/lit/ - Literature

File: 90 KB, 540x401, ritual_orgy.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 11:44:43 2015 No.6844771 [Reply] [Original]

>There's always a single concept to be found at the bottom of every philosopher's philosophy. With Heraclitus it's flux, with Schopenhauer will, with Stirner the ego, with Kierkegaard faith, with Nietzsche power, while with Baudrillard it's seduction and with me immersion. But what is the quest for power if not the way in which the immersed ego maximizes its influence in the flux by having faith in itself while following its seduced will? And I could easily add Plato's forms, Spinoza's Nature, Hegel's spirit, and all the rest. Hell, even Wittgenstein's silence (via way, perhaps, of Shakespeare) will have a place in my elaboration of the ultimate form of thinking by the time I am done. My masterstroke will be the inclusion of even all the abortive half-concepts and pseudo-concepts floating around in the swamp of the subhuman brain — they too will have a place in the grand scheme of things (though as befits the ideas of small, tiny creatures, theirs will naturally be a very small, very tiny place) — and all the rest, beyond that point, will be silence.

Let's discuss immersion. In a way it has certainly been the main theme in the arts for the past 30+ years. The youngest artform, video games, thrives on it. What does it mean for the future? Where can we go from there, past immersion? Anywhere?

What does it mean to you?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 16:20:32 2015 No.6845850 bump

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 21:27:33 2015 No.6847171 So I take it /lit/ only replies to memepost tier "philosophy" threads nowadays?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 21:29:19 2015 No.6847179 >>6847171 >icycalm >not memepost tier

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 21:33:18 2015 No.6847191 >>6844771 >Orgy of the Will Dear lord, where did you dig this one up? Parody or not, that's the funniest shit I've read for a long time.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 21:38:57 2015 No.6847213 Don't confuse video games with interactive narrative. Games don't have plots, characters, or stories or any of that shit. Just the player using his skills to achieve a higher score.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 21:43:01 2015 No.6847230 Flow is the future. Beyond prejudice and ulterior motives, there's going to be flow and the rest of time will be waste.

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 21:43:34 2015 No.6847231

>>6847213
In a game ressentiment can often be lacking simply because the loser can laugh defeat away by claiming to be playing just "for fun" (as if winning were "unfun" — but that's another story). Defeat here is not such a big deal precisely because games test only narrow aspects of our being, and no single game is sophisticated enough for its outcome to sufficiently define a person. But as the game grows to encompass more and more dimensions of life, it becomes increasingly harder to discount the shame of failure and the rising ressentiment by propping up your self-esteem by your success in activities outside the game. When the game finally reaches the level of the universe, ressentiment is unavoidable and automatic, having at last become equivalent with the concept of defeat. Any attempt to deny or rationalize away the ressentiment at that level, is merely a further symptom of ressentiment.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 21:45:10 2015 No.6847239 >>6847230 Weakness is the incapacity to flow (i.e. the capacity to flow less than others), sickness is to flow in the opposite direction to the prevailing flow, which is to say to God's, to mine.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 21:46:00 2015 No.6847241 >>6847231 No, people say they only play for fun when they think their opponent is taking it too seriously.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 21:50:59 2015 No.6847256 >>6847241 Resentful loser detected.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 21:53:15 2015 No.6847266 >>6847256 >i-if you don't agree with my posturing you're a loser! So cool and rational.

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 21:55:28 2015 No.6847272

>>6847266
Three orders of thinking beings.

The religious believers are totally irrational (i.e. it is impossible to discuss anything with them).

The scientific believers will take rationality to their graves — and therefore fail to understand anything about the universe beyond some petty, narrow facts about each individual science.

And finally, the philosophical believers, who operate wholly on the level of rationality, while recognizing the irrational foundations of all rationality. They can, in other words, rationally demonstrate their irrationality. They operate, therefore, on a higher, third-level rationality, a rationality which the scientific believers are not rational enough to understand (not to speak of the religious ones).

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 22:00:07 2015 No.6847285 File: 39 KB, 469x355, don'tyouever.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Stupidest thing I've read in a long time.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 22:01:51 2015 No.6847292 >>6847230 Flux was already a concept 2500 years ago, why would we go back to it?

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 22:02:28 2015 No.6847295

>>6847285
Well, I think he manages to pin you down:

>Increasingly older people making babies. Result: weaker and stupider children. Death of the family. Result: disadvantaged weaker and stupider children with psychological issues. Society inundated with decadent propaganda. Result: disadvantaged weaker and stupider children with psychological issues pissing their lives away doing stupid shit, and therefore ever more resentful towards the increasingly tiny minority that somehow manages to avoid all these pitfalls. — This is the face of the subhumanity of the future: weaker, stupider, and more resentful than ever before. They will make Neanderthals look like geniuses and supermen in comparison. But, for the same reason, they will cause the Overmen of the future to shine more brightly than anyone has ever done before.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 22:02:50 2015 No.6847297 >>6847272 What is the point of saying this?

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 22:04:14 2015 No.6847305

>>6847292
Through the microscope you can see the flux, through the telescope the Eternal Return. But the subhuman has no time for microscopes and telescopes, any more than for real books; "he works six days of the week", as Voltaire has bluntly put it, "and on the seventh goes to the inn". Try to keep that in mind next time you attempt to have a conversation with him.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 22:06:49 2015 No.6847315 >>6847295 >baseless assertions followed by idealist view of the future Yeah, nothing to see here.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 22:07:42 2015 No.6847320 >>6847315 >baseless Stay sheltered.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 22:10:45 2015 No.6847331 >>6847320 Check your privilege

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 22:13:56 2015 No.6847348 >>6847320 >sheltered What would that have to do with anything? Though he obviously didn't the internet allows an sheltered individual to access a large amount of information about the world. All he did was write a shitty NYT style opinion piece.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 22:15:04 2015 No.6847357 What the fuck is this shit Psuedo-intellectual Saturday

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 22:16:26 2015 No.6847366 >>6847348 Here we see a typical example of the subhuman brain. Subhumans: Standing Every Human Idea On Its Head Since The Invention Of Speech.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 22:17:48 2015 No.6847372 >hegel's is not 'negation' Dropped.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 22:18:25 2015 No.6847376 >>6847357 >Psuedo-intellectual Saturday Everyday is psuedo-intellectual day.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 22:21:44 2015 No.6847389 File: 156 KB, 1500x1000, asyouwere.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6847295 >Re-writing the plot to Idiocracy as an aphorism is now philosophy.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 22:22:57 2015 No.6847394 >>6847366 Why do you refer to yourself in the third person, Alex?

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 22:23:18 2015 No.6847396

>>6847389
Why do scholars never write aphoristically? Because they have so few real ideas. If a scholar tried to write in this way, his whole life's work would hardly take up three or four pages. And vice-versa: each aphorism in a philosophical work could be expanded by a scholar into a whole book, which is indeed what scholars do, or at least the best, most well-read of them, and as I've already explained with good reason.

« 零 » !Ry9.FWKNDY Sat Jul 18 22:26:29 2015 No.6847413
File: 35 KB, 296x289, AREIZOO V.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6844771

IMMERSION IS DETRIMENTAL TO PERFECTION; IT SUBSUMES AND DILUTES CONSCIOUSNESS; IMMERSION INTERFERES WITH, AND ULTIMATELY PRECLUDES, THE CONTINUANCE OF ONTOLOGICAL EVOLUTION BY SUPPRESSING SELFAWARENESS, AND SELFCONSCIOUSNESS, THEREFORE STIFLING THE SOUL.

"IMMERSION": FROM LATIN "IN" ("IN", "INTO", "ON", "UPON"), AND "MERGERE" ("TO PLUNGE", "TO DIP", "TO DIVE"); "MERGERE" IS ALSO THE ROOT FOR THE ENGLISH WORD "MERGE" ("TO COMBINE", "TO BLEND"), THEREFORE IMMERSION SIGNIFIES A DIVING INTO SUBSTANCE, ENTAILING THE DISINTEGRATION OF BEING INTO NONBEING; ID EST: NOT A PROGRESSIVE NOBLE SYNTHESIS IN WHICH BEING BECOMES ITSELF, BUT RATHER A REGRESSIVE IGNOBLE ABSORPTION.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 22:28:42 2015 No.6847424 >>6847413 damn...

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 22:28:42 2015 No.6847425 >>6847413 Buy a new keyboard Rei I'm so sick of your gimmick

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 22:30:46 2015 No.6847432 >>6847413 caps m9

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 22:31:03 2015 No.6847435 >>6847413 Hi, Jesus. Dionysus would like to have a word with you.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 22:31:51 2015 No.6847440 >>6847394 Thanks for the flattery, but Alex Kierkegaard is a greater genius than I or any of you will ever be.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 22:34:17 2015 No.6847449 >>6847396 Whatever you say, Schopenhauer. It's like someone programmed an algorithm into your head, that takes in the ideas of far more capable thinkers, misconstrues them, then spits them out in this painfully bloviated style.

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 22:42:10 2015 No.6847477

>>6847449
Your combined writings do not amount to A SINGLE aphorism of a great thinker. Instead you are in the valley — and on your KNEES moreover — screaming your petty little bullshit while totally unaware that there even exists such a thing as giants. And the pseudo-intellectual comedy continues.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 22:44:00 2015 No.6847488 File: 294 KB, 500x352, yousoundlikeabrokenrecord.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6847477 c.i.p. mate

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 22:55:06 2015 No.6847540
File: 585 KB, 1705x2034, 1344697732642.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6847449
1. if you read more you'd realize all writers have rehashed the ideas of past writers at some point.

2. the above does not necessarily diminish the authenticity of the writer.

3. being a part of a new body of work can grant them new meaning, which in this case it does.

4. just because some ideas are rehashed doesn't mean he hasn't presented a shit ton of new ones already.

5. his writing style corresponds well to his character and his ideas.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 22:59:11 2015 No.6847560 >>6847540 1. If you could actually read you would have been able to gather the actual sense of my post. 2. You can't and you didn't. 3. ???? 4. I'm out.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 23:06:17 2015 No.6847580 >>6847560 You do know these posts are quotes pulled from orgyofthewill, correct? It doesn't sound like you do.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 23:08:13 2015 No.6847584 >>6847580 Except they aren't.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 23:08:37 2015 No.6847587 File: 62 KB, 398x388, 1396534133110.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6847413

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 23:09:15 2015 No.6847589 >>6847413 damn...

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 23:11:19 2015 No.6847596 >>6847413 caps m9

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 23:14:04 2015 No.6847607 File: 33 KB, 400x400, 1326124335171.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6847584 k

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 23:14:34 2015 No.6847609 >>6847413 damn...

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 23:19:27 2015 No.6847622

>>6844771
>"So what, then, ultimately, is his position?" That you are all a bunch of fagets. A bunch of filthy, ugly, cowardly, lazy, uneducated, uncouth, lying, hypocritical, effeminate, dumb-as-a-rock fagets, and consequently not only deserve every last thing you are currently getting, but a whole lot more than that, which is precisely what you'll get when the time has come for me and my descendants to take over.

This man's ego is a thing of wonder

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 23:53:33 2015 No.6847744

>>6844771
I don't think speaking of immersion will yield meaningful results, in a way that Phenomenology (Merleau-Ponty) hasn't already. Except by evaluating the standards of acceptibility in immersion, but now we're specifically about virtual reality. It would fall under a rumination about value (Including Kierkegaard's Nietzsche).

As for virtual reality. Deleuze (Bergsonism), Badiou (Presentation/Representation), and Baudrillard have started speaking about it. I'm more interested in virtuality (Meaning how ideals become realized--Baudrillard's Integral Reality) than just the technology.

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 19 00:05:23 2015 No.6847775 What would you tell someone who desperately wants Icycalm to be wrong but can't find any flaws with his reasoning?

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 19 00:13:44 2015 No.6847800 >>6847775 If you can't beat em, join em. Or die.

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 19 00:13:46 2015 No.6847801 >>6847775 He doesn't show any reasoning.

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 19 00:16:09 2015 No.6847811 >>6847775 >Icycalm Is that the same guy who used to write pretentious video game reviews?

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 19 00:16:32 2015 No.6847813 >>6847775 >What would you tell someone I'd say, "Fuck off, Alex."

Anonymous Sun Jul 19 00:18:47 2015 No.6847823

>>6847811
That's him. This thread is full of his quotes, or just search "Orgy of the Will" to find his latest work, which he describes like this: "In this work of absolute genius, after two and a half thousand years of progress the path of philosophy arrives at an end, and the intellect at last draws, one by one, its ultimate conclusions."

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 19 00:24:15 2015 No.6847850 File: 154 KB, 499x499, rare griffith.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6844771 griffith did nothing wrong

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 19 00:29:13 2015 No.6847868 >>6847213 welcome grampa, the 80s are over.

Anonymous Sun Jul 19 00:33:16 2015 No.6847890

>>6847813
I'm not him, nor am I one of the nuthuggers on his forum.

I've always had somewhat lofty, liberal ideals but realized they were unfeasible in a world defined by strife and domination.

Discovering Nietzsche and later Zyrmpas' writing a few years back has only increased the massive feelings of anxiety and cognitive dissonance I have.

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 19 00:33:31 2015 No.6847891 >>6847850 Icycalm did nothing wrong.

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 19 00:35:28 2015 No.6847896 >>6847891 https://icycalmisacriminal.wordpress.com/2012/11/12/icycalm-is-a-criminal/

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 19 00:36:00 2015 No.6847900 >>6847896 Icycalm did nothing wrong.

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 19 07:34:49 2015 No.6848757 >>6847896 >this slave morality

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 19 07:44:59 2015 No.6848766 File: 28 KB, 480x360, parmenides.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6847413 >IN WHICH BEING BECOMES ITSELF >BECOMES

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]