gnostic soteriology? In Buddhist terms: how to understand the retroactive illumination of what-always-was? Univocity of inner sense hosts the combinatory field of the human: mirroring the cosmic khora in which transgression, perversion, and Evil become concomitants of the teleological production of novelty: Adorno: Evil is the identity of triviality and inertia: Abraxas/the Brahma Lung: that effectivity against which “nothing stands opposed ... but the ineffective ... his effective nature unfold[ing] itself freely”: from a Vedic perspective, heat death signifies the exhaustion of the khoric “algorithmics of connection” inherent to this epoch: already anticipated by capitalism's combinatory simulation of signs: libidinally charged bathwater, ahegao toasters: zygosis psychosis of the White Lamb: the commitment to the Empodecles' God of Love BEFORE Strife's perforating “passion” for transgressive access; but Lacan: if freedom lacks the knowledge adequate to transgression, that purity must in some way be “immature”, stillborn, ie Darkness stands in a relation of objectivity to the Light: inverted by Sethianism: Light alone understands Evil's major malfunction … averse thermodynamics: before the end of time, all possible horrors will be fulfilled, just because they are possible; that space yawns to abide the murder of flesh by non-flesh … man makes himself findable in the world to the utmost limit: it is not an illusion that capital inverts the constitutive relation between image and world: Valentinus would agree: the light-image of the Anthropos preceded the demoniacal construction of homo sapiens in Hyle: Derrida: writing's correlation with onanism: that obscene, simulative power of the presence/absence binary switch: anime weaponizes the synthetic-pareidolic function against itself: but this “retroactivity” is not without soteric value: just as someone whose never heard of rabbits will suddenly perceive one in the Duck/Rabbit figure after being told what they are, so do avidya and liberation work on the same principle: the Rabbit and Duck are consistent with the same “stimulus identity”, it is KNOWLEDGE that makes effectual: axiological variance within invariance; alternation in constancy:

Books about WWII from Japanese prospective?

>get horny one day
>decide to write a fantasy erotica for shits and giggles
>publish it on an erotica site
>overwhelmingly positive response
>people are waiting for part 2
h-haha maybe I do have talent.

I want serious answers.
Why poerty is important? What are the benefits of learning and reading poerty?

>2020 and still undefeated against atheists

can anyone stop him

Best edition of Leaves of Grass? Favorite biography?

What do you guys think of Walt Whitman? Best edition of Leaves of Grass? Favorite biography?

LIGHT POLLUTION IS DYSGENIC, SLAUGHTERHOUSES ARE THE BEACH-HEAD OF AN ONTOLOGICAL INVASION, AND HENADS ARE BEING'S FOURIER TRANSFORMS: constituent frequencies of the CTMU prime signal: causalities coextensive but undetectable to one another except as their becoming in a coordinative manifold: so there's two pictures here: the standard model of a One splitting into an All, the God-Zygote's diremption into tessellated multiplicity, etc. (Scott David Finch's Demiurge as Hegel's tadpole, that which diminishes the darkness by consuming it, until, at one with its petri dish, the Idea honeycombs into a World: ie, GOOGLE BUILDS A GEIST MACHINE: the public become cybernetic stomach stone*): and then the one they don't tell you: imagine the universe as the wave interference produced by discrete hyparxes in resonance: the “universalization” of primitive individuals/Gods: substantially infinite, but truncated by duration: not a prism that splits white light, but collects a rainbow: Langan gets to keep the unity of reality, but not the unity of what happens in it: AS IT: so it all began with an anon on here claiming to be on the verge of a breakthrough in how we understand causality and the real: I think he was onto something huge: think causal pluralism: the Rashomon effect ontologized: reality is not a “container” in unilateral progression, but the parallactic convergence or “intersection” of many causal chains whose independent slices we observe arbitrarily as sequential on a “master” series*: nice echo of Being in Proclus as a space of negotiation between henads: independent (autarchic) universes related by a mediate (ex-timate) monad: also, with Moravec's claim that “other realities” are just transforms of the constants in this one*: parallel natural laws superimposed over one another like clashing color temperatures, a Rabbit-Duck metacosm: perceptible only to genius: like Boehme who popped the hood on the Mainframe looking at a pewter cup: his beauty in the world was not a mirror of Heaven but Heaven itself: likewise with Hell: teleological Eden overlapped with Herzog's jungle: the interplay of Love/Strife only operative within/as their respective metaphysical registers*: the prosaic does not compete with the metaphysical, or even vice-versa: the Christ-Cut: what PKD called ditheon perception, Shestov's pneumatic eye: the next step in human evolution: a “two-chambered ultra mind” for which the Cross appears as a grave and a door. With Christ ended the bicameral age: our tutelage under these para-daimons: and the umbilical officially cut by the linkage of brain hemispheres, like the two blades of a scissor: Christ signaled, yes, the dawn of proletarian consciousness, but also the danger of this dawning: our phenomenological declension into an “oppositionality point”*: we call the Demiurge that which totalizes its “signal” just as the signal of totalization: a hermit crab of the vacuum:

