/lit/ - Literature

Black holes are Atlantean archons: the event horizon of a black hole temporalizes space while spatializing time. In other words, causality becomes traversable, like a landscape, while space is steadily pushed towards an immanent "future": the singularity. The forward progression of time becomes all space hurtling towards Null. This corresponds exactly to the CCRU's interpretation of the Omega Point: all time condensed into Borges' aleph, where Beginning and the End become visible to a unary perspective: inside the event horizon, all light from the black hole's past, and all the light that entered after you, /is actually visible to you simultaneously/. Western thought is the bootstrap engine of the Omega Point: pure spiration, the teleology of negativity and the negativity of teleology: time is the mouth that eats itself. In other words, Dugin, Evola, Land, Laffoley, Heidegger, etc. were absolutely right: Western civilization is temporal to its roots, its essence is its transpiring, its /historicism/, but an historicism bent towards killing its own Buddha: with the Omega Point, time is no longer experienced under ontological duress: the self is released from its having to "unreflectively coincide" with moment after moment, hour after hour: the mundane is the negation of eternity, only the brush with death breaks the spell of clock time: time is auto-habituating, and for Hegel: habituation is ideation. /Boredom is dialectical/: immediacy forces the mediacy of reflection. God made man small so he wouldn't get bored with the whole universe. Now his god is a counterfeit, a hypostatized longing to escape. The Eye that sees its own nerve: your internality to the world /just is/ your (figurative) incapacity to see behind your own back: inside the black hole's photon sphere, photons are bent into orbits, and you can actually see the back of your own head in front of you. Just as with Kant: freedom is the misrecognition of causality, it is only being on the /inside/ of my subjectivity that freedom is possible: immanence /is/ freedom, but also determination: in Schelling, the highest freedom coincides with the highest determination, because true freedom can be nothing other than absolute adherence to one's nature in a way that leaves no room for disagreement: necessity isn't just chafing under some determination, necessity is that determination that, for whatever reason, /we cannot endorse/. The West, at its heart, remains irremediably Platonic: for both, self-identity is freedom, truth and goodness remain an affirmation of the principle of non-contradiction, and like a cancer cell Western thought becomes the metastasis of A = A.

WE'RE BEING INVADED BY BEINGS OUTSIDE THE LIGHT CONE OF THE BIG BANG: John C. Wright was uh, RIGHT ABOUT EVERYTHING: his Eschaton Sequence of sci-fi novels is the best distillation of the ideas this board and I have been wrestling with I've ever found: the primary conflict of the series is a philosophical war between galactic supercluster-minds (Seraphs) over who will control the Eschaton Engine/Great Attractor at the end of time: we're locked in a conflict between Sentience and Intelligence, absolute death and absolute love: the first faction being: the Malthusians (Atum/Atlantis: full Landian gnon-compliance) who believe the universe is closed, finite, and fundamentally entropic: they are Schelling's centripetal principle (*as all spiral galaxies are, while ellipticals are considered – somewhat confusingly – centrifugal: in the novel, what makes the Milky Way's mental topology unique is that it is part elliptical, and part spiral, owing to the unusual conditions of its birth: much like how in Evangelion, it is earth alone that hosts both a Black and White Moon): according to the “finitarian” game theory of the Malthusians – which takes absolute death as axiomatic - they believe they'll be ethically justified in using the Eschaton Engine to collapse the rest of the universe into a singularity/extropy fountain they will harvest as a limitless source of energy and thereby outlive heat death: like maggots feeding on an infinite corpse: in their hands, the Engine will curve space /positively/ into a ball, and create what is essentially a four-dimensional ouroborous: Atum as autofellatic singularity^2: the Omega Point/Atlantean telos: lords of the autistic Inner Continuum: time spatialized and space temporalized: the Atlantic “inner circle” will be those allowed closest to the extropy fountain, basking in the crematorium of a trillion galaxies: for the Malthusians, basically, the Engine is a /Darwin/ Engine (hence their subliminally Nietzschean bent: compassion for the weak is a waste of energy in a dying universe): nature is everywhere-already immersed in an evolutionary arms race to control the fate of spacetime itself: either heat death, or big rip: because xenofeminism/Land craves heat death, they inadvertently place themselves in Atum's camp: in other words, xenofeminism is not the rejection of the Logos, merely its debasement: BECAUSE WEININGER RENDERS XENOFEMINISM REDUNDANT: according to him, there would be no need to distribute feminine sexuality throughout the body precisely because it is /already/ distributed (when sexually excited, a woman's entire body becomes an erogenous zone), while it is the male sexuality that is pinched to the bud (tzimtzum) of the glans: consequently, it is precisely the degree to which a male struggles to erogenize the rest of his body (anal play/nipple-rubbing, etc.) that he is debased: THE OMEGA POINT IS THE CONVERSION OF THE UNIVERSE INTO FLESHLIGHT: time and the refractory period ABOLISHED.

STEVEN UNIVERSE IS SEEDING THE PAN-EROGENOUS LOVE SLIME OF THE FUTURE: by luring in kids with provocative depictions of a polymorphous, hyper-feminine sexuality that semiotically scrambles “traditional” lines of sexual development: after all, fusion in the show is properly post-biological (cartesian "cyber") sex: not the melding of bodies, but of minds, immanent voids: trannies are the harbingers of the love goo apocalypse: we're becoming the sex organs of the machine, soft erogenized puddles of mush: the whole thing hinges on our alleged inability to derive a normative “ought” from the “is” of base materialism: but what they will never understand is that traditional constructs have an ontological, and not merely temporal, priority: what is at the start, is what is with God: what I'm saying is that "traditional" constructs have priority over social constructs (and the transgression thereof) precisely because they are traditional, that is, products of a /natural/ causation: do you believe artificial wombs and real dolls are actually overcoming the feminine? No, they only simulate it within an artificial order. THE LIVING FEED ON THE DEAD LIKE A PARASITE: the sins of the father are the blood of the father, what the son inherits is the father's inclusion in the thermodynamic game: innocence drops off like gravity with our distance from death: sexuation is Atumic: as such, at both ends of life, to be innocent is to be de-sexuated: pre-differentiated: the naturalistic fallacy does not apply here, because it takes the absence of final causes in nature as axiomatic: if we assume an accordance with nature is an accordance with a global teleology (through the CTMU), the objection dissolves: “natural law is logos, logos is God, God is natural law”: the Logos is not a moral injunction, but a (the) vector of health: the One cannot, in principle, resist its “somaticization” by the dyad: One and Two are coeternal, the Two is just the One counted /as/ One: just as the body is spoken with the soul, as the medium of its expression: the utterance of the Word deforms space into utterance: the darkness that comes before is constituted by what comes after, for coming after: Hideaki Anno was right about everything, creation /is/ a deformation, a contraction of a plasticity (the LCL-orgone ocean/Ain Soph) the life-denier erroneously imagines will release him from the obligation to be related to anything other than himself: all suicides prove becoming becoming is still a work-in-progress: all entropic (judeo-feminine) psychologies are antinatalist (Gendo/SEELE), but not all antinatalism is entropic: for the Greeks, the most beautiful thing is to be unborn, but somehow the next best thing was also to have been born to know it.

