/lit/ - Literature

>>19779120

Indeed, the same goes for life itself.

>>19099484
If anything, this is the implicit Trinity "preceding" the Christological advent, not only a Monarchy of the Father, but one where he comes down from his transcendent throne for something much worse, to rule from the inside-out, each subject implicitly sodomized into being, just as the members of the Trinity itself are nothing but inert receptacles for the Father's sodomy. Yaldabaoth biting his own mouth, splitting in half, and forced to be his own vampire in the absence of his hypercadaver. Indeed, the Catholic rightly concludes that Yaldabaoth needs me, and this is precisely why I reject him. Conversely, the Gnostic disjunctive synthesis of the Monadic father and the Sophianic mother is the very absence into which Jesus disappears. Another Catholic obscurantism is the opposition to "mind-body Dualism", mind-body coincidence in body at one extreme and literal Materialism (an aspect of Catholicism first and foremost) at the other, the common denominator of the opposition being a curious ritual murder of that which the murderer claims does not exist. Vulgar Gnosticism would reply with a symmetrical idea wherein the mind-body coincidence is all mind per Subjective Idealism and such, whereas Gnostic Gnosticism would realize that the obscurantism is not so much about mind being put to death, but about absence being murdered to life. The blueprint of Theosis, that metal receives the properties of fire without becoming fire, is most relevant here: the body receives the properties of absence without becoming absent through the ritual murder of the mind. I only reject the idea that the body traps the soul because it does not go far enough, it is the true, of "truly false", mind-body coincidence that attempts to trap absence, the aforementioned presences masquerading as absence being a "like" attempting to know a "like", and, moreover, to pervert it into the ultimate Ideal origin as Yaldabaoth's most exquisitely Evil locus. What if it could actually be yesterday or tomorrow rather than indefinitely today? Per Vulgar Gnosticism, the present is crucified, the two cones of past-future telescopically expanding therefrom and touching bases therein, the tips being dead ends of utter incomprehension, constituting the delirium of Time as superfluous to the coherent present; whereas per Gnostic Gnosticism, the points touch in the present, the bases being "living ends" of utter comprehension purporting absence itself as part of the aforementioned Black torus, as alleviating the delirium of the indefinite present and presence.

>>18982204
>mfw i've single-handedly caused gripsposting on /lit/

>>18905865

Good, the Phenomenal world is itself falsehood.

>>18414355

Indeed, motherhood is just "low vibration" prostitution. Previously:

>>>/lit/thread/S18390918#p18392011
>I yearn to read the first feminist text. One would expect to enter a figurative nunnery, a sorority, a women's bathroom, instead one finds himself in a literal brothel when reading what currently masquerades as feminism: it is simply literature written by women for men, for men to read, for men to understand, for men to manifest. How women allegedly treat, or should treat, each other in men's absence has no Epistemological foundation and is merely contingent on how men treat women, the most benign man-to-woman input automatically has Apocalyptic significance. There is literally no thesis pertaining to womanhood alone, which does not even exist therein, except, or course, as didactic performance for men. Worst still, the more contingent on men a role is, the more it is consecrated as "purely feminine", prostitution and motherhood and such being the apotheosis of this "feminism"; neither from woman nor from woman and man, but from man alone, and proudly TO man alone as well: a list of desires the wife has impotently prepared for her husband. If you need any proof that man and woman are not complementary halves of a Divine whole but abominable inversions of a Demiurgic rupture, look no further.

>>18399593

peanut brain: priosn iz obsolet :(((

medium brain: community is more obsolete than a prison. prisons expand into the conceptual, and become a paradigm for forming societies, whereas community is just a coping mechanism to deal with this, and becomes less and less important with every advancement made in online technology that pulls us farther away from our actual community and has us investing time and energy in people/causes we don't really know.
sorry I don't have an actual recommendation for you, beyond like Discipline and Punish or whatever

GALAXY BRAIN: ALL THAT IS CRIMINAL IS SOCIAL AND ALL THAT IS SOCIAL IS CRIMINAL. ALL ORGANIZED CRIME PERFECTLY MANIFESTS WHAT MENOPAUSAL PUBLIC SCHOOL TEACHERS JERK THEMSELVES RAW OVER: INDIVIDUALITY ABOLISHED. THE SOCIAL AND THE CRIMINAL ARE INDISTINGUISHABLE, THE MAFIA IS THE LOGICAL APOTHEOSIS OF ALL SOCIAL GROUPS AND OF THE MEANING OF "SOCIAL": TO IMPLICITLY COLLABORATE AGAINST SOMEONE OR SOMETHING ELSE. THE FRIENDS, THE COUPLES, THE FAMILIES, ALL QUANTITATIVELY DEFICIENT BUT QUALITATIVELY IDENTICAL TO THE MAFIA. WORSE STILL, THE PETTY MAFIAS ARE NOT AT ALL IN A "HEGELIAN" TRANCE OF DOING WHAT THEY CLAIM TO HATE, THEY ARE PROUDLY CRIMINAL AND ONLY UPSET THAT THEY CANNOT BE FULLY CRIMINAL: THE PURPOSE OF FRIENDSHIP, OF CONCUBINAGE, OF FAMILY IS EXPLICITLY CRIMINAL: OUTSOURCING OF ONE'S CONSCIENCE TO A SOCIAL "CONSENSUS" AND MUTUAL DEFENSE FROM THE LAWFUL CONSEQUENCES OF ONE'S OWN ACTIONS.

GALAXY BRAIN: ONLY EVIL EXISTS IN THAT THE PHENOMENAL WORLD IS EVIL ITSELF AND, CONTRARY TO CATHOLIC DELIRIUM, THE NOUMENAL WORLD DOES NOT DISTINGUISH ITSELF THEREFROM BY EXISTING PERFECTLY BUT BY NOT EXISTING AT ALL: DURING DEATH ONE LITERALLY GOES UP THE COGNITIVE VISTA INTO REASON ITSELF, EXPERIENCING AND FULFILLING THE VERY DISTANCE AND DISCRETION OF REASON FROM THE INSIDE, GOING INTO THAT "INEFFABLE" SOURCE WHENCE HE FREELY RECEIVED RATIONAL THINGS IN THIS LIFE, SNEAKING PAST THE EMPIRICAL AS RATIONAL THINGS THEMSELVES SNEAKED, APPEARING IN FRONT OF THE RATIONAL UNTOUCHED BY THE EMPIRICAL, AS RATIONAL THINGS THEMSELVES APPEARED TO HIM.

>>16304891

Neither parents, nor anyone else, can deliberately make any one man. No one can guarantee a successful conception and, moreover, no one can guarantee that the one being born will be me or you. It has all but never happened, the coincidence of me and the one being born is a unique event. The efforts of all current men's parents are irrelevant to their being since no one could guarantee or even guess that any one of them would be in general, and be themselves in particular. It is only after the immanent finality of their being that their making is then retroactively imagined, ironically enough in a total inversion of your premise, i.e. a unique top-down and inside-out event sanctioning all bottom-up and outside-in failure allegedly pertaining to it. Obviously Christological.

>>15882312

Yes.

>>15712567
Moral Letters to Lucilius. But listen to it as an audiobook while you go for long walks. Has helped me quite a bit.

>>15343267
>Pretty sure there's a term for this

Christ Consciousness.

>tfw eat once a day
>tfw seldom hungry
>tfw i hate eating
>tfw fasting makes me hate it even more
>tfw the longer i go without eating the more offensive i find it
>tfw having solid things in my mouth and taste itself feel ontologically illegitimate
>tfw drinking water alleviates the nightmare

>>14926406

The more you examine the supposed Ontological horror of having been "made" unbeknownst to you, the less congruent it is with God and Man alike, "creation" revealing itself to be an event of mutual dignity. Free will being not so much given to you after the fact, but the very thing whereby you are.

>>14661250

>labor theory of value - nietzschean diary entries
>labor alienation - practically "anarcho-primitivist" tedian-vargian assumption that there ever was a different state of affairs
>historical materialism - utterly absurd even for marx, nothing appears at its alleged "due date", marx himself silently conceding the point by making no such predictions despite claiming to be privy to unimpeachable knowledge

A more serious reply on property:

"Public" property is in fact the apotheosis of "private" property. Think about it in the most concrete terms, as Marx intends, or claims to intend: what would no "private" property actually BE? Mutually sustaining pure negatives wherein one is implicitly forbidden, implicitly conditioned, implicitly limited, etc., purely for the sake of others' claim, others "private" property, in said Phenomenal. Even assuming "private" property is zero-sum, even though this is Rationally and demonstrably not true, "public" property is not so much further zero-sum, down the fractal vanishing point, but is the THE God's eye zero-sum that engulfs the whole Phenomenal in the losing circle; the house of Yaldabaoth. Property being most Ontologically emancipated when "private", free from all owners, but one. Obvious Christological parallels to the body, the triumph of the Self over the "architecture" of Yaldabaoth or the "utility" of Moloch. Consider THAT, philistines.

>>14626235

But what is the relation between physical and physical properties? Materialism is not tenuous because of the "mind-body problem", but absurd through and through because of an all-pervading "body-body problem", obvious even at the most vulgar level. That not eating leads to bodily destruction suggests that food is "fuel", however, inferring this as the polar opposite, or that there even is such a thing, food being anything at all merely because its lack has such and such effect, leads to a "body-body problem" wherein although both body and food are said to abide by the same Material principles, each body and each food seem to interact in distinct ways, so much so that the inference of food as "fuel" would further suggest that each body and each food, and any and all of their relations, are distinct enough from an other to have their own mutually exclusive Material principles, that they are distinctly distinct.

>>14537602

CRASH COURSE:

>climate change itself in the "objective" sense is as tenuous as it is irrelevant
>it makes people hysteric because it excites otherwise taboo ideas including but not limited to
>the inversion of the demiurgic master-slave relation between "the earth" or "nature" and man wherein the latter now torments the former
>a "night of the living externalities" if you will wherein one's winning not only offends an other rationally but immanently as well
>a realization of the implicit hostility of "the earth" that we already put up with relative to which the dangers of climate change are merely quantitative and the possibility of already being in a kind of "apocalypse" that we have introjected for no reason

The world cannot hate you; but me it hateth, because I testify of it, that the works thereof are evil.

>>14314838

The obsession with needs is just as morbid as the obsession with work. You are neither a human needing nor a human working, but a human being.

>>13985028

Meanwhile Zizek is still taking THE substance.

Christology, death-positivity, Reason as the subsuming of the Empirical.

>>13904282

There is nothing wrong.

>>13821288
>>13821378
>>13821460

Any and all warning of this reply would have done nothing to change the fact that you're reading it now, this is what Death is like. From the God's eye perspective, none of our lives ever began.

>>13789122

I remembered seeing The Secret in 2006 and, despite disliking its focus on expedience as well as the certainty of cause and effect, I still somehow felt happy that such a thing found its way to me, and remembered its main idea of the Phenomenal world being Ontologically subordinate to identity gave me a sudden oceanic feeling, tremendous vistas opening, most of all the fact that I myself was watching this was somehow amazing. I'm happier still now, realizing that I did not blaspheme.

>>13728646

Yes, but as an individual event that happens to you when you die.