>tfw failed the 5 hour Western Canon exam to enter the library

I wasn't expecting them to test me on Ugaritic poetry!

Why are bombastic, wacky characters more interesting than reasonable, realistic characters?

EVERYTHING THAT SHITS IS DAMNED: the inefficiency of life, the life-process, tethers being to its remainder: Derrida: there is no fire that does not leave cinders: “cinders there are”: the cinder as Orisian surplus, what is not and cannot be burned up in the final conflagration: what even the eschaton cannot eradicate: because only cinders can birth a Second Ainulindalë : the eternal cycle of cosmoi fed by Osiris-as-ontological-fertilizer: Eden was an open thermodynamic system, the knowledge of good and evil was the knowledge of what can only be born immanent to the thermodynamic closure of sin (Boehme): Leviathanic time is closed time: THE EMPIRE NEVER ENDED: Shestov: man fell because he glimpsed the Black Sun of God: man fell because he glimpsed the Whiteheadian maw of the objective as the ultimate predator: the Night of Brahma as the perfect intestine: only nescience can transfigure pain into deliverance, as only the nothingness of sleep can heal: Hegel: it is not the mind that is an improvement of corporeal digestion, it is rather digestion that is nature's imperfect prefiguring of the Mind: WE LIVE INSIDE A BLACK HOLE: Adam fell because he glimpsed consumption written into the very laws of his knowing: the annularity of creation: God as a singularity transfigured to white only when it is entered voluntarily: the Lion King and The Matrix are modernized retellings of the nocturnal descent into the Duat: don't believe me? Cornell West & Ken Wilbur in their commentary agree the final sequence in the trilogy is Neo's embracing of a Zen-like, ateleological “choiceless-ness” over and above the ahrimanic hunger for purpose: Smith (the body of Osiris, the endlessly pollillating Zero) must become one with Neo (the Solar “I”, the “because-I-choose-to” of the Deep): Ra, the energy of consciousness, comes face-to-face with Osiris, the “being” of being: THE AKH IS THAT WHICH IS REGENERATED BY ITS DIFFERENCE FROM ITS SUBSTRATE: hylics are all Ka, pneumatics all Akh: in this universe, only the suicides are as blessed as the saints: the Tibetan thanatonaught: you either identify with the sky of mind or the subterra of the Void: but there is no choice as such, only a part's recognition of its kinship with the Whole: Calvin was right, damnation is metaphysical, not moral: the human species proves not even good works can save a defective self: Kierkegaard: despair is not the failure of the self, but the failure of the self to be a self: only the return of a drop into the ocean: the Pharaoh, like the genius, is the drop that mirrors the expanse, he (re)produces in himself his own constellation sky: Atum (God/CTMU/Logos) is: the Lichtung: an intrinsically self-emergent actuality: the soul, instead, a hand-me-down bootstrap: Atum has monopolized (the intelligibility latent in/of) the Void, anything that emerges afterwards can only emerge into his worldhood.

GOD IS ELECTROMAGNETISM, PNEUMAVORES ARE REAL: THE IMMATERIAL SOUL HAS IMMATERIAL PREDATORS: WE LIVE INSIDE A BLACK HOLE, LOCKED IN A META-WAR BETWEEN FORCE/EXPANSION/LIGHT AND THE OUTER GODS OF THE TRUE VACUUM: metastability as FIAT LUX: if only you knew how bad things really are: Hegel's dialectic rationalizes Perlman's Leviathan: thought becomes the concretion of the universal/universality, because CIVILIZATION IS A THERMODYNAMIC TAPEWORM: a tapeworm that, paradoxically, generates the very surplus it consumes, just as (Hegelian) Spirit is the balm for the ontological cut that it is and can only be: remember, Land and Perlman ironically agree on one point: intelligence is “baked” into nature in just the same way the Leviathan is everywhere-already in virtual suspension, a machine whose parts need only to be “picked up” to be set to its dreadful work again: in this way, the Leviathan is immortal, but immortal only in the way dead things are immortal: Zizek: evil is the assertion of the Ground within that which it grounds: the irruption of Void within Logos: Hegel: evil is the assertion of universality against the particular: Schelling: evil is the attempt of the particular to posit its own ground: let's bring it all together: evil is the attempt to ground the UNGRUND: every species is the devil of the one below it in the food chain, and what your masters will never tell you is the natural-biological food chain extends upward into a spiritual clime: John C. Wright was (wait for it) right about everything: his stories set in Hodgson's Night Land don't pull any punches: there are entities that eat souls the way we eat calamari: that use Love as bait to fish for more Logoi to eat: is not the Leviathan an irruption of the Outside? A cadaverous demon-engine, poised to crack this planet open like a walnut? Hegel's Phenomenology doesn't narrate Spirit's contingent dawning into the knowledge of its own process, not really: Spirit is the auto-justification of the Leviathan's dominion over this earth: the dominion of the Idea as omnivore: truth is inherently provisional, processual, because the Leviathan hasn't had its fill yet: ramified immediacy engineered into the concretion/boostrap vector of THE NIGHT LAND'S WATCHERS.

THE BRAIN IS THE ECLIPSE OF ITS GROUND: Bakker's Blind Brain Theory does for cognitive science what Kant did for metaphysics: the gist of it is very simple: lacking direct access to an object, a brain must rely on some kind of interpretive algorithm to infer appearances from context clues: for example, those optical illusions that trick you into perceiving the same two lines as being different lengths are actually tricking your depth perception heuristic: the brain uses what Bakker calls medial mechanisms/components to construct its perceptions, but just like Kant, the rules of the construction are not themselves part of the construction (except in an a priori mode): not because we simply lack perception of the ruleset, but because there is no perception /without/ a ruleset: the brain is what makes a man, as Heidegger calls him, the “environing” animal: its inclusion in an environment is precisely what selects for its determinate (read: heuristic) occlusion /of/ that environment: the brain must always be screening for properties relevant to the problems it is always trying to solve, and hence why, because it was made to solve problems, it is always presupposing them: no wonder then that Hegel's dialectic is a triadic, immanent process: there is first the immediate/the given, and then the very “negative space” the given must necessarily gesture towards, but also simultaneously occlude, to be given as /itself/: negativity, THOUGHT: that determination's relating back to the context-condition of its own intelligibility: “Being, pure Being-”: the mark marks the context by which it is made legible to itself as the mark that it is: in other words, the brain must rely on some kind of medial regime to functionally abbreviate its complexity, by contravening its ground it can only problematize it: instead of approaching the task of Knowledge as the task of solving some Problem, we should instead approach it with a mind to how it is the brain generates these “problem ecologies” that it does in the first place: thought as ramified MU: now a lot of this is old hat, but here's where it gets interesting: Bakker says human consciousness as we know it is an artifact of the brain's limited processing power, its inability to correlate all of its contents at once: the more we optimize processing power/intelligence, the more the heuristic utility of consciousness is superseded: Derrida: the interiority of the Thing can only be the non-essence that continuously defers the Thing's identity with itself, from itself: the thing Is, only insofar as it Is Not: again, old hat, but I'm struck by the way Derrida formulates this relationship between interiority and exteriority: as he puts it, the interior is the “deferment of the spatialization of time and the temporalization of space”: sound familiar? This is what I've been saying this whole time: CHRISTIC HUMAN INTERIORITY IS THE ANTI-MOLOCH: THE LAST AND ONLY BULWARK AGAINST TOTAL OMEGA POINT COMPLIANCE.