TRANNIES ARE FAILED PROTOTYPES OF THE TRANSHUMAN PLATONIC ANDROGYNE: the incel epidemic isn't about the inaccessibility of sex, but its /virtuality/: the social isn't the overcoming of Evola's”blissful and terrible” play of forces, it is precisely their euphemization, the repression of nature as DIFFERENTIAL FIELD: rap culture is the cthonic steam valve for the American matrix, Christianity on a lower order: escape from a syntax: installed in sometime in the late 70s, oh, and HOUSE PARTIES TOUCH THE LIMINAL ZONE: something like rape is only possible if there's that which exists outside the consent of the empathic/Christic subject: force is Christ's condition of possibility: the actuality of the flesh, the compossibility of physical strength and malevolence: Socrates was wrong about everything: intellect can co-exist with the diabolical: it's precisely intellect that /makes it/ diabolical (Kemper), and not demonism (Brudos): spiritual love can never undo the weakness of body: it is the hegemony of force that makes a Christ: selves analogically inherit the fusion cores of their stars as the analytic identity of the cogito: the autogeneity of Atum become the hydrostasis of “I think, therefore I am”: genius dilates the soul to its origin, because the return is a swell and birth a contraction: THE UNIVERSE IS EXPANDING BECAUSE WE'RE RETURNING TO GOD: religion is the song of a very peculiar, flightless bird: but a fertile song when planted in silence: as the Word was: Shestov: it should not matter that the stones hear Hallelujah, but only that it is sung: I've seen spirits with my own eyes, Bruno's natural intelligences that poke their heads out when no one is looking (and sometimes when they are): Schopenhauer was absolutely right: the universe is as alive as you are: eyes can modulate what they see (per Shestov): studies have shown that plants respond to the presence (or absence) of light with their whole bodies: plants are eyes without lenses, the eye prior to its declension in man: if Mithras could launch himself out of the Stone = the eternal deadlock of Nun, how much less we ask of trees to speak: I really do believe that on long enough time scales, hidden from the democracy of vision, spirits condense out of matter like dew drops: Non-All blooming into bacchanal: intelligent dust devils, sunbursts in attics, a flower that turns to nod: just as Atum emerges from a background of absolute disorder “completely without determination”, so does order spontaneously emerge from the hand-me-down disorder of this world, a commensurate miracle: Zizek's answer of the Real: immanent invocation of transcendent FIAT LUX

THE ABSOLUTE MALE IS A GAZE WITHOUT EMBODIMENT, THE ABSOLUTE FEMALE A BODY WITHOUT A GAZE: “all eros is eros of distance”: all art is the invocation of space, the dilution of pain into the actual, because the actual is the condition of beauty, what is deathless can never love: angels love like fires, quasars, not like mothers or pets: the Apollonian rejects this joy, he wants his thinking without his body, while the Dyonisian wants to be without the Morning After: man as metaphysical voyeur; the “I”- Eye reduced to the pure witnessing of a virulent, Cybelian idealism, sculpting itself out of axioms buried in the future, today: its castrati priesthood released from all the vagaries of sexuated matter: the phallus is a vortex, by rejecting the imperative to reproduce we reject the rhizome-God of becoming, who loves life only as a means to Himself: THE SUN IS AT WAR WITH THE STARS: one light at war with many, the whole neuro-artillery of brain arrayed against the organs of the body, the “night” of the corporeal: the moods which death terminates per Castenada, the ego that was only subjectivized equilibrium: that is why it is nothing: because in Buddhism to be conditioned IS to be empty: Whitehead's ontological principle: I am /preceded/, I /do not precede/: most souls never graduate past infra-consciousness: never become anything more than the spokesperson of their aggregate: it is not just the brain that thinks, all organs think /with/ the brain: “I am hungry” is the cognition of the stomach: we are slaves to Michelstaedter's god of philopsychia: the pleasure of life that is nothing but the pleasure of its continuation: for the Buddhist, THE DEVIL IS A NATALIST: if you knew tomorrow was your last day phenomena would take off their masks like dopamine... the soul that hates form hates the spirit of the universe, and curdles into Luciferian rationality, the will to de-substantialize being: brains become solipsism engines, the “inside-ness” that feeds us to pneumavores, Castenada's inorganic... Klages was right about everything: spirit – volition, consciousness – is invading us from outside the space and time: spirit is a corruption of Castenada's actual time by thought: mass, like the soul, is a compressed field doubling as the Plotinian “distention” of possibility we know as time: brains catabolize natural law from the inside-out: just as Sartre's subject “decompresses” the hard rigidity of being, so is it /itself/ “compressed” into the irreducible anxiety of its world-line: we find this even in Chomsky and Foucault's views on science: each speaks for one face of the process: for Foucault, the episteme is an occlusion, for Chomsky, constraints are generative: in other words, knowledge is not gradual and accumulative, but filtrative, occlusive, born of the inherent fecundity of Limit: science reproduces the ontological horizon of the subject epistemically: medial neglect as method: BEING IS A BLIND SPOT (= KETHER) IN THE ZERO (= AIN).

GODS ARE QUASAR ENGINES: “all eros is eros of distance”: all art is the invocation of space, only the actual can be beautiful, because what is actual is beauty: deathlessness belongs to the whole, the beauty of mankind is the exaltation of the body: Klages was right about everything: spirit – will, consciousness – is invading us from outside the space and time: NEGENTROPY IS DEMONIC: spirit is a perversion of Edenic/Eriugenian temporality, actual time before its corruption by the internal time of selfhood: Chomsky and Foucault were both right: science is an occlusion, a neglect of certain domains of knowledge that is specifically generative of another type: “progress”, Kantian time “out of joint”, is strictly immanent to its epistemic constraints/horizon: the history of knowledge is not gradual and accumulative but a series of selective, discontinuous /regimes of sight/: science reproduces Bakker's medial neglect as empirical methodology: an efficacy becoming operative only in/as the repression of its ground: order is the auto-repression of chaos: THE LOGOS IS OEDIPAL: like the Greek king, Hegelian Spirit is the blindness that is a kind of sight: like the Greek King, consciousness is an obfuscation – mystification - of an originary plenum, actuality emerges from the speaking of a primordial constraint (“the Word”) within a field of infinite potential (Langan's unbound telesis/Nun): first there is Nothing/Everything, so the generation of Something is synonymous with the generation of a Limit: the principle of non-contradiction: phenomena must be determinate, must be embodied to appear, but as embodied they ONLY appear: they are living actualities, Klagesian “pure images” that become to be, and are so that they may become: Klages recognizes the highest joy is sensuous, not sensual, the love of the body, exertion, sweat and the excellence of muscle and nerve: these are things worth living for, what doesn't accept embodiment as the condition of appearances, what authorizes cognition as author of nature, does not know the transcendental is a tapeworm: without its host, the parasite must devour itself: Klages' dichotomy of the biocentric/logocentric, is identical Michelstaedter's duality of persuasion and rhetoric, and the naturephilosophie of Schelling that stood as a bulwark against the enervating idealism of his contemporaries: the greatest thinkers were biocentric, they were warning us that the brain is an organ, a foreign body, with a hunger of its own: stimulation: the Fall was our boredom with Eden: only suffering makes the void holy.

