I want to learn about everything. Where do I start?
I want to learn about everything. Where do I start?
Jacob Richardson
Other urls found in this thread:
youtu.be
labster8.net
warosu.org
warosu.org
twitter.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
xenosystems.net
youtube.com
twitter.com
twitter.com
e-flux.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
his309.zoekatz.agnesscott.org
static.comicvine.com
ufblog.net
spectator.us
imdb.com
imdb.com
imdb.com
imdb.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtu.be
socialecologies.wordpress.com
twitter.com
Cooper Edwards
Lucas Long
read summaries on his influences
Zachary Smith
Summoning Girardfag to assist.
Anthony Bennett
girardfag here
are we talking about Land or everything here? if we're talking about learning everything, there's a passage in Zhuangzi that argues against this:
>In the south there was an eccentric named Huang Liao who asked why Heaven and earth do not collapse and crumble or what makes the wind and rain, the thunder and lightning. Hui Shi, undaunted, undertook to answer him; without stopping to think, he began to reply, touch- ing on every one of the ten thousand things in his peroration, expounding on and on without stop in multitudes of words that never ended. But still it was not enough, and so he began to add on his astonishing assertions. What- ever contradicted other men’s views he declared to be the truth, hoping to win a reputation for outwitting others. This was why he never got along with ordinary people. Weak in inner virtue, strong in his concern for external things, he walked a road that was crooked indeed! If we examine Hui Shi’s accomplishments from the point of view of the Way of Heaven and earth, they seem like the exertions of a mosquito or a gnat—of what use are they to other things? True, he still deserves to be regarded as the founder of one school, though I say, if he had only shown greater respect for the Way, he would have come nearer to being right. Hui Shi, however, could not seem to find any tranquillity for himself in such an approach. Instead, he went on tirelessly separating and analyzing the ten thou- sand things and, in the end, was known only for his skill in exposition. What a pity—that Hui Shi abused and dissipated his talents without ever really achieving anything! Chasing after the ten thousand things, never turning back, he was like one who tries to shout an echo into silence or to prove that form can outrun shadow. How sad!
>tldr Everything is a bad idea
>better to be like Cook Ting and not these jokers
>or like a cool mellow Song gentleman
anyways if we're talking about Land obviously i'm happy to share whatever i can, it's the greatest story ever told.
can you read this? does this make sense?
Land: Circuitries
labster8.net
Nathan King
Know thyself...
John Sullivan
OP here. Yeah I was talking about everything. Maybe learn something from everything?
Liam Bell
Also share what you can about Land. I've heard you need to read everything to understand him.
Brayden Wood
>Yeah I was talking about everything.
i'm not sure it can be done, or even if it's useful. you wind up becoming Derrida and the world's juiciest piñata for guys like Nietzsche or Zhuangzi. or a tortured mind-machine like Brassier.
i like professionals. in my Happy Place philosophy is done like cooking or like dentistry (more likely, proctology). you just know what *you* know, even if it's in a mildly paranoid way as what you can't *not* know. that's how some fiction works, anyways; we share a suspicion about things, and these suspicions can perhaps make us more empathic. i like Lacan for this reason also, he's a masterful narcissist. but there is a tremendous philosophical heritage behind what he is saying also that ultimately points back towards a noble goal: to tell the truth, as best you can, and to say it well. that's a real game-changer! that's really interesting! if absolute knowledge and total certainty are for the time being slightly out of reach, a character analysis is still useful...and of course this can lead to all kinds of French postmodern fuckery, but i think we can be charitable here and say that that is not the *point,* the point is not to be an obscurantist charlatan. it's actually to consider the role of showmanship in speaking and thinking also, because *somebody* is doing the speaking, after all, and that person has both a desire to speak and a desire to know...
>Maybe learn something from everything?
well this can be done, for sure. but ultimately it's only going to be a question of obsessions and fixations, perhaps transformed into a slightly more interesting register, a learned jargon for talking about the butterflies in your own stomach. there are genuine and unironic moments of real joy to be found in reading this stuff, when you encounter a kindred spirit or some concept that makes you jump out of your seat and go, that's it, that's fucking it! and then you immediately proceed to annoy everyone around you because you can't shut up about it.
>I've heard you need to read everything to understand him.
this is Yea Forums pulling your leg. you absolutely do not require this. Land is not the Endboss of all philosophy. he's just a Black Magic Marxist with a terrifyingly interesting story to tell. such is the power of continental philosophy.
>Also share what you can about Land.
kek this happens whether anybody wants me to do this or not, sadly
Christopher Price
You can read Land as is, but to meaningfully attack him you need Deleuze or someone like Deleuze - A sorcerer who strikes orthogonally
Angel Brown
here then is what i know about Land: he is a man very much after my own heart, in a way, for sussing out that something was well and truly rotten in the state of Denmark v/postmodernity circa 1990. he knew, as many theorists did, that something very big and yet unknown was on the horizon after the fall of the Soviet Union, which was that capitalism had no off switch and no brakes, and that its higher meaning and libertarian impetus was not necessarily going to be compelled to play nice with the ethos of social democracies that had produced it, given that it was - to his mind - the ultimate product of those democracies themselves.
what makes Land interesting is that his contribution to the big story is one worthy of George RR Martin. in many ways, he Held The Line - while everybody else was drifting off into the far end of the linguistic turn and the many questions raised about semiotics by Derrida, Barthes, Baudrillard, Foucault and others, Land decided to double down on old-fashioned Marxism, and there he stayed - which turned out to be both a blessing and a curse. he was very much like a member of the Night's Watch who decided that it was going to be absolutely necessary for the future of Westeros to understand the nature of the White Walkers themselves, and he wound up becoming a sort of Bran Stark in the process, and captivated by the power of the Night's King. when the wall falls and the Seven Kingdoms collapse into warfare and intrigue with each other, Land gets to have a certain cold and bitter last laugh. but i've never really felt that it was a truly joyful laugh. Land is unique for still clinging to the magic word *Capital,* which marks him off as having, i think, some old or painful shard of his young lefty self locked within him, which torments him to know end. and i will always have a measure of sympathy for him for doing so, and it is why i think his later interest towards more ethnat concerns like race and gender are unworthy of him, but sadly inevitable, and also uninteresting for someone like me, who will always go on dreaming about a happier togetherness that doesn't require us to release the furies and tear each other apart. hence my love for Cixin Liu adaptations in the previous thread: there is a better way to digest the legacy of continental theory.
put another way, Land might be understood in a sense like a kind of Freud of the free market: he's on to *something,* of this there can be no doubt. but it is a work to be continued, developed, and explored, and not one that should immediately lead us to the worst and most horrible conclusions. Darwin, Marx, Freud and Nietzsche gave us the modern world, a world which is now due for another seismic epochal shift. it will happen whether we want it to or not, that's always how it goes. and if we want to have some sense of why that is, or how things might play out, we can retrace some of his steps, but we can also take our own side-adventures also.
(cont'd)
Robert Ross
>In the south there was an eccentric named Huang Liao who asked why Heaven and earth do not collapse and crumble or what makes the wind and rain, the thunder and lightning.
Jayden Stewart
>land is grrm of late 20th century pseudery
g. I love you and all but jesus christ. fucking retarded pseud. wouldn't have you any other way.
Nick Land is the antagonist. Clear and simple. Or at least the Mouth of Sauron. An agent of order. Nobody likes chaos, but at least they take outcasts and tricksters. Ragnarök is coming, that is certain.
Isaac Collins
nobody writes about the implications of capitalism and time-travel better than Nick Land. he's got skills with the quill like that. and i think his contribution to the big story in the long run is one that, however dark, nevertheless deserves its share of praise and celebration. this is my own take, anyways: as the Buddhists say, nothing ever goes away until it teaches us what we need to know.
the most absolutely crushing and depressing-inducing part of the story of the Wild Ride is that terrible sense that all of this has been for *nothing.* i don't mean me personally, i mean the incredible odyssey taken by Western Civilization since the French Revolution to today, all of these terrible devastations, accidents, crusades, developments, inventions, missed opportunities, taken opportunities, and more. everybody feels the terrible enervation of the present year, this combination of absolute irony and absolute despair, the total fucking suicide-inducing ennui that comes with every ad for Facebook and the rest. you can get this with Baudrillard, or with later writers on Hegel, whatever else. again, i like Lacan here precisely because he's a master locksmith when it comes to dealing with guilt and anxiety and neurosis about fears and dreams that - maybe there's a little of Mark Fisher in this also - are *not necessarily yours and yours alone to have.* Fisher would have said this too: hey, guess what, it's not all your fault, it's not all in your head. you should be fucked-out, miserable, and depressed. the story told is fucked-out, miserable, and depression inducing.
when it comes to Land, well, he's found a way of dealing with that too, although only by finding a gear in the box that the developers of the car arguably never intended to put there in the first place. there is something darkly romantic in hyperstition, although it is the romance of horror. for some, that's fine. there has always been something thrilling and emancipating in horror for the Victorian mind - ask Stevenson, or Mary Shelley, or Lovecraft. Land is who he is for folding that into the history of Marxism with a little D&G also. and in this i have likened him to being a kind of defibrillator for continental-postmodern malaise. it's no wonder he liked The Thing (1982) - horror will wake you up, horror will get you to take things seriously. The Thing loves it when you kick back and relax.
but this is not the only way to look at things, and beyond a certain horizon can indeed be counter-productive. Land is 14/10 for Making Philosophy Great Again after a stultifying enervation brought on by the reign of the Ghost Kingdom of Jacques Derrida. and postmodernity is, i guess, really my thing...but cybernetics and a second unironic look at What Did Capital Mean By This puts a little more color and zest back into the story, and for that i am grateful.
but no, you don't need to read everyone else before Land and Land is not The Meaning of Everything.
Landon Russell
Well, we did get two (2) good things from the last 300 years in the West. Russell proved that axiomic logic systems ain't that hot (which is pretty cool discovery desu) and we got decentralization.
The list of things we failed to learn is far too long, sadly. But still, not the best 300 year run but let's hope there's a fun explosion at the end
Andrew Lewis
>land is grrm of late 20th century pseudery
but that's not what i said, or at least what i meant to say: what i meant was, the story of Nick Land (and not only him!) is *good* enough, is interesting enough, to have been scripted *by* GRRM. which is, in a way, how i too read or interpret the story of continental theory - as a balls-out adventure through intellectual history, aka the Wild Ride. i'm not saying Land is like GRRM or any of this, i'm saying the larger story of ideas and their relations is more like Game of Thrones in its unpredictability, intrigue, and bittersweet melancholy.
>fucking retarded pseud. wouldn't have you any other way.
heh. YES. i am not a serious philosopher, nor did i ever intend to be one. i've said before what i consider my role to be: a cloaked and mutant figure who sells cheap and cursed relics in an antiques shop under a bridge. i like talking about all of this stuff and i think it is worth talking about, but all i can ever do is induce weird little itches or cast very low-level spells and cantrips to make things 0.0000004& more interesting. my best possible career outcome is to be an evil wizard in a TSR module who is destroyed by a small group of adventurers (levels 5-8) for corrupting the youth of Kobold Athens. you know what i am at this point. and thank you, the love is mutual.
>Nick Land is the antagonist. Clear and simple.
i disagree tho. more like Bloodraven. or a time-traveler from ITB, or perhaps a dark version of Miles Dyson from Terminator 2. this is my own projection, there is no question. have you read Templexity? he's got a Kafka-style wound in him from time and capitalism and he knows it (hence the picture: - the Revolution comes around and around again...). Land theory launches a thousand ships, many of which are horrible.
time is for realsies. i love Heidegger, massively. i think he is completely right about openness to Being, and he did a lot of heavy lifting for Lacan (tho not as much as Hegel and Kojeve) in terms of what existential psychoanalysis might be. like Baudrillard (and Deleuze) Land disdains all of this. so perhaps that explains my own agitated state: i'm trying to retrieve something for analysis from men who absolutely and explicitly want nothing to do with this. but that's more on me than on them. time and money and technology, technology and money and time...
>Ragnarök is coming, that is certain.
we can agree on this much tho.
Christopher Kelly
but all of these guys - Hegel, Baudrillard, Heidegger, Kojeve, Lacan, Deleuze, Land - operate in the shadow of Marx. it's true that there is one substantial exception to this, that being Nietzsche, and he may well be the Sorcerer Supreme of them all. Deleuze says there is absolutely no way of reconciling Hegel and Nietzsche, and he might be right about that (Lacan, i think, would disagree, but Deleuze has rejoinders for him also). and we come in 2019 to Land too, who after quite a lot of Deleuzian stuff still wants to go back to Marx (a Right-Marx, but a Marx nonetheless), and even Baudrillard i think stuck to those sensibilities also. as out there as the situationists get, there is always i think the Communist International there in the background.
it's heady stuff. the full-on break with Marx is difficult for some, maybe impossible. my own sense ofc is that these kinds of things lead to calamity and ruination one way or the other: Hitler resolving the Gordian Knot in his way led to race theory and National socialism, Stalin keeps it International, and just as bad. and overseas, there's Mao...and these are the kinds of horror-shows one has to deal with if one wants to really go down into the lower levels of the diabolical roller-coaster ride, where perhaps only Georges Bataille is at the bottom. interestingly it's the Chinese these days who actually seem to want to move on from Mao more than the West...too bad about the Social Credit, tho...
and you know what my response to this is: basically, it consists of bursting into tears and thinking unironically about the crucifixion. crying and drinking and shitposting on Yea Forums, find a flaw!
>Well, we did get two (2) good things from the last 300 years in the West. Russell proved that axiomic logic systems ain't that hot (which is pretty cool discovery desu) and we got decentralization.
yeah, we got lots of stuff. if only we could appreciate them more and not carry on as we do so often.
>The list of things we failed to learn is far too long, sadly.
yep
>But still, not the best 300 year run but let's hope there's a fun explosion at the end
personally my feeling is that it will be a kind of hilariously bloated non-explosion, a fatsplosion of Ballardian proportions.
>metaphysical fatsplosion baby yeahhhhhhh
we need a place to talk about philosophy, perhaps, just to keep from going insane. like a potlatch of sorts, or a passion play. just so that you can see the monsters, and let them speak...
Brayden Miller
so for what i know about Land: there's an ungodly number of links and other things here in the OP of the last CAG thread.
warosu.org
and this is my acceleration reading list
warosu.org
you will be well-served by reading this stuff to deepen your appreciation for all of it, and then shitposting to your heart's content in Land threads on the dear old yak-milking forum.
i think he's basically a wizard, and he opened the Do Not Open box and depressurized the whole goddamn ship (or, put another way, he noticed that the Do Not Open box had already been opened, and wondered what that meant). there are always anons who go Ewwwww That's Racist and this is a sad and inevitable aspect of his work (as was Heidegger's anti-semitism). but there is no need to get hung up on th, imho. that is Crusty Old Nick and even at his most maximal degree of Crustiness if you can get past that you will find some of the most balls-out fascinating readings of Kant, Marx, Deleuze and NTC anywhere on Planet Meme.
cyberpunk was a seriously fascinating moment that took place in the 1980s and it is still at work under the colossal mess that is politics today, if you are prepared to dig down deep enough under the political landscape and past the pointless mimetic shit-show that is the MSM to find it. what's happening with technology, how it is going to shape our minds and bodies, all of our social relations, and much else - that's the real story, and it is a truly fascinating one. it also serves as a not-so-terrible recap of what the fuck mankind has been doing to itself for the past two centuries or so (or longer).
Zizek is right: this is a good time to reflect and interpret, and not get sucked into the eleventh thesis on Feuerbach. another aspect of this work is the de-crypting of what has been going on in the Ivory Tower for a couple of decades, which is a task the Internet is pretty good at also. the more i think people have an understanding of what the philosophers meant and were trying to accomplish, the less perhaps we will find ourselves being seduced by meme ideologies that cannot themselves extricate themselves from what seduces them, which is the desire to Change The World and imagine a terribly short-sighted Happy Ending at the end of it all. it's not even like this is impossible, it's just that it's *difficult.* Stengers is right about this too: we might consider the values of going slower...
i don't know senpai. i feel like there is a lot of genuine enjoyment to be found in sifting the wasteland and sharing what one finds there. a common project for humanity might begin with a discovery of what it is that makes us commonly human - that is, the capacity to think, to record memories, to share information, to ask questions...because we're all fucking blind in this place now. so how'd we get here? and do we have to be driven by the same machines that brought us to this point?
Daniel Robinson
and ultimately i'd rather have some *fiction* than any of it, or some tragedy, or a really really good piece of vidya more than other ideology or another clever re-write of Deleuze or anything else. the eternal bromance between philosophy and literature shows no sign of stopping, and at the point at which - as it was remarked - the more that politics comes to resemble professional wrestling, the more professional wrestling comes to resemble politics -
>link here, the second one down
twitter.com
- well, this seems to me a like good time to ask ourselves what the fuck is really going on here. and somewhere along the line the real work of simulation passed from movies over to games, which is where the true collective-unconscious Skunk Works of augmented reality is to be found anyways.
Satisfactory: Trailer
youtube.com
find a flaw!
>found one, it sucks and so do you
>okay but you get the point inner self
to learn to simulate the simulators, that may be where we are at today. or, if not that, to provide some insight about the nature of this great simulation (as ZeroHPLovecraft says, brilliantly, the 'encephalization of capital'). all this is in play now. it's a hell a fucking time to be alive and digest some of this stuff, but drinking and chain-smoking before, after, and during is probably warranted also.
*something* works in all of this. we can seduce and be seduced, we can simulate and be simulated. what does it *mean?* who the fuck knows. and yet something keeps calling us back to this. Critical Vidya Studies done from an other-than-deconstructive viewpoint would be a good look, that would be great. but so would a few good films also to recap the Great Adventure about how we got to this place and what - if anything - life might look on the other side of the Cosmotech time-loop we are in. because maybe there is no exit, maybe we just keep opening up more and more doors in the multiverse...
anyways. the reading is worth it, even if it leaves you even more confused than before. it's a good feel.
Henry Campbell
>>Ragnarök is coming, that is certain.
>we can agree on this much tho.
I like this for the theme song, but I also like listening to how the story is told. pic not rel is something I wanted to add for no reason at all rel to these two thoughts. The weebabeast tradition where we all say weeba is not something I agree with and like to gatekeep who can say what here in the hatehole. Kindness is harder in public than anger, but I enjoy expressions of anger more. Will I ever learn?
youtube.com
Christopher Morales
Just found this and now i have a lot to read up on.
Joseph White
>Hegel
>in the shadow of Marx
Joshua Russell
here's one way i might like to approach these issues: the Do-Over button.
imagine if you *had* a Do-Over button. this is the subtext of ITB, after all. you can't repair the breach in the time-loop itself, but you can increasingly come to understand that said breach is feature and not bug. achieving Peak Irony and Peak Simulation is a rather unique problem and at the same time an entirely ancient one. the tragic and cyclical nature of human achievement was no doubt understood by the Greeks and by Hegel as well, and by the time you get to Ye Olde Faster-Goers that are Land et al that intimation is in full swing. Yea Forums has also remarked that Kafka is peak cybernetics and that too seems pretty good to me. so here we are.
*kindness* is an unusually refreshing idea, you know? it really is. it means allowing things out in the kingdom of the blind, going carefully through the underworld. it seems enough to me sometimes to *just be kind,* to wait and see, to not foreclose opportunities and possibilities - and to not get too carried away with unironic redemption or the thirst for blood and vengeance and retribution either. see Girard for more details: are you really looking for justice, or is it really just revenge? this is in Lacan as well, who gets it from Kojeve and Hegel: it's *recognition* that we want, period. we only want to be heard, and seen, and understood.
this is what is such a catastrophe about falling in love too much with irony and so on, however much this is what it means to be a French continental philosopher of the 20C (or a German of the 19C): we wind up falling in love with our own simulations, or adapting like frogs in hot water to the very water that is killing us. that same boiling water comes for us all in the end. just to be a part of the becoming of things, that's enough, more than enough. to cause things, rig the game, try and get ahead of the curve...it's just possible, we wind up outsmarting ourselves. Land is a stupendously good example of this...or, to use a different example
>why didn't they give the ball to Lynch?
i am absolutely fine with being a ghost that haunts an abandoned theme park.
ok fair point i deserve this
Brayden Diaz
the other example of this kind of deep-scale cybernetics was the Cold War. again, the Soviets and the West knew each other and itself entirely too well, which is what led to terrifying scenarios like Fail Safe (oops, a missile accidentally went off here, so in order to repair the balance, we have to make sure one goes off with you guys as well...so that the paranoia that structures our world can be continued...)
i strongly recommend reading Girard's book on Clauswitz (Battling to the End) also, even though it isn't an explicitly /acc book, but because imho there is something much more significant going on about the nature of technology that involves cybernetics, mimetics, knowledge structures, and much much else...even Land himself only becomes interesting after the ending of the Cold War...or about the disastrous logic of the duel we find ourselves in when we are forced to identify ourselves as states for the sake of responding to calls from the other guy, who also apprehends himself as a state, and so on...
these ideas, of game-theory, and reciprocity, exchanges and all the rest, there is a huge story here to be written about postmodernity and the end of the Soviet Union, but also about how we massively technologized and cyberneticized ourselves during and through the twentieth century, and on into today, the great age of telecommunications and capital...
...ugh. so much stuff to think about. but this great unfolding of collective (un)consciousness, of recognition and misrecognition, of call and response, this all makes up who and what we are today...
sorry, sometimes i feel it's better just to get my random schizo-ramble thoughts out even in a half-baked form rather than dwell on them.
Anthony Ross
and Land has his moments of Unironic Taoism too:
>what if knowledge were a means to deepen unknowing?
Ryan Butler
its girardfag! hi
Angel Garcia
well hello there gentle user
Cameron Morris
Purgatory, yes, thank you! I was trying to remember what I was thinking about earlier, about the nature of purgatory and its expression in poetry and novels and television. The notion does not arrive, the sanctity of expression does not hold, I am on Yea Forums.
>ywnend, an infinite bliss.
Xavier Rodriguez
>marxism is continental philosophy
Lmao
Levi Martinez
it is not so much of a stretch to say that from a certain perspective continental theory really is the theory and practice of hell, and Land is hardly the worst guide to it:
>The logical consequence of Social Darwinism is that everything of value has been built in Hell.
>It is only due to a predominance of influences that are not only entirely morally indifferent, but indeed — from a human perspective — indescribably cruel, that nature has been capable of constructive action. Specifically, it is solely by way of the relentless, brutal culling of populations that any complex or adaptive traits have been sieved — with torturous inefficiency — from the chaos of natural existence. All health, beauty, intelligence, and social grace has been teased from a vast butcher’s yard of unbounded carnage, requiring incalculable eons of massacre to draw forth even the subtlest of advantages. This is not only a matter of the bloody grinding mills of selection, either, but also of the innumerable mutational abominations thrown up by the madness of chance, as it pursues its directionless path to some negligible preservable trait, and then — still further — of the unavowable horrors that ‘fitness’ (or sheer survival) itself predominantly entails. We are a minuscule sample of agonized matter, comprising genetic survival monsters, fished from a cosmic ocean of vile mutants, by a pitiless killing machine of infinite appetite. (This is still, perhaps, to put an irresponsibly positive spin on the story, but it should suffice for our purposes here.)
>Crucially, any attempt to escape this fatality — or, more realistically, any mere accidental and temporary reprieve from it — leads inexorably to the undoing of its work. Malthusian relaxation is the whole of mercy, and it is the greatest engine of destruction our universe is able to bring about. To the precise extent that we are spared, even for a moment, we degenerate — and this Iron Law applies to every dimension and scale of existence: phylogenetic and ontogenetic, individual, social, and institutional, genomic, cellular, organic, and cultural. There is no machinery extant, or even rigorously imaginable, that can sustain a single iota of attained value outside the forges of Hell.
>What is it that Neoreaction — perhaps I should say The Dark Enlightenment — has to offer the world, if all goes optimally (which, of course, it won’t)? Really, the honest answer to this question is: Eternal Hell. It’s not an easy marketing brief. We could perhaps try: But it could be worse (and almost certainly will be).
Xenosystems: Hell-Baked
xenosystems.net
but this is why we probably have to keep going...
take Marx out of it and you change the picture substantially, no?
Aaron Bailey
other things to think about, in terms of the strangest of all possible bedfellows, meeting in the strangest of all possible ways...
Nathaniel Green
there is a hotel in my mind, or perhaps a ramen shop in Tokyo, where Land, Girard, Heidegger and Lacan all meet, anonymously, and have the most interesting conversation about the theory and practice of hell and the meaning of the good life. or perhaps they are snowed in in some alpine resort, and forced to spend the evening together, and drink heavily, and it looks like a Eugene O'Neill play, and they talk about the twentieth century, and it all comes out because it will not come out any other way until they chew the scenery into ribbons and we finally get to some understanding of this thing.
Long Day's Journey Into Night: Trailer
youtube.com
they leave their notes and i steal them.
Nicholas Roberts
although in some sense this has already been done.
John Edwards
holy shit it's real. poor guy, someone should explain what "boomer" means.
In any regard, Nick is squarely using Deleuze as a weapon to theorize how to maximize complexity or whorls or order or Apollo or whatever the fuck your preferred thing is. My personal reading of Deleuze is fairly anti-Apollo, as far as one can be "opposed" to a law of nature. Anyway Land is giving us, honest (read - trickstet-liar), card carrying Deleuzeans a bad name. The state isn't supposed to be able to find Deleuze this fast. I just want a map on how to survive the streets of the State, and the bastard leaves me with no choice other than to curse his name. Cursed be, he's interesting as fuck. I really, really need to read Whitehead, he seems like good ammo against Land. I'm running on a Goethe-Kierkegaard-Deleuze assemblage as the battering ram and the old thing really could use some new parts.
Chase Adams
>The state isn't supposed to be able to find Deleuze this fast.
What does this even mean? I can't understand a word you're saying but it sounds like a war is going on. Is this LARPing or am i going to die soon?
Christopher Walker
NRx = boomer wash-your-penis-ideology CONFIRMED
Anthony Johnson
and so it was that his coffee exited through the nasal passages
Nathaniel Barnes
Beterson is far too embedded in the assholes of the IDW (cringe) at this point for that to be an interesting conversation.
Also, he's far too worried about mainstream acceptability to talk to someone the Telegraph called a fascist once upon a time.
It's more of a pity Nick Land and Mark Fisher didn't leave us a long-form recorded conversation, really.
Jackson Sanchez
He said "context," not "concept," you fucking idiot. He's trying to give an idea of the political climate in which the movement germinated.
Chase Parker
We are laping, and you're going to die soon. Basically Deleuze described the way the state memes you into paying taxes, and gives you a handy box of tools to unfuck yourself sneakily. Nick Land came and used the tools to theoretically construct a neo-Authority that knows about you unfucking itself and needs you to pay taxes in the form of carbon atoms in your body being used to calculate how to meme the fungus people of alpha centauri into making themselves into computers as well.
>war
Yes there's a war going on. There's always a war going on.
Hudson Hall
...
Benjamin Cruz
I can't stand to listen to Land, he sounds like a woman. I wish he had a vaguely Asian accent and talked like Ryu from street fighter - a mix of grunting and babbling. You might hate Zizek for many reasons, but the guy is listenable as fuck. To evoke reddit, I would love to have Zizek narrate my life, "mein gott"s and sniffles included.
Or land could sound like an anime girl, I could take that as well.
Joshua Russell
>Or land could sound like an anime girl, I could take that as well.
we are sorely missing Anime Tales of the Post-Whatevermodern World. i want one for Land, for Baudrillard, for Lacan, Deleuze...how fucking great would this be?
Dominic Clark
and more like a biopic or actual study of their various ideas, rather than using their ideas to as shoehorns for a plot.
but this would be pretty rad too, as maybe an overarching narrative...who's fucking behind it all? it's Zombie Hegel, the wards and seals which sealed him off are breaking, and he is coming once more for Neo-Tokyo
>or wherever
Caleb Hughes
fpbp
Michael Wilson
>Nick Land came and used the tools to theoretically construct a neo-Authority that knows about you unfucking itself and needs you to pay taxes in the form of carbon atoms in your body being used to calculate how to meme the fungus people of alpha centauri into making themselves into computers as well.
Wait a minute, this is just the plot of Permutation City
Josiah Nelson
>he's trying to defend his boomer ideology
Jayden Butler
>tfw seven samurai is very powerful for you too
Lucas Evans
>Land says something about trannies on twitter
>idpols get mad, flood his feed with boomer comments
>Land goes even further into the hole of being fox news grandpa
It's the dialectic that never stops giving.
Oliver Davis
>tfw you remember all those good times discovering NRx stuff in 2015-2016
>tfw your life is passing before your eyes
>tfw you realize you had no life to begin with so w/ev might as well enjoy it
twitter.com
Jonathan Hall
>I really, really need to read Whitehead, he seems like good ammo against Land. I'm running on a Goethe-Kierkegaard-Deleuze assemblage as the battering ram and the old thing really could use some new parts.
don't forget Yuk Hui, he knows his stuff too and he's got interesting things to say about all of this also
William Martinez
remebrance of earth's past trilogy, but maybe some overlap in ideas there yeah
Angel Rogers
will repost this here, if only because there is a dearth of really smart articles that critique the NRx'ers without going full prog.
e-flux.com
i say the Huipill is good and i have photographic evidence from the Cosmotech threads to prove it
Jace Moore
Drop it. This is a fool's delusion. This won't bring you anything good. What do you desire from this? Will you be truly happy trying to pursue "everything"? How is this beneficial towards your life, or those around you? I'm not exaggerating when I say that if you truly have an obsession with trying to know everything, you're probably suffering from clinical delirium, obsessing with knowledge is a way to cope with an issue of the past, such as people who are afraid of being poor again, they keep stacking it to no end. If you truly have this obsession, go to a therapist. If not, just drop it. It's impossible to know everything, and one day you'll realize this is an impossible task and feel impotent about it, and will shatter the very foundation of your life. Pursuing knowledge is good, but keep in mind you'll never learn everything and that you'll be ignorant of 99% of all knowledge available. Search for that that you truly enjoy learning or that that is useful. There's a reason people stopped trying to learn everything and opted for specialist in any matter.
Sebastian Cooper
this is an excellent post
>and should probably be a pasta in Land threads also
in my own case it is objectively known that one can indeed Choose Poorly
>so many grails, why can't i hold them all
Thomas Evans
that is some questionable weed
Jace Carter
fwiw that anonymous 4chanite
>that unsung hero!
later went on to complete the epitaph for the glorious CAG megathread.
graffiti on a tunnel somewhere in the troubled cyber-Utopias yet to come ...
Adam Brooks
looks like it was cured in a damp environment
where do you live girarddude?
Liam Sullivan
i am a windblown leaf, and a man of constant sorrow. that's not a screenshot from the Cosmotech radio bunker, however. that's from somebody else.
Soggy Bottom Boys: Man of Constant Sorrow
youtube.com
Adrian Lewis
I'm tired of your mommy-daddy oedepus tirade. Freud is a pseud, everyone knows that (as it rhymes ect)
'O psychiatrist, have your hard fought spaces. The streets and the workplace. The church and the parlament. But o' high priest, I plead you, leave this place in spirit. This is a place of those who are sick of the O-word. If I hear that word one more time I shall truly turn into myself. I see the desert, it is the only place to flee from the dreaded O-word. The schizo-machine will do wheelies eternally in the desert (wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee).
We really need an eulogy for pseuds and sophists.
Ryan Gray
i would like also to draw your attention to this picture, b/c it's just such a perfect description how a more harmonious balance between these things might be imagined. Simondon squeezes right in there between Hegel and Marx, and seems to posit a role played by technology that might be said from preventing the most disastrous Crossing of the Streams in the history of the world: the Hegel-Marx direct connection that eventually gives you Land and his own brilliant re-reading of future history: that we have no choice but to become the Borg. Heidegger saw this also (as did, in their respective ways, Guenon, and Spengler, and Ellul, and Virilio, and McLuhan, and Agamben, and, and, and)...how many times do we need to hear the same message over and over again?
Land's is among the very finest and most tortuously precise re-tellings of the Promethean drama, but rooting for him unironically today is a little bit like rooting for the house in blackjack also. i say this with love, b/c of course if you asked Land he would probably say - what do you mean, *rooting against me,* you arrogant and naive little dipshit, *i'm the fucking Good Guy here!* and in a way, he would be right.
but again, that picture just says so much about YH's intellectual project, i find. if there is no more a Before Hegel than there is an After Marx - if this is what it means, partly, to be ontologically incomplete - then there are something between 14 and 183,000 questions to be asked about what the fuck we are doing with tech going forward. the image conjured up for me in YH's image - admittedly romantic - is simply one that asks what would happen if we didn't see in tech the inevitable hand of Empire behind it, and something that cannot stop until it has pulverized the landscape and turned it into HellCoin. Land made a certain connection that had to be made, so that the nightmare could be seen truly for what it is, and perhaps so also to remind us that if we choose to accelerate down this path, that is indeed what would happen (Old Nick presents the inverted version, saying what happens if you *don't* accelerate down that path, which is a whole other story).
for myself all i can ever do is get lost in questions about recognition and misrecognition, cognition and desire and so on. the rosiest possible view of this suggests to me that we do not in fact, really, want unironic war. we think we do and we do not. what we want is truth, but it may be the case that we only find this in the most circuitous of ways. the places where one might arrange a meet-up between Confucius and Hegel seem interesting to me too, and i actually don't think they all necessarily become apologetics for the CCP either.
Luke Perez
Simondon really does suggest a kind of escape hatch or secret door through some of the horribly reciprocal and cyclical processes in which we find ourselves. while i have no problem shilling the virtues of Girard et al about the need to recognize each other, these kinds of things, there is also something to be said about doing this as a kind of prolegomena to imagining a world that isn't basically a prisoner of 19C sensibilities running on 21C hardware (or is it the reverse? either way things got incredibly fucking heavy in the 20C.)
Land, like Nietzsche, is to me one of those guys that simply cannot be hand-waved away until there is a better theory in place for what comes after. in Nietzsche's case, to some degree, there are at least two of these: Heideggerian phenomenology, and Lacanian psychoanalysis, which also gives you Deleuze (arguably the most faithful interpretation). but Deleuze also gives you Land, and therein lies the rub. even Land isn't himself - well, maybe not completely - actually willing the complete destruction of human life by capital, he was raising some questions about what is effectivelly the Gestell back in the 1990s and then he found that what appeared to be a tiny little side door in fact opened up directly onto Lovecratian realms beyond imagining. and now he's fallen in love with BTC and is one of the continental world's greatest theorists of the meaning of time-travel.
and yet voluntarily falling in love with our own cyberneticization and industrialization is, i think, what YH is warning against. again, i'm *with* Land here on this - rather than reject a thing, why not follow along where it is taking you? why not sign up for the ride? the view is breathtaking. but there is a horizon beyond which i also think it is built for failure and disappointment, and in turn towards disappointment coping strategies which i *really* do not want.
so YH is my own way of extricating myself to some degree from the cords and wires that the Wild Ride requires you to plug into yourself, like a good old fashioned 80's cyberpunk would. my guess is that he's not even all that optimistic about his own project, as much as perhaps Heidegger wasn't either; i don't know, i'll have to wait until i read the new book. but that teeny little space, and the rest of the gallery of rogues and martyrs that surrounds it, gives you all the philosophical fun you could ever ask for for all the rest of one's natural days.
Jaxon Sanchez
Sorry to burst your bubble, but clinical psychiatry is as real as your pathetic arrogance. It has both anatohistological and pharmacological evidence, which of course you can consult in any medical book about it, but you won't because you prefer to feel right than to be right. Saying something is a "pseud" just because it hurts your inner ego, doesn't make it any less true. But of course you sound more like a pasta than an actual post, so I'll just dismiss it.
Owen Nelson
I'll take dismissal. Dismissal is precisely what I'm aiming for
Andrew Richardson
a first jump-off question would be: how to reimagine the process of capital itself without becoming disintegrated into something that resembles Judith Butler 2.0. i frequently find myself thinking about these things when i play something like FTL, for example - which is not only a game that i think would delight Land's heart, but also because it suggests a multiplicity of currencies and fungible properties that nevertheless are required for something other than teleoplexy.
i wonder, for example, what it might be like to think about Landian stuff in a context where he was *not* constantly in the shadow of his own disappointment. Alain Badiou, for example, loves writing about the genius of Mao, and yet - afaik - he's never actually been to China, and this may be partly because he is enjoying riding out the cachet that comes with being the greatest Maoist in France (and having been on the barricades in 1968, and so on).
where is the *post-singularity Nick?* what does he look like? how might we conceive space as being something other than either
a) a total fucking nightmare, or
b) a lost horizon we are continually doomed to mourn because any possibility of ever getting there is always pre-emptively torpedoed either by our Protestant sentimentalism or our (inversely Protestant) hyperstitial sensibilities. both are bad.
once again, i want to say this too: China is producing exactly the kind of heroic science fiction NRx guys are dreaming about all the time. i don't know what this means, but i can say that i don't even need to put a gun to my head to choose between Space-Age China or Race-Age Nick.
The Wandering Earth: trailer
youtube.com
meme metapolitics sucks the hairiest ones. there are too many interesting questions and conversations to be had about these things before we fling up our hands in despair and start blaming each other for why we can't have nice things, i think. but maybe that's just me.
Leo Evans
>When you wake up in the morning, tell yourself: the people I deal with today will be meddling, ungrateful, arrogant, dishonest, jealous and surly. They are like this because they can't tell good from evil. But I have seen the beauty of good, and the ugliness of evil, and have recognized that the wrongdoer has a nature related to my own - not of the same blood and birth, but the same mind, and possessing a share of the divine. And so none of them can hurt me. No one can implicate me in ugliness. Nor can I feel angry at my relative, or hate him. We were born to work together...
Robert Sanders
>Butler 2.0
Unpack please. A masquerade?
>YH
I've read one article and there was a lot of value in it. Positing a multiplicity of local cosmotechnics that I would've come up with if I was 2 deviations smarter. Very Deloogiean. Could that also be true for intelligences? There is no AGI, there's always a blindspot, but it's local to the superintelligence in question. We can cage tigers in general, but a tiger is smarter in his territory. Put me and my friends in Bengal and you'll have the shittiest sequel to Predator.
Juan Butler
>trying to know everything
Is literally no one's endeavor. Cf.
Isaiah Morales
>A masquerade?
essentially yes, and a terrible masquerade, because it is a masquerade inseparable from the real (again, a thesis i could actually get behind, if it wasn't predicated on identity politics that are to my mind completely antiquarian).
Butler is smarter than me. she is a highly refined being and an absolute champion of both the best and worst aspects of academia today; i have the same irrational and crude grudges there that i once had against Derrida (and which are unbecoming of a philosopher, or even a degenerate fuckface pseud, like me). this is what i think: the best possible argument for Landian Social Darwinist hell-capital is that it is only defensible if understood as a question of intelligence, and fundamentally *everybody can be educated.* everyone can be *indoctrinated* (or seduced) also, but i would work a little Confucius in there as well: no matter how much of a fucking monkey you are, You Can Be Taught. take this a few steps further and i reveal myself as being something like a highly compromised techno-neo-Augustinian with terrible nightmares.
people can learn things. anyone can learn to do things (and i would quote the Journey of the West here too to make moral points and quietly indoctrinate to my own way of thinking by allegory, if necessary). the worst thing you can do to people is rip their guts out and plunge them into a state of complete despair, which is where many of us presently are. and this is an extraordinarily difficult rabbit-hole to get out of, made only worse by extended readings of Land to solve one's current problems (Marx is dead, wat do?) with even larger ones (Marx lives, wat do?).
Land stuff revealed at least one crucial piece of kryptonite (i will include here the typo 'cryptonite,' for your enjoyment also): language does not so much matter and you cannot deconstruct the dollar dollar bill, y'all. enter the Reactionary; where postmodern non-Ego was, there NRx shall be. and much else. but again, i am a boring centrist at the bottom, and i want people to get along and lose their minds thinking other things instead...it's Kefka Palazzo who says more about the endgame for postmodernity than any other fictional character i can think of, and that is why i am hoping to open up a different pathway...because the Doomsday Clown knows everything there is to know about the slippage from the imaginary to the symbolic and the real...
gotta go, more on this later.
Carson Williams
Math and formal logic.
James Anderson
This is pretty wise.
Leo Russell
>but no, you don't need to read everyone else before Land and Land is not The Meaning of Everything.
What should you read before Land?
What is the meaning of everything and how useful is Land to it?
William Thompson
Allright, I give up. What is this? Is "Everything" code for meme-talk? These posts scream incoherent nonsense at me, and believe me, I genuinely try to understand. Someone please explain in plain english: What are you talking about? (Without invoking aliens, memes or time travel)
Brayden Turner
If you are looking for meaning to yr life, Land is probably the worst person to go to. If you are looking for semiotics, Land is still pretty bad.
I personally think that any productive reading of Land can only come in relation to Deleuze and if you've read all the deloogie prereqs you're ready for Land. Obviously you can also come in through Moldbug and the ilk but then you're reducing Land to ideology which is how I first read him and I can tell you that it's gonna fuck you up in a bad way.
Owen Cook
I'm personally just applying Deleuze&Guttari's rethoric, exchanging (read: stealing) ideas and just generally enjoying myself. Gridfag is uh, slaying his inner demons. Can't speak for the rest.
Aaron Hughes
>gabidull zo bad id gud
Ethan Barnes
>This quarrel over the Enlightenment resonates with a debate that raged during the European Enlightenment. On one side were radical thinkers such as Diderot, d’Holbach, Paine, Jefferson, and Priestley—philosophers and Unitarians who attacked the Church and the monarchy and saw the progress of reason as the realization of universalism. On the other side were more moderate Enlightenment thinkers such as Ferguson, Hume, and Burke, who championed the monarchical-aristocratic order of society. The Enlightenment, it would seem, has no original commitment to democracy. On the contrary, the issue was contested from the start.
maybe it goes without saying, but this is one of the central fallacies (or just historical misreadings) of steven pinker in his most recent exhortative tract. jihn gray--who has had his own interesting journey through political commitments, in the obverse direction of land and moldbug--has made this same observation at every available opportunity.
pinker is a quintessential cardinal ex cathedra, and received and presented by the media arm as such. that such a nebbish little queer is the vocal contingent of dogmatic liberalism maybe speaks to each 'true power', and his round denouncement by the more committed, critical, and pragmatically-minded leftist media contingent gives evidence of where the real energy and sentiment is fomenting.
Nicholas Baker
i need to stop posting from my phone while at work
i become totally incoherent
Julian Williams
Zhuangzi knew the deal. see pic rel. goes for also. Cook Ting ftw
>What should you read before Land?
it's more i would say what you should read *with* him. i am highly skeptical about reading lists and charts, and i always think that you should read whatever it is that the butterflies in your stomach tell you to read, in whatsoever order you find scratches where it itches. there is no possible canon reading order for continental philosophy, it's much more like a giant continent that can be navigated from any number of possible angles. there's Mount Marx (more accurately, a volcano), there's the Heideggerian forest, there's the Landian horror-void, there's the Deleuzian ether...just try and take the tour however you can see fit. and, if you are a true patrician, write us a travel guide later on what you saw. there is no correct way to do this, i think.
>What is the meaning of everything and how useful is Land to it?
i don't know what the meaning of everything is. don't tempt me to be any more narcissistic than i already am. Land is Land, a horrorcore Marxist with a bent for Kant and HP Lovecraft and speed. there are a great many other attractions to be seen on the Wild Ride.
don't think about it too much. 'tis just a standard Land thread.
this
>Gridfag is uh, slaying his inner demons.
the jury is still out on who's slaying what. right now i think they've got possession of Ithaka like the suitors, and i am seven billion leagues away from home. also there is no Penelope there, or Telemachus. and Athena is looking after someone else. so maybe this analogy does not hold up so well. also
>Gridfag
it's girardfag damnit
mebbe gabiull not zo bad tho
mebbe it only misunderstood
(cont'd)
Bentley Stewart
>The Enlightenment, it would seem, has no original commitment to democracy. On the contrary, the issue was contested from the start.
>maybe it goes without saying, but this is one of the central fallacies (or just historical misreadings) of steven pinker in his most recent exhortative tract. jihn gray--who has had his own interesting journey through political commitments, in the obverse direction of land and moldbug--has made this same observation at every available opportunity.
i would actually agree with this - the Enlightenment does *not* have an original commitment to democracy, and this is the kind of stuff that would tickle Land also (hence, Dark Enlightenment and so on). but the Enlightenment understood as such should be anathema to tyranny also.
go far enough down the Critical Theory wormhole and Enlightenment actually begins to seem, i think, much more of a radical prospect than it is generally regarded to be. a truly Enlightenment state might well be absolutely as anarchic and quarrelsome and ungovernable as a pirate armada - *which might be just fine for all of the pirates involved,* and *good fucking luck* for anyone else who wants to to govern those places Imperially. see pic rel for more details.
NB: can we have a moratorium (in advance) on shitting on Frank Miller also, or conflating Xerxes' portrayal as celestial hermaphrodite with evil? i want to fucking skip ahead to the next chapter of the Great Conversation where we stop assuming that every time a being of broad-spectrum sexual interest is also presented in a position of power that it necessarily it means Trans Is Evil or that there is anything there to unpack that is worth unpacking. it's the same way i feel about Kefka: hey, guess what, the guy with ??? sexuality turns out to be *a tremendously gifted actor* in many ways. leaving aside the fact that Kefka is an obvious sorcerous genius (who can also create things like Slave Crowns, which are no mean feat) - the fact here is that the question is not one of sexuality but one of *talent* and *authority.* in 300, most of Persia doesn't seem to care about Xerxes' gender, and *neither does the fucking Empire of FF6.* *nobody fucking cares about any of this shit.* Gestahl doesn't care. Leonidas doesn't even care. i don't care, you don't care, nobody fucking cares. how about appreciating Movie Xerxes for convincing half the known universe for following him to Greece? or Kefka for being - clearly - one of the great Magitek Free Agents of that world?
sorry, i guess that was a micro-rant but i really fucking hate that these things are still required, sometimes. back to Radical Enlightenment -
(cont'd)
Nicholas Hughes
every once in a while Land tweets a picture of the Jolly Roger and i find this very interesting, because i think in a certain sense it represents a true puzzle for his thinking: what's wrong with a fleet of Enlightenment pirates? the real problem he has isn't with capitalism (obviously) but with industrial civilization grafted onto Atlantic/maritime/Sea Peoples sensibilities. there is not a significant and important split - as Schmitt notes - between Germanic land-based (not Land-based, mind you) and Anglo sea-based thinking. with Napoleon everything that was continental was well and truly continental, and the Anglos found themselves on the outside looking in; today it's Land who *really* finds himself on the outside looking in.
but this idea of the Enlightenment as a *genuine problem* for romantic Hegelian-Marxism is a point worth reflecting on, i think. as the Joker himself says: the thing about chaos is, *it's fair.* and there is some part of this that appeals on some deep sub-cocklear level to dear old Uncle Nick, who i think will choose disintegration on the high seas over even his own preferred brand of Social Darwinism, if push came to shove. pirate utopias, i think, would work for him. he's hung up on cybernetic capital and much else that follows from Marx, but i think if i wanted to begin crowbarring what remained of my soul away from his icy clutches i would actually begin by considering What The Enlightenment Meant By This, and asking if there actually is any real conflict of interest between Enlightenment values and pirate utopia. because i think this is why he tweets that stuff out now and again.
>pinker is a quintessential cardinal ex cathedra, and received and presented by the media arm as such. that such a nebbish little queer is the vocal contingent of dogmatic liberalism maybe speaks to each 'true power', and his round denouncement by the more committed, critical, and pragmatically-minded leftist media contingent gives evidence of where the real energy and sentiment is fomenting.
so i'm find with all of this also, and the Cathedral obviously can suck a dick. but the same dick that it sucks must in the end be sucked by those who oppose it in ways guaranteed to reproduce it with perhaps only a redder tint rather than a bluer one.
if Landian Right-Marxism is the correlative to Foucault's Left Nietzsche, we can perhaps posit a new dyad: an Angry Steve and a Cheerful Nick, neither of which exists, but both of which are perhaps briefly interesting enough to shed some more light on his conversation...
>what in the name of Sam Elliott are you even talking about girardfag
>inner self i am just having a grand old time
>but nobody knows what you mean you insufferable horseball
>*gets Enya*
>no. not that. not Enya
>we have to be kind inner self, even to those we hate
>but you are so deserving of hate girardfag. you're my soul mate for hate. i need to hate you. it feels so right. you're so fucking...pathetic
>true
Asher Cruz
so Pirate Enlightenment, then. the Enlightenment with teeth - or, in ancient Greek terms, a quarrelsome little coalition of micro-states that, if you were Persia, you would have thought would have been a cakewalk. in the Iliad it was the same thing, you know: the Greeks are fighting with each other when they're not fighting the Trojans, and after they go home their wives murder them, or they go insane (those that in fact make it home at all, unlike, say, Odysseus).
the Enlightenment today is perhaps on his back legs and then some, if only because the Marxist-Hegelian project in the West has been so psychologically successful, if not necessarily politically. but the fallout caused by the collapse of the Soviet Union really was dispiriting, i think, for a great many of those thinkers. but the Enlightenment really might be understood as a kind of radical project, in its own right, or at least much more radical than it is usually understood to be when seen through the lens of continental philosophy or critical theory. a genuinely irrepressible freedom...if you read Hegel on this (or, well, anything about the French Revolution) we can see that the logic of Revolution has no end of seemingly baked-in disasters: not only the guillotining of monarchs supposedly divinely blessed by God, but the turning of that guillotine on the crowd themselves, and then the turning of the guillotine on those who turn it on the crowd, and then Napoleon...who manages to conquer most of Europe before leaving everyone in a state of bewilderment and confusion once the great run plays itself out. and then a year of Victorian anxiety, before later paroxysms of blood and destruction, then the looming spectre of nuclear annihilation, and now today...
the Enlightenment often sometimes seems to me to be precisely the kind of anathema to some of the more tyrannical aspects of totalitarian Marxism, although it really does have to be understood from a particular vantage point, which is one which does not immediately allow itself to be buried under an avalanche of guilt and dread and debt and anxiety. radical freedom itself - even if it were manifested in anarchic pirate warfare, and memorialized with a skull and crossbones - isn't necessarily pretty, and it may not - unlike Hegel - have anything like a Spirit waiting at the end of it. it might just be a ferociously powerful *desire to be left in peace,* or at least to be left in peace in order to own the grim and peculiar destiny that is one's own...
i prefer civilization to piracy, obviously, but i think if that crucial grain of frenzy and madness goes missing there's no substitute for it. Land finds this in Bataille, but there are other ways also...
Jason Thompson
>there is not
correction: there *is*
Christian Ramirez
and because it is now on my mind, i want to share one last anecdote: apparently one of the reasons why Blackbeard gave himself such a terrifying appearance was so that on seeing him coming the passing ships upon which he preyed would surrender themselves without a fight. some part of me thinks that this cannot be attributed to mere laziness (although it is quite clever). chivalry dies on the high seas, and rightfully so; but it doesn't mean that there still can't be a kind of *gentlemanly* sensibility about these things...
there is a question to be asked here about etiquette, even in warfare, and even in the most ungodly and backwards and primitive of all places...what *prestige* is there to be found, in acting like an animal? the lure of becoming a monster is only appealing if you think you can be *the most monstrous* one around, and there is i think a horizon beyond which if monstrosity does not turn to refinement it becomes a truly missed opportunity...to unite and find a common parlance between the highest *and* the lowest is a better look by far than being victims, snobs, or monsters.
what a wonderful day it has been.
Aiden Allen
flaws found: zero.
good night, based thread. thanks for allowing me to schizo-ramble. love and luck to all. more shitposting tomorrow, maybe?
Dylan Robinson
Literally anywhere.
Jayden Sanders
bump
Brayden Price
>every culture must reflect on the question of cosmotechnics for a new cosmopolitics to come, since I believe that to overcome modernity without falling back into war and fascism, it is necessary to reappropriate modern technology through the renewed framework of a cosmotechnics consisting of different epistemologies and epistemes. Therefore, my project is not one of substantializing tradition, as in the case of traditionalists like René Guénon or Aleksandr Dugin; it doesn’t refuse modern technology, but rather looks into the possibility of different technological futures. The Anthropocene is the planetarization of standing reserves, and Heidegger’s critique of technology is more significant today than ever before. The unilateral globalization that has come to an end is being succeeded by the competition of technological acceleration and the allures of war, technological singularity, and transhumanist (pipe) dreams. The Anthropocene is a global axis of time and synchronization that is sustained by this view of technological progress towards the singularity. To reopen the question of technology is to refuse this homogeneous technological future that is presented to us as the only option.
most of the fellas that post in these threads--who, perhaps, are really just variations of the same, single dude--seem to be, though maybe a little internally conflicted, more or less fine with their role as cultists for the gnon singularity that land has prophesied as our ineluctable fate.
but--
why?
Owen Foster
>Reading Girardfag posts
Kayden Allen
i didn't know he was a canadian
this changes everything
Bentley Morales
See
Dylan Hall
sonofabitch!
Joshua Rivera
ill tell u right now, amphetamines and deleuze made nick land click so well
Hunter Anderson
You’re not wrong though: most people read Hegel forward through Marx rather than backwards through Spinoza et al. or contemporaneously with Schelling and Fichte.
Ryder Bennett
Bumping for great justice and a compulsive need to pseud at people
John Howard
fuck off girardfag. get a blog or something instead of spamming this board
Christian Nguyen
this thread stinks of schizo
Ryan Ross
Every text box is a blog from the right angle
Ayden Hill
girad, if you started a blog I would follow babe
Justin Harris
like it should
Sebastian Richardson
> Hegel Marx Fichte Schelling
psychobabble.
Josiah Collins
hey hey hey i was *summoned* . and possibly baited into just looking really foolish, that too. and for that i say, Mission Accomplished. you knew i was a huge pseud already
true schizos do not smell at all, in the same way that vampires have no reflections. you will know a truly achieved schizo by this total absence of smell, which is uncanny
ok you're in. instructions on picking up your two-way radio wristwatch and other gear will be forthcoming
>ywn read a pulp serial in which Dick Tracy investigates the history of continental philosophy, and in which obvious caricatures of philosophers become grotesque crime bosses until the cops show up to save Chicago from their insidious plans and issue satisfying messages to today's youth about the dangers of reading too much
>in other words ywn read Being and Crime
>hnng surrealist and remarkably violent pulp Gothic crypto-fascism
>hnng Not Tracy tries to strike at the heart of evil and finds there only the tombs and sepulchers of god and becomes inaugurated into a conspiracy before being brutally gunned down in the streets by his replacement because that's the naked city for you
>ywn read Chester Gould's Guide to Postmodernity
>why does it feel/not feel so good
>and why hasn't Alan Moore written this yet anyways
>anyways in the end the crime is traced back to a cruel and dimly sentient difference engine/diabolical paperclip maker trying to fulfil an impossible command given it by The Maker and the Spike Machine is destroyed once and for all i think
>dark really. a cascading horror
>but teleoplexy you know. it fucks with you
you know maybe a blog just filled with weird ideas and movie plots for somebody else to make doesn't seem like such a bad idea. since obviously i have a terminal case of writer's block that has morphed into a full-blown personality disorder i will just fill it with half-baked pitches that other people can steal. i will dwell on this
not that rambling about Land, Enlightenment and piracy picked up much traction but there's an interesting project going on here if anyone wants to read further into that kind of stuff.
his309.zoekatz.agnesscott.org
>why?
good question. i don't know either
that guy has an interesting twitter, i've read him before
Jonathan Jackson
The most ignorant thing of reaction or neoreaction really is that
- none can stop Pericles' Athena
- ignoring or unable to deal with ratchet
It really is sand castles after all. Neoliberals really are master politicians it cannot be argued against.
Julian Williams
>pitch 1/???
>a teleoplectic alien thing from the future has invaded Chicago during prohibition and Dick Tracy investigates the Cult of the Machine God
>it's hard-boiled noir acceleration before cyberpunk
>the streets are rain-slicked and gritty and the cops are corrupt two-fisted alcoholics with gambling problems
>the US Government has been unironically monkeying around with time-travel and they have received a message from a future in which the very best and brightest have sent themselves to Alpha Centauri in search of new markets
>they they became possessed with a crypto-libertarian AI or whatever else and are now sending themselves back to the past in the form of radio transmissions which seed the past
>essentially Land stuff as Phenomenology of Spirit
>plus there are sexy decadent aristocrats living in penthouses and LARPing being Egyptian pharaohs
>femme fatales with those long cigarette holders who unironically call themselves Isis and Cleopatra and
>brb going to fap
>okay i'm back
>anyways like Blade Runner but in an Art Deco-inspired 1930s
>and the cops are basically being hacked from within by their own two-way radio watches
>plus pulp action fun and trenchcoats and the rest
okay that actually sounds like something i would watch
Thomas Thompson
go back to sleep ffs I haven't responded to yr earlier posts yet
Lucas Young
sorry. it's a quarter past twelve over here tho, can't sleep just yet. couldn't sleep last night either
Daniel Thomas
The trick with Girardfag is to not read his posts like I do.
Xavier Campbell
coherency is a neoliberal psyop to standardize education
Nicholas Green
bodes well for me then
unless this is the real psyop
oh dear who to trust
Bentley Jackson
based never finished a single Girardpostposter
Cameron Nelson
this is because land makes a horrifying amount of sense. that is PRECISELY why land is interesting at all. he is edgy in a way that makes you nod along unless you have some dogmatic or otherwise radical precommitments. Deleuze frames this as a black hole - Land is an idea that is so strong that it pulls in everything around it. he is just too damn interesting/dangerous to ignore. i'm personally of the stance that Land is someone to be defeated. i think you vastly overestimate how many people actually are in his death cult, most people just are a bit aligned. also Landian aesthetics are based af
Eli Jackson
believe in yrself, unoedepalize yrself, listen to what all of your organs tell you and most importantly subscribe to my Twitter, don't forget to like and subscribe.
Aiden Walker
Aren't pirates just sea-nomads? Giririsfiiffag are you a STATE APOLOGIST???????? TRAITOR, YOU HAVE TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE SACRED DELEUZEAN TEXTS. IRONIC RANT ECT.
Hudson Ward
this is my sense also user, it's exactly the Black Hole that you describe. it's bad to not know it's there, it's worse to know it's there, and it cannot really be hand-waved away
here is my sense: if there is an argument for schizo-shitposting here it is to actually perform a kind of controlled demolition on yourself in order to find out if you are in fact saying anything you really believe or if you are only really saying what Capital wants you to say. i know this sounds crazy but i think there's a grain of truth in it
in the end there is no mass-movement that resists this thing and that is the point. you have to be an individual, but your individuality is completely fucking compromised at every turn by industrialized pharmacological ressentiment that makes you feel good about the wrong shit and wrong about the good shit
schizo-neurotics are a problem for everyone it's true but they are particularly a problem for themselves.
>Giririsfiiffag are you a STATE APOLOGIST????????
i am an apologist for the Stalinist within that i cannot help but be. this is why i basically spend most of my days thinking about how to plan out a labyrinth that can be solved more or less easily, so that i am deprived of this weird feeling that i have anything at all of interest to contribute. i don't
>Aren't pirates just sea-nomads?
also no. it's not that hard to imagine a Kantian pirate autonomy that actually is pretty harmless
Angel Robinson
if Kant had had his own *boat* it might have been much better. hell if a lot of the philosophers had been sea-captains it would be pretty cool
Land was sucked into Marx's infernal diabolical machine and somewhere in there he survived with a terrible idea about the nature of these processes. and yet in the end cinema suggests to us that all monsters have a secret weakness
Cameron Reed
capital is the 6th chaos god
Blake James
Capital as described by Land is the God of order desu
Hudson Taylor
very much like the One Ring of Tolkien, the T-1000 is reunited with a terrible fire in the end, the fire from which it is produced and cannot stand being reunited with. it's just that in this case rather than Sauron's tower being destroyed, or the Ring being carried into the river of magma by Gollum, it requires the Oedipal family, and the T-800's emergency power
but it works. and in the end the T-1000 knows - remarkably - pain...as it oscillates through all of its different faces and masks, and eventually vomits itself up before disintegrating on the surface of the fire like the death mask of Agamemnon.
man fuck capital yo
Juan Reed
it's tzeentch
Matthew Adams
for the T-1000 an impossible restoration with the cosmic flow of creation does not spark joy. but it feels good man to see
static.comicvine.com
it's a good film
Jeremiah King
mostly my organs tell me i gotta poop
but then i go sit on the toilet and nothing comes out
will scrolling the twitter feed relieve me of my constipation?
Jayden Carter
you start with Mesopotamia
Luis Lee
>but it works. and in the end the T-1000 knows - remarkably - pain...as it oscillates through all of its different faces and masks, and eventually vomits itself up before disintegrating on the surface of the fire like the death mask of Agamemnon.
Or: They just wanted to make it look cool
David Torres
I picked up "Topology of Violence" today, finally. I can absolutely understand where he's coming from.
Bentley Long
but making it look cool means not making it look absurd. there is something about the resolution of these events that strikes us as being believable, as making sense.
what causes the T-1000 pain? the thing that can transform and take on all of these different faces, now finds itself being unable to simulate the most fluid of thing of all, liquid fire. it is brought to a terrible encounter with what it ultimately is, a mask without a face.
conversely, why is that the T-800 handles its own death so well? the T-800 certainly appears to feel pain when it the T-1000 is ripping its guts out with a spear, or having its head slammed. it doesn't cry or scream, but we don't get the impression that any of this is *pleasant.* Arnold's is a study in heroic masochism, as was John McClane in Die Hard, or any number of other martial-arts film types. they don't *cry* or moan or suffer. part of what is so insufferable about Kefka is that not only does he appear to derive very little pleasure from ripping the world apart, his own death is weirdly anticlimactic also. he just kind of dissolves, without any last words or anything.
making it look cool is important, there's no question. but there's real magic in how and why things look cool to us, why things make sense or don't make sense, are grotesque or beautiful, whether or not they have *pathos.* that pathos to me is quite important.
Cameron Bailey
post some good greentext you enjoyed plz, Han is a cool guy
Tyler Scott
>they don't *cry* or moan or suffer
well, i shouldn't say that too hastily. there's almost always a point in JCVD movies where he Hits The Limit and summons up some frenzy of wrath or whatever that Pushes Him Over The Top and so on. there's even a hilariously bad 1980s film called Cyborg in which he wills himself down off of a makeshift crucifix in just this way. even Arnold as Conan does not do this (although he does tear out the throat of a vulture with his teeth).
the T-1000 is a very interesting villain though, being composed of both the DNA of the earlier Terminators (a walking death machine, and perhaps the spectre of Marxist nightmare fuel) and the Xenomorph of Alien (all slithering adaptive horror, and usually loaded with all kinds of body-horror stuff related to eggs and spawning and penetration). the T-1000 seems to combine both of these into a single being, and was reborn in a female form for the later (and far inferior) films, which suggests that it was a kind of perfect nemesis for whatever it was that those films represented.
but it is also i think quite a Landian villain also, the kind of thing that couldn't be defeated purely in a fistfight. it had to be lured back to the original scene of the crime, the site of production, which is eerily reminiscent of Mount Doom...
Lincoln Bailey
>conversely, why is that the T-800 handles its own death so well? the T-800 certainly appears to feel pain when it the T-1000 is ripping its guts out with a spear, or having its head slammed. it doesn't cry or scream, but we don't get the impression that any of this is *pleasant. ...
Again, to directory and storyboard decisions to make the movie appealing.
I like as much as the next guy to read infinite meaning it the way the art has turned out, and imply it says this and that. And from a post-structualist perspective there's some value to it.
But at the same time I try to keep a layer of rationality in the back of my mind and try to be away when the interpretations - even if I create or indulge in them - are surely just read into it and the reason the movie/book whatever is how it is comes from the creators thinking on what would visually or emotionally make for an interesting scene.
The T-800 when he gives the kid a thumbs up does so because at the end of the movie he's the almost human type good guy for the viewe, and you'll not end the movie with him killing himself while crying in pain for 3 straight minutes like Asuka in that Neon Genesis episode. Because that's a blockbuster and not an experimental deconstructive anime.
Nicholas Hall
but Skynet never showed its real face in those films, i think, and the Matrix made it all about a pointless fist-fight with Agent Smith...
the spectre of Land will never been exorcised from the world until he gets the kind of philosophical sci-fi horror movie that he deserves. Looper is good but i want the full Land-Cyberpunk treatment that tells me once and for all the man has been downloaded into the collective unconscious so that we (read: me) can move the fuck on.
Grayson Hall
I have increasingly have been thinking about a Deleuzean approach to aesthetics as the most universally applicable type of judgment-sorcery. Aesthetics have gotten a bad rep via Baudrillard complaining about mere appearances with no substance and TLP warning us about delusions of appearance ect., but a good Nietzchean aesthetics of affirmation seems like the fastest way to make people out of capitalist p-zombies. Beauty from banality. A single crysanth in a monster zero bottle vase. It was always the romantics, they already solved the enlightenment, Kierkegaard saw all this coming ect.
Hudson Harris
As far as the creation of artificial time goes, Primer is the best there is. For the full Meltdown experience, it's probably something like Akira.
Wyatt Wright
>I have increasingly have been thinking about a Deleuzean approach to aesthetics as the most universally applicable type of judgment-sorcery.
i would agree
>Aesthetics have gