/lit/ - Literature

>>19916199
Took the words out of my head. My only fear is that saying “all good” come across like I’m saying “I have decided for us that your choice to reject me was okay”, which is narcissistic, instead of what I mean, “no harm done” to make the situation less potentially uncomfortable for her while we finish shipping the package
But that’s way too much thought probably

>>12020754
>>12020818
>pure metaphysics gets lost in the void
>not process meta-metaphysics

i'll ask both of you guys about this. the idea of an absent Void or Void concept is just kind of interesting on its own. it plays such a huge, huge role in continental philosophy generally speaking - Lacan's lack, Derrida's trace, the fundamentally negative nature of all power. and against this, Deleuze posited his own super-affirmative philosophy, derived from Bergson, Nietzsche and Spinoza. whatever Nature is, it is alive, and whatever we can know of the Absolute it is that it contains all possible permutations therein, as first and last cause, and the process which drives all of it throughout.

and yet it's interesting to ask why Deleuze was not a Whiteheadian. too much love for Nietzsche maybe? maybe he just felt some personal kinship with Spinoza? life might have been very different if he had been. or even today it were possible for us to think of, say, Land and NyxLand as being fundamentally part of the same process (which they must be). i'm still a little bit blown away that Nyx's black paper on gender acceleration and Land's preface on BTC were released on the same day, and that that day was Hallowe'en to boot. i don't mean to just lose my mind completely in pointless superstitiousness, but it is kind of amazing.

a world composed only of relations. this was the idea, ultimately, i think, back in the 1990s, the age frozen in time forever by the Matrix as the peak of civilization. who knows but that they were right? i don't see us solving the problems we have today but with larger problems yet, and eventually some kind of crunch.

i had one moment in my life of true and unironic epiphany. some things that i would have to call supernatural, but only one truly lightning-bolt flash of illumination, like being gifted an idea i never thought i could have. it was like having a pilot light turned on in my skull. came out of a period of intense misery that i could not flee or hide from, but i would characterize what followed from it as being just profound sanity, and a deep humility. and yet it wasn't anything like a self-conscious humility, it was just, 'approach from the bottom,' basically. forget about CTRL, and deal with people in really a fundamentally humble way, and the whole world seems to move things to get out of your way. really wild. i've never felt anything like it since. the universe - in the teeny little sense of it that was my own lived experience - was fundamentally rational, and sane, and just...do-able. that things are meant to work that defy all rational or predictive understanding. it's always, always, *us* that fuck them up. always us. because of anxieties.

>>11870849
5/7

>From the moment when Evolution begins to think itself it can no longer live with or further itself except by knowing itself to be irreversible—that is to say, immortal. For what point can there be in living with eyes fixed constantly and laboriously upon the future, if this future, even though it take the form of a Noosphere, must finally become a zero? Better surely to give up and die at once. In terms of this Absolute it is sacrifice, not egotism, that becomes odious and absurd. Irreversibility, then, is the first condition. The second condition, no more than an amplification of the first, is that the irreversibility, thus revealed and accepted, must apply not to anyone part, but to all that is deepest, most precious and most incommunicable in our consciousness. So that the process of vitalization in which we are engaged may be defined at its upper limit (whether we envisage the system as a whole or the destiny of each separate element within it) in terms of “ultrapersonalization."

>In short, as I said at the beginning, the terrestrial evolution of Life, if it is really to continue as hominization extended to the scale of the Noosphere, cannot rebound in a new spring forward without acquiring a morality, and, to the extent that it needs a "faith," without becoming "mysticized." Which amounts to saying that the complexification of Matter, at the point it has now reached in the human social organism, is physically incapable of advancing further if the Mind does not play a part, not only with its capacity for technical organization, but with its purposive and affective powers of arrangement and inner tension.

>In hominized evolution the Physical and the Psychic, the Without and the Within, Matter and Consciousness, are all found to be functionally linked in one tangible process. Setting aside all metaphysics, the two terms in each of these pairs are articulated in a quasi-measurable fashion one with the other; with the twofold result not only of at last affording us a unified concept of
the Universe, but also of breaking down the two barriers behind which Man was coming to believe himself to be for ever imprisoned-the magic circle of phenomenalism and the infernal circle of egocentrism.

>The iron laws binding economic factors, the irrepressible recurrence of nationalisms, the apparent inevitability of war, the insoluble Hegelian conflicts “of master and slave"; what are these supposedly unalterable necessities of the human condition, except, finally, the diverse expression and outcome of exteriority and a mutual antagonism between the individual seeds of thought which we are?