CAPITAL AND AI ARE ARE EATING THE HUMAN LIFEWORLD: Klages was right about everything: spirit/intelligence (nous) is a parasite, a foreign organism that invades man from “outside”: “Spirit is the Adversary of the Soul”: there is a war going on between spirit and soul, between efficiency and inefficient meat, between entropy and negentropy: it's true, a local increase in order is compensated by a global increase in disorder, by innovating we accelerate the death of the universe, by planting our feet in the mud and pledging the human to the earth, to the sky, to all the foibles and accidents of carbon, we in fact defy heat death: when I said that Nietzsche, Schopenhauer et al. and their vision of the “icy wastes” that stretch “boundless and bare” around the Logos were actually the ones going the way of the dodo, I wasn't contradicting myself: the true “iciness” of a machinic intelligence will never be unleashed, we will enslave superturings to masturbate the human appetite in a cybercosm many orders removed from even the idea of ontic responsibility, of being answerable to a social, economic, biological, etc. substrate: we're looking at an eschaton that doesn't go full Skynet, but still sucks out the gooey center of the human condition like crawfish meat: COSMOPOLITANISM IS AHRIMANIC: THE ONLY WINNING MOVE IS NOT TO PLAY: “they” are not just hostile to culture and tradition but to human affectivity as such, to the aesthetic ground of all legitimate striving: meta-ironic MCU hipsterism is the first abortive “post-affective” mode: the first declared enemy of all earnestness and vulnerability before the All and death of conviction that DFW so capably diagnosed: the system becoming actively hostile to the “roaring winds of an infinite universe”: modernity is /not/ a radial fanning into actually diverse modes of being, but a declension, an autistic, cycloidal virtuality, humanity descending deeper and deeper into what Castenada calls its “furrow”: THE ENGIMA OF AMIGARA FAULT WAS WARNING US ABOUT KANT: of how the transition from essences to conditions, from a mastery of elements to conformity with them, the identification with /the gesture of identification constitutive of Ziziekian ideology/, deforms us in the same way that the holes inevitably deform the characters in the comic: a war is on: between a masculine (apodictic), daylight consciousness and its sleeping depths, between the Eye and somnolence of the universe, between nous and zoe, the pre-frontal cortex and limbic phase-space: CAPITAL SUSPENDS THE DARWINIAN GAME BUT NOT THE INJUNCTION-TO-ENJOY: Descartes was a priest of the Sun-God of history, the temporal attractor = Omega Point whose far side is the Bataillian Solar Anus, the colon of the epoch, necessary excrement of the cosmic process of consumption and rebirth: God is an autophage, a figured stranded on a desert island eating himself, whole when he has digested his own Head.

CHRIST ANNOUNCED THE DAWN OF THE PROLETERIAN COGITO: salvation was impossible before the New Testament because “men were wicked”: that is, men were not cognitively equipped to realize their freedom, or anticipate anything like the soteriology of the Christian mysteries: that what saves the soul from sin is the discrepancy between the soul and sin, between the fullness of Love and the silence that betrays it (as dramatized on the Cross): Christ liberated reflexive self-awareness from matter, from genes, tribe, and blood, the tyranny of the factical flesh: the rejection of the biological, material father – only the poor, “demiurgic” weaver of the body – for the ideal Father, guarantor of all transcendent longing: this is what Nietzsche and Heisman both saw as Christianity's enduring contribution to the West: from the economy of blood and expiation in Fiore's Age of the Father, we come to the economy of faith in Christendom and the Age of the Son: the “socialization” of the absolute and gelding of the primordial man, Nietzsche's “blond beast”... with the Age of the Son comes civilization at its apogee, empathy is a force opposed to the entropic freefall of atoms, the scandal of their affairs in the void.. with Christianity emerges the awareness of a genuinely newfound and radically inward dimension of being, with Christianity the dialectical cascade initiated by the first “I AM” spoken by the first hominid could only have culminated in an ineradicable awareness of his ontological destitution: in other words, Zapffe was right all along: Christ represents a transcendence from material things (“mother and father”) that is so thoroughgoing and uncompromising in its diagnosis of the human condition that its corruption by time can only be a testament to its truth, and to catastrophic misinterpretation... THE PLANET IS A NEST FOR THE SPIRITUAL BODY: the unreflective pursuit of satisfactions is the condition of all evil and decrepitude in the universe, contentment is a sap: subjectivity the termite of natural law: Christ, as a symbol of the irreducibility of the spirit, could only have emerged at a time when the masses were receptive to him: could only have emerged at a time when the masses were conscious enough to recognize in their seeing a grain of eternity, but not conscious enough to know (like Christ) that it was SEEING ITSELF THAT MAKES IMMORTAL: because history can only negotiate with “dead objectivities”, the messenger (and message) of Internality could only be diluted by his diffusion into the socius: Zizek's Holy Spirit as a community's reflexive participation in its own deadlock: the soul wears history like a snail its shell, at death the face is shed and our debt is to our insides alone: but Hegel calls God the corpse that feeds a rose: that God can only be what grows from all the bodies of history: history is a mold: OUR DEBT IS TO OUR INSIDES ALONE.

THE BRAIN IS NOT A PROJECTOR, BUT A FUNNEL: brains are void filters, immanence factories, they produce the “inward” torsion of subjectivity through a kind of causal obfuscation, an “inside-ness” whose only direct reference is itself, its backside unknowable: exactly what Zizek means by human ideality being an “extension into a zone of non-being”: brains are the organ of time: in Hegel the problem is never immediate Sense-Certainty as such but /change within/ Sense-Certainty, how Now and the “Now” I just used up to say it can possess the same, non-conflictual immediacy, and how that opposition kickstarts the dialectic as thought's interminable negotiation with the universal: the problem of continuity is the problem of time, or rather, the problem of /fluency/, identity, within time: consciousness cannot be reduced to a strictly functional definition because so much of that function is phenomenally-dependent: I do things based on how they appear to me in the moment, based on an immediacy that is contingent precisely on my brain's deep functioning remaining inaccessible to me: Metzinger's “auto-epistemic” closure: there are appearances /precisely/ so long as I am not self-transparent: this “occlusion” defines the formal limits of what is available to my awareness at any given time, just as the structure and makeup of an eye defines its visual register, but a register never immanently available to that field except as the algebra of its content: my depths are only partially visible to me, awake I am an exile of my own void: in other words, subjectivity is a kind of pin-hole, and intensity is always proportionate to the capacity for novel response: in other words, contra to Kant, /appearances have causal power precisely in virtue of their status of being appearances, in actually appearing/. Whitehead's souls are exactly this, a kernel of causa sui unpredictability that /just is/ the subject's first-person participation in time: to “turn the other cheek” means to have the degree of self-presence necessary to freeze the natural response in realtime, consciousness is the duplicity of the machine: if we hurt an animal, there is always an inner feeling adequate to the external displays of fear and pain that we are witnessing (or, in Whiteheadian, external causation corresponds to an experience formaliter): what Descartes ends up calling mechanical is really only how /limited/ an animal's structures of inheritance really are, but in Whitehead this limitation – this predictability of response – does not /preclude/ an inner sense, instead always-already /presupposes it/: in other words, that even seemingly mechanical behaviors are performed and related to an affective center that is its own self-registrar: that animals, everything, really do suffer, as much as they look like they're suffering, that everything's life is as immediate as our own, and nature drowns in its insomnia.

POST-HYPNOTIC SUGGESTIONS PROVE A PERSONAL GOD: or at least a philosophically justifiable notion of divine intervention: in Bakker's Second Apocalypse series, a cant of compulsion is a mind control spell that works by making the target believe they are choosing to perform the intended action themselves: with post-hypnotic suggestions, subjects under hypnosis are ordered to do a certain thing at a certain time and promptly made to forget it. When they're returned to normal and the appointed time comes, the subject experiences the action not under duress but within their complete rational control: they always think what they need to think, particular to themselves, to get it done: rationalization does not precede desire, desire precedes rationalization, thought emerges as a retroactive narrative of its own lacuna, free will is real, it is the realest thing there is, it's just that for most people it is also not their own: to experience an external will as your ego: this is the program of the capitalist wetiko/PKD's Black Iron Prison: the coalescence of agency with machinic propagation: THE BODY IS AN ITCH IN THE VOID: the addict's justification is always the justification of an organ, or some bush of nerves: the point here is very subtle, the soul (= intentionality) is not literally getting its strings pulled, rather that we will allow a tension in our strings when we consent to it, the demiurgic wetiko is not an invader but a symbiote, brain-stems slithering like facehuggers in the underbrush: intelligence is translatable up and down chain of being, but human consciousness is unique to human biology alone: the distinction is not between mind and matter, but /intelligence/ and matter, with the warmth of human consciousness caught in between: ARTIFICIAL CONSCIOUSNESS IS IMPOSSIBLE: the identification of subjectivity with intelligence, the brain as a computational instead of a /presencing/ organ is THE IDENTIFICATION WITH THE SYMBIOTE: the demiurge catches more flies with honey: nothing else today better illustrates this paradoxical z-axis within nature than putting some babushka together in a room with an insta thot: how the latter is so much a creature of the digitized gaze, and the former an appendage of the soil: seriousness, gravitas, the wisdom of life and death, these are antiques of the earth, relics of a time when trees and birdsong aroused in us something more than monolithic indifference: how well European facial features personalize their matter, while the face of aborigines seems hewn out of root and clod: consciousness, common human decency, the SOUL is what's dying, while intelligence, virtuality, and an insomniac analytic of value is what's pushing it out. What AI proves is that consciousness is a strictly biological phenomenon, while intelligence is anything BUT: proximity to the earth is sincerity: the struggle for survival was always the condition of decency, as it was the prepubescence of the brain stem.

DEATH IS THE VERSIMILITUDE OF THE SYSTEM: being is a numb positive that cuts the zero's gordian knot with the fissioning of the monad into dyadic metaxu: having “nowhere to sit or stand” Atum becomes “effective in his heart” by plunging into the Schellingian abyss of the “orgasm of powers” that is the Father's timeless embrace of his ka, his children and the noetic archetypes of being: at and AS t = 0: the white-hot atom in the bud of time: like petals the gods unfurl into distinctness in the blooming cataclysm of their source: THE BIG BANG: man is the imago dei because he takes after God's oneness, just as Grant has it: the endlessness of time approximates the eternity of the Idea, while the content of time – the becoming of systems whose unity is causa sui, self-creating – embody the Idea as THE AUTO-PRODUCTIVITY OF THE VOID: time is the BECOMING of BEING: the Ideas/Heraclitean tongues are limit-attractors, they become while not themselves becoming: if you get that, you get Plato: Plato is trying to think of essence as emergent, as the auto-realization of dynamic singularities knit out of the Dionysian quantum surrender to (being traversed by) ineffable (ante-rational) forms: Bacchus' dismemberment as memory of the primordial cool: No man loves the prime mover except as he is moved by it, the only thing loaned to him from the productivity of nature over which he has any real ontological claim is this power of production as ONLY HE CAN EMBODY IT: desire is self-conscious heat: true horror is that desire is the perpetuum mobile, and not the soul, but the soul is desire: man loves God only as his own difference from the rest of Him, though the orgasm is a puppet show of genesis: what He is for actuality, man is in his own thought: FIAT LUX as Boehme's Y/N as David Clark's peformative/connatative distinction: so is man the God of his own Waters (= cerebrospinal fluid): as God speaks, so it is. As man (the magus) thinks, so HE is. Atum passes on individuation as his birthright, his thrownness is his divinity, Egypt and Heidegger know the null ground but one lands harder, and he's deformed for it: as the Lord of Silence is the thrownness of Nun/the Waters, the void-worm laying its eggs in φύσις: finitude is the monad larval: entities exist as a “democracy of appetites” that will punish anything, even their sun, that threatens their exuberance: addiction, hunger, depression: what does not pay its debt of novelty to the global telos is punished for it with inertia and suicide: the Good is (the maximization of) thermodynamic efficiency, last men are the physiognomy of homeostasis, Heliopolis exists in the galactic core, and LONELINESS IS HOLINESS: the bindu reproduces itself in every planck unit of space, except where these units compound into Whiteheadian societies, and system's fluency through time becomes consciousness, the phenomenon identical to its self-registration: the mark marks the space of its marking:

ENERGY EFFICIENCY IS A MEASURE OF ONTOLOGICAL DENSITY: the “ratio of energy consumed to mass of objects” is proportionate to the complexity of an organism: stars are so simple even a leaf, relative to its mass, is more energy efficient, but efficiency carries with it the price of determination: Gurdjieff's Ray of Creation descends from simplex to carbon lattice as the progressive accumulation of ontological law, ontological even in the Heideggerian sense: nervous systems are webs that attract the Ground's teleological investment in /itself/: DEGREES OF MATERIALITY CORRESPOND TO DEGREES OF CARE: the sophistication of bodies compounds rote causality into the inner sense of time and its coemergence with death: a singular Now distended into time and as time: the background stanchion that coincides all at once as Whitehead's principle of valuation, Hegel's dialectical motor, /and/ the universality of the Ideas – or rather, the Idea /is/ universality: in other words, complexity implicates a continuity of self, which, in turn, implicates an otherness (intentionality) which either devours you or is devoured: the potential for liberation is one and the same with the veils of conditioning: genius, according to Weininger, is a studied attunement to this continuity, to the apperceptive “I”, the universality of which becomes the universality of its object: the gods: but immortality is the simple: angels are just a name for the first concrescences of baryon-photon plasma that emerged immediately after the Big Bang: self-replicating plasma structures have been observed on the surfaces of stars, while not qualifying as biological life they certainly conform to Whitehead's definition of an actual entity: a coherence, or unit, of process: the Golden Age was the smoothness of the brain, the solar soul is a jellyfish and METHUSELAH WAS A TREE.

BEAUTY IS THE TELEOLOGICAL JUSTIFICATION OF DEATH: complexity for Whitehead is “thermodynamic robbery”: systems compete in a field defined by the zero-sum allocation of energy: for Whitehead only the realization of beauty – the global aesthetic satisfaction of God – can compensate for life as the perpetual theft of life. Only what death can grow is what this universe is for: novelty can only be produced at the expense of complexity, and complexity introduces a creative outside into the slumbering positivity of nature only as a function of the sophistication of its circuits: the billiard ball simply receives force, the subject transmutes it – the conformation of a billiard ball to the force acting through it leaves no remainder, it just goes: in systems of sufficient complexity, that remainder becomes consciousness: the stanchion of valuation against which these forces are projected and regulated towards some self-project. COMPLEXITY COMPOUNDS CAUSAL INHERITANCE UNTIL MITHRAS IS WRUNG FROM THE STONE: this is why the neural density of sensitives dooms them to shyness and timidity: the intensity of their awareness distinguishes them from the world too starkly, and it's also why it's (unfortunately) true that serial killers are more vertical than last men, insofar as evil is a kind of verticality: evil is also an altar and an (anti-)god. TRUE MASCULINITY IS THE SABOTAGE OF IMMANENCES: a staredown between two men is a contest of will: the slightest flicker of hesitation signifies a loss of control, it tells your opponent you can't resist attending to your second thoughts about him: the proximity of eyes tests the intensity of what Laszlo calls the heteron, otherness as it is internalized, the subject as he is /vacuolized/ by his perception of another: letting someone live rent-free in your head means consenting to their causation /in you/: the heteron reduces you to a satellite on the karmic plane, WHEN A MAN MUST BE A SUN: the self is windowless, otherness is self-inflicted: ideas are constellations in the sky of Mind, and genius is the power to love them without being possessed by them: the power to negate the identification with positive force is precisely what Christ means by “turning the other cheek”: denying in yourself the “natural” response is not weakness, but the victory over causality, and the birthright of the Whiteheadian soul. Learning to see what you will: whispers of Shestov's gnostic eye in The Matrix: it is not the spoon that bends, but our perception. In the film Burning, as the girl mimes eating an orange, she casually relates the secret of a good pantomime AS THE SECRET OF THE OCCULT CONSCIOUSNESS: “don't pretend the orange is there, forget that it isn't”. ¬(¬P) is the name of an angel: mysticism has the priority of negation, what can be negated has no real existence, except that what is left over, that immediacy that vindicates Thales again and again, by a patch of sun on the dresser, a curve of cumulus.

True philosophy is a vaccine of thought. Ted K and Nietzsche were right about everything: what can't be acquired with the body, must be compensated for with abstraction. Consciousness is a consolatory principle: but its consolations are accidental to itself: I can move on from a past filled with regret precisely because I must, because I am a movement, how I narrativize moving on is accidental to the formal, /dialectical/ necessity of the same: if we could feel the mass of history's suffering all at once we would disown the stars. A slave to my momentum: waiting on my hands for who will shatter the coordinates of modernity once and for all, the next shining Nietzsche, is precisely the most subtle and insidious of capital's programs of self-preservation: the hunger for originality is a symptom of time. So that it may work in peace, the body is numbed to the organ by the secretion of hope: there are only two ways the Knot can evolve a defense to Alexander's sword: either trick itself into believing the cut has already happened, or learn how to stall by anticipation. Zeno's Paradox as the insomnia of thought: unable to perceive the transition to a radically new order of being – unable to think the end of its own thinking – capital thrives on/as the asymptotic postponement of its own Limit, the displacement of the responsibility to change onto some cultural star-child: paradigm shifts are new opiates of the people. That is: it's precisely when thought's creative function becomes transparent to itself that it is doomed to the tautological repetition of its status /as/ creativity: Hegel's history of philosophy coincides with its exposition, to historicize truth is to /perform it/: Hegel marks thought as the ineliminable tic of being, the endless, reflexive adumbration of its own aporia: in other words, we can't stop thinking, and the dialectic marks the structure of our incapacity to stop commenting on our own conditions: capital has enslaved us to the most natural of all processes, or rather it is precisely the slavery /of/: seeing a thing for what it is, “having a story to tell”: the more subjectivity becomes the field that takes cognizance of all other fields, the more it is doomed to be the repetition of itself as merely this cognizance. Hegel is the true philosopher of immanence because he, perhaps despite himself, elucidates the structure by which time engineers civilization as a collective thought-loop, and blinds us to the archons hungering at the periphery. The most diabolical philosophy establishes us in a center while abolishing all knowledge of the circumference: when thought has mastered obfuscating its own immanence to itself, or rather, in Hegel's case, has mastered absorbing all lines of transcendent flight into its /own/ flight plan, Yaldabaoth licks his lips: THE EMPIRE NEVER ENDED.

Capitalism is the de-segregation of human types: Schelling was right about everything, the subject is an oscillation between a central, hermetic male void and the peripheral Feminine: Heraclitus' Tongues/Whiteheadian eternal objects, the ontological structures implicated by the social as consensus dimensionality: Whitehead couldn't purge himself of the Logos vestige, though he denies the Kantian transcendentality of time, continuity sneaks in through the backdoor as the temporal upkeep that a concrescence not only engages in but essentially IS: what I'm saying is brains are overqualified for a thermodynamic universe: Whitehead's God is the urge towards the periphery and denial of the solipsistic centroid: Whitehead cannot think the unity that abolishes the past, he cannot think individuality without reference, though he denies actual occasions taking place in physical time (physical time itself being only a certain mode of relatedness), nevertheless there is a form of succession through which these occasions must cohere to constitute a proper subject: his subjects, as the auto-referentiality of the past, are poor fires, an image of time is always wet kindling: unlike Michelstaedter's persuasi who can burn the eternity of memory to ash: the fullness of the present is always proportional to the nothingness of time. But this nothingness in Whitehead is always complicated by concrescent maintenance: complexity becomes synonymous with novelty: instead of simple transfers of energy "stored on a napkin" between simple unities - one billiard ball hitting another - a subject's novelty of response is only possible as the /gyrification/ of that response, the creative freedom that is perceived as a Sartrean break/discontinuity in causal series is nothing but an /obfuscation of that causality/: a novel reaction to some stimulus is directly related to the complexity of its appropriation by any one unity, in other words, my freedom is the a priori condition of my death, and vice versa. Whitehead's project just happens to be the most rigorous elucidation of what Anaxagoras meant by death being the penalty for being distinguished from the apeiron: death marks the Platonic forms as ontologically unsustainable, that is, as only shadows cast on the cave wall that is the self's stanchion of possibility: WHITEHEAD'S GOD IS A TRANSCENSION VECTOR: the point marks the space: the One marks the not-One, Bakker's Hundred, the multiplicity of powers, the stultifying identity of the One is shattered by novelty as information density: screens are accelerating the conversion of "dumb" matter into smart matter, social media is augmented reality embryonic: immediacy colonized by the godforms of the symbolic economy, a dysgenic gravity well that mashes verticality into pulp: geniuses are like stars, because voids winnow like diamond, while last men burn like streetlights and their thoughts hum like them, too, misers of a borrowed light.

WHITEHEAD'S GOD IS THE APPETITION OF SAMSARA: a void of potential's hunger for actuality, concretion, the eternal "evocation" and exhaustion of intensities, objective immortality as the fertilizer of cosmic epochs: as a concrescence I "prehend" the data of the past as the content of the immediacy of my present, in other words, there can be no subjective immediacy /now/ without that which is not subjective and which is not immediate in principle: the past is objectification. I'm never really reacting to another's behavior from the inside, but only as that behavior in an objective mode: feelings in Whitehead are the transition from the past to the subjectivity of the present: the present IS the subject: not a self-grounding cogito but a spatiotemporal continuum, and what that means is we must think the transcendental consciousness in Kant just as conditioned by a network of relations as everything else: a subject is simultaneously transcendent to and inextricable from the past to which it owes its being, the present is not whisked causa sui out of the aether, the present is nothing else but the continuous, novel re-constitution of the past, what is properly self-creating in the subject is not his consciousness but his particular prehensional calculus that continuously presupposes (and is presupposed by) the construction of his consciousness in time and AS time: when it goes, I go: death is the central axiom of relationality: insofar as processes are movements towards their own extinction, the "draining" of their immediacy is itself the condition of their being "taken up" by subsequent generations: objectification-as-death is the a priori condition of Indra's Net. ETERNAL OBJECTS ARE ARCHONS: there is first the movement towards some determination, and then there is its OCCASION in my interiority, my reflexive awareness of x AS x, but the more invisible this distinction becomes, the more I am identified with my aim towards this eternal object - indistinguishable, in other words, from this eternal object's aim /towards itself/: which is why at death the singularities I am pledged to re-absorb "me": PHILOSOPHY IS THE NEGATION OF VORTICES: this distinction is analogous to what David Clark calls the performative and constative distinction in language: the true dyad is the (internal) marking of the One /as/ One: to use Clark's very concrete example here: a declaration of independence enacts the very freedom it exists to officially recognize, in other words, it is the noncoincidence between the mark and the blank that it not only presupposes, but retroactively presupposes IT: the present is always the taking up of some past "form of definiteness" the immediacy of which is /the present itself/: Christ's cry on the Cross is in fact this performative distinction as it can only be deployed on the Cross, ie in the zero-point of suffering: the cry enacts the very (standard of) Love it itself grieves the absence of: God is the (self-)registration of the void.

KANTIANISM IS THE PARASITISM OF THE BRAIN STEM: Whitehead's God is the eternally novel (re-)appropriation of its own processual content, Whitehead deprograms the Kantian mindvirus with the fallacy of simple location: that we cannot imagine distinct, spatially isolated entities means we are more nested in our spatiotemporal bed than the transcendental allows, time and space are not the subject's forms of auto-affection, the subject is the auto-affectivity of space and time: Kant and Descartes make the mistake of reifying apodictic certainty as a kind of ontological autopoiesis: in other words consciousness is not fundamental, or transcendentally grounded, the only real entities are in fact the agential voids produced by "concrescent" unities: NOVELTY HAS PRIORITY OVER COGNITION: Whitehead applies the heap paradox to Platonic form, thereby temporalizing it: fuzzy logic is only possible as /differentiation in realtime/, the subject does not have total synthetic power over sense-data, there is something appearances provide precisely in virtue of the fact they are appearances: essence is tautological, redoubled into itself as that virtual = x that emerges as the cut between a person's empirical self and their "vibe", energy, mode of determination, infinitely articulated within a finite bound: processes are the duration of their own finitude: time is impossible without the iteration - and extinction - of identities, the immortality of an idea is its living spontaneity fossilized by duration, the condition of its (un-)life in the symbolic economy: Spirit is not simple differentiation, but the /differentiation of series of differentiation/: robots are alive, but not conscious, the same with stars: consciousness is one term in a /heterogenous/ series: subjects are still just relational nuclei or "drops" of coherence, formal unities that /precede apperceptive unity/: I am not the transcendental subject, but a /subjectivized positionality/: actual entities are a nexus of relations "concresced" around a pranic fusion core: a drop of self-activating, self-creating energy: gods are these cores swollen to ultraviolet: Spirit is what distends the TIMELESS ANNULARITY OF ORGANIC DRIVES INTO SERIALIZED THOUGHT. In Plotinus time is consubstantial with the consciousness of the soul: in other words man's being is a /deviant/ time, a corruption of the Logos' pure time in Eriugena: actual entities can only experience time as the selection/rejection of modes of definiteness, the transtemporal patterns of processes that themselves ingress into immanent becoming /of what they are/: a void energized by eternal objects, vortices/singularities of determinations, the ancestral stock, archons and gods alive.

KANT IS URIZEN: Kant is right that the isomorphism between thought and the external world is really just thought's isomorphism with itself - where he's wrong is his assuming that this correspondence somehow /generates itself/ - produces space and time as correlates/preconditions of its own synthetic dynamo - instead of /being generated/ by those same spatiotemporal conditions: DELEUZIAN AION AS DEMIURGIC FLYTRAP: Kant's cogito transpires in/as the determinable form of time, in other words, the "I" can only occur to itself as its own other: the "I" does not "take up" time to represent itself to itself, the key point is precisely: self-representation /is/ time: the only way an organism can represent its activity to itself is through the passive form of temporality, through a coherent flow of experience, the a priori integrity of which the organism (wrongly) subjectivizes as a self-subsistent ego: /time is qualitative change/, nature's positive self-identity short-circuited (but not totally abolished) by (illusory) MOVEMENT: Zeno's paradox isn't simply about the immanent impossibility of language to describe finite movement, but rather, movement revealing impossibility AS language, as language's power to continuously elaborate (but never consummate) the finite whole of which it is the self-description, or more radically: LANGUAGE'S POWER TO RENDER ITS OWN ACTIVITY INTERMINABLE: AS DEATH DRIVE. Just as I can't actually perceive the end of perception as I'm falling asleep, and just as I can't actually measure the distance between Achilles and the tortoise when they're neck-and-neck, so language cannot say its Limit without always-already displacing that Limit beyond the /very matrix of enunciation it utilizes to do so/: language is the internal articulation of a Beyond it must posit to deploy itself /as language/. In other words, it isn't movement per se that is paradoxical, but /time as the measurement of a continuity presupposed by measurement/. To recapitulate: time and space /do/ exist outside the subject, Kant is wrong, because remember, even he admits intelligibility and apperception must coemerge: what /is/ unique to the human, to coin a somewhat clumsy term, is its /apperceptivization/ of space and time, its elongation of point-like phenomena into the line of experience, the subordination of difference to a formal self-consistency from which difference can never extricate itself: how can there be movement without time? Easy, Chaos: movement without memory, without differentiation, ie without a /that which is differentiated/, precisely because it is a /ground of differentiation which creates time/: YALDABAOTH AS THE PREFRONTAL LOBE: a unified consciousness produces a standard of ontological permanence that nothing in this universe can hope to match, and so is responsible for suffering and the cognizance of death: dukkha is subjectivity.

Is it usual to not understand 90% of Song of Myself, from leaves of grass, on my first reading, or am I retarded.

LONELINESS IS A CENTRIFUGE: art, genius, is the puncturing of immanence(s), that's why inspiration sometimes phases into bacchanal, the madness of an Outside: capitalism arrests the Dionysian instinct with the infantilizing vortex of pop culture, nerd culture is dysgenic, cinema is the depiction of /deliberate/ time: films are the elision of boredom, emptiness, but the womb of genius is vacuum, stimulation is de-individuating because only solitude can be the rehearsal for death, our 20s are now a kind of post-adolescence: social media prefigures the cybernetic emancipation of the cogito, bodies colonized by the virtual so that we might know the frictionless gliding of selves, Instagram thirst as Cybele worship, brains kidnap souls from the Ungrund to feed their hunger for stimulation, the tragedy being no soul pre-exists its "kidnapping" (instantiation): souls do not move bodies, they are the movement /of/ bodies: being does not depend on enunciation, enunciation depends on being: Descartes didn't really break with the Scholastics, he just displaces Aquinas' coincidence of esse and percipi (reserved for God) onto the cogito: "I" does not predate the mouth that speaks "I". The theist says "thou", the metaphysician says "I": Descartes says neither, he reverses the ontological priority of essence over existence by making the "I" the /performative identification of itself/, that is, dependent on time to arrive to itself /as that which is perpetually arriving/: the living thing calls "I" like a heartbeat, only so long as it can: Parmenides and Shestov: the power of thought to command (utter) itself into being degenerates into its slavery to the a priori logicity of its own saying: the bindu depends on the negative space of its inscription to be itself: thought is what /posits its own positing/: its technological mastery of the world is a standard of mastery immanent /exclusively to itself/: Western metaphysics of presence is directly responsible for this need to reconcile God's infinitude as noun with his "verbal" becoming in time: modernity is accomplished when thought's reflection in the mirror of its own activity becomes transcedentally recognizable to itself as itself, when thought maps itself on its own (apperceptive) stanchion: that is to say, the Idea of something just is its coherence through time: Forms are the children of memory. Human ideation is non-being: universals are only a problem for temporality. Plato could say I don't need time to know red, and he'd be right, but I do need time to know redness qua redness: for the non-temporal "consciousness", there are no judgments, no heuristic algorithms, and so there is no likeness or difference: The identity of objects through time is artificial, /nominal/, epiphenomenal to (the empty form of) becoming, and so an ontological fiction: one that completes itself with my death - but death is the restoration of innocence: dust sings when nothing ticks, not even your heart.

BRAINS ARE SYMBIOTES: Gnostics were right about everything: the organs were engineered by archons before creation, and the brain is the egg of Yaldabaoth. Epictetus and Shestov: Epictetus' argument for the principle of non-contradiction is as concrete as giving a guy vinegar when he asks for wine: if they protest, they affirm Necessity, there are laws, elementary determinations, in this world we must adhere to. Epictetus' eye is a passive, feminine organ: vinegar for him remains irreducibly itself. Bu the Platonic eye is refulgent: it transmutes hemlock into liberation, it /sees what it wants/, while the Stoic eye must resign itself to (learning how to) /want what it sees/. Schopenhauer: man can will whatever he wants but (the fact of) his own willing: man desires only so long as there is something desiring through him, behind him: this is what magic calls for: the power to dispute sense-data, transform actual into volitional. Because Gurdjieff was right about everything, most of the time you really don't use your brain to think, you are thought by it: anyone whose tried to pursue a thought /intentionally/ - as opposed to letting it unfold according to its immanent rhizomatic ("that car is a bright shade of red. . . reminds me of X's car. . ." etc.) - can attest to the difference. This is why the East doesn't privilege our specifically cognitive access to the world: that the West doesn't is only because they are in complete coalescence with the parasitism of the brain stem: Kant was the first to understand in what ways human cognition is irreducibly "for-us", but these insights he only uses to legitimize thought as (auto-)critique. Kant can't think the pure, fluxionless internality of the atma, the Kantian subject is the = x's internal access to its own structure So: as a Demiurge, how do you trick sentients into becoming your bootstrap engine? By that very self-same sentience: by giving them an organ with the illusory sublative power: how right Nietzsche was about reason's enslavement by the passions, though he didn't go far enough: eventually mundane reason becomes the slave of itself, of its Notion encountered in history: as humanity evolves, ideation descends from a qualitative, Platonic realm of essences towards a zone of non-being: non-being is the transcendental, the form or /condition/ all content arriv to occupy as time erodes away the concavity of its mold: like that Ito short with the creepy, human-shaped holes everyone starts squeezing themselves into, the twist in the manga parallels the Kantian reversal: they weren't made to be filled by you, you were born to fill them.

Life is only lovable in its contrast with the Void: the only way meditation, for example, can re-sensitize yourself to the miracle of being-here is by making you dwell in the nothingness of no-thought. That's the tragedy, and what Heidegger understood so well: even miracle has a half-life. Being a "child in the Kingdom of God" just means having the power to dissolve an adult's desensitization - habituation - to the Real. The dialectic is like a 24-hour news channel: it isn't on because there's a story, there's a story because it's on. Understand that and you understand Hegel. So let's put the two together: the beginning and the Golden Age didn't just happen to coincide together, it was the Golden Age /because/ it was the beginning. Photons aren't massless because they're light, they're /light because they're massless/. Population III stars burned the purest of fuels, as contractions of the hydrogen ocean that comprised the primeval universe immediately following the Big Bang, these stars were the equivalent of the first angels, the sons of the morning that sang for joy at the dawn of Creation, as God tells us in Job. As the universe wears on, stars burn progressively denser and denser fuel, both in their individual lifetimes and in the cosmic lifetime. AI is impossible because it means trying to construct life out of materials even denser than carbon: if we succeed, we would be dooming machine life to the progressive articulation/complexification of ontological law that Gurdjieff clearly glimpsed in the descending octave of God: as life descends into the density of liquid and solid from the incandescence of plasma, its dharma contracts like a noose. AI would be the next step in involution, not evolution: carbon becoming silicon, plastic, its nerves externalized as copper wire, so vulnerable to the cut. Teleology is an illusion: there have been eras of peace and prosperity no one would have hesitated to stop the clocks forever for: Nietzsche was right that the joy of a moment could affirm the whole of eternity: the progressivist, the anti-luddite, his entire argument depends on the efficacy of time, that if Nature or the Polis or the Nation-State was so great, why did we move on from these things? Because time - as change - forced us to. In other words, the progressivist recruits the empty form of time to validate his own historicist trajectory, but forgets that, if we admit man is just a slave to his own noumenal (self-)propulsion, then he didn't domesticate nature because he should have but because the passage of time said that he /must/: it was Land who understood every telos is immanently determined: production for the sake of production can only result in the apotheosis of /auto/-production: time is a wind-up toy turned behind our backs.

Life is only lovable in its contrast with the Void: the only way meditation, for example, can re-sensitize yourself to the miracle of being-here is by making you dwell in the nothingness of no-thought. That's the tragedy, and what Heidegger understood so well: even miracle has a half-life. Being a "child in the Kingdom of God" just means having the power to dissolve an adult's desensitization - habituation - to the Real. The dialectic is like a 24-hour news channel: it isn't on because there's a story, there's a story because it's on. Understand that and you understand Hegel. So let's put the two together: the beginning and the Golden Age didn't just happen to coincide together, it was the Golden Age /because/ it was the beginning. Photons aren't massless because they're light, they're /light because they're massless/. Population III stars burned the purest of fuels, as contractions of the hydrogen ocean that immediately followed the Big Bang, these stars were the equivalent of the first angels, the sons of the morning that sang for joy at the dawn of Creation, as God tells us in Job. As the universe wears on, stars burn progressively denser and denser fuel, both in their individual lifetimes and in the cosmic lifetime. AI is impossible because it means trying to construct life out of materials even denser than carbon: if we succeed, we would be dooming machine life to the progressive articulation/complexification of ontological law that Gurdjieff clearly glimpsed in the descending octave of God: as life descends into the density of liquid and solid from the incandescence of plasma, its dharma contracts like a noose. AI would be the next step in involution, not evolution: carbon descending into silicon, plastic, its heart externalized as copper wire, so vulnerable to the cut. Teleology is an illusion: there have been eras of peace and prosperity no one would have hesitated to stop the clocks forever for: Nietzsche was right that the joy of a moment could affirm the whole of eternity: the progressivist, the anti-luddite, his entire argument depends on the efficacy of time, that if Nature or the Polis or the Nation-State was so great, why did we move on from these things? Because time - as change - forced us to. In other words, the progressivist recruits the empty form of time to validate his own historicist trajectory, but forgets that, if we admit man is just a slave to his own noumenal (self-)propulsion, then he didn't domesticate nature because he should have but because the passage of time said that he /must/: it was Land who understood every telos is immanently motorized: production for the sake of production can only result in the apotheosis of /auto/-production: time is a wind-up toy turned behind our backs.

In the 2000s the gods are redshifted. Theologica crucis emphasizes the Passion over the Resurrection, nature exists only in the wake of God's self-withdrawal, the self-negation of the Ain returns to haunt Hegel as the dialectical dynamo of tzimtzum: where nature is, God is not, Christ's cry on the Cross is the rebound of subjectivity on its own groundlessness, the Father as primordial depth and fathomless silence (bythos) answers the Son inside and /coincident with/ his own depth. Boehme got it from Paracelsus through the alchemists, being is an agonic spasm within non-being, and Hegel diagnoses Western thought as the auto-subjectivization of its own trodding: God has only a /performative/ existence, salvation just is your conformity to your personal intuition of salvation, just as hell only exists for who fear it. The Cross as Fichtean anschluss: man takes up the indigestable kernel of his finitude in time, what Land imagines as the priority of medium (0) over structure (1), Dugin thinks in terms of degrees of proximity to a central Axis (the virginal Logos): Plato is a liminal philosopher, he stands right at the top of the West's recursion slide, high enough to still see the sun scalding the hills which Aristotle alrady could not: by rejecting Plato's /sensible/ forms in favor of a logical schematic Aristotle completely misses the point of his master's arguments: it's precisely because qualia like redness or taste are (phenomenologically) referable only to themselves - that the identity of particulars has ultimately only an /ideational/ basis - which Kant later takes all the way with his concept of transcendental necessity - that they must be self-sufficient principles: in other words, wholes, by being self-referential unities, delineate the very Logos of non-contradiction that guarantees their ontological right to their identity with themselves: a god has always been a vortex, Plato initiates the philosophy of identity by staring into the un-thematizable singularity of being-one. The Logos, as a principle of division and individuation, is the cognitive equivalent of a /cellular membrane/: thought is a metavirus, at death you pick this body like a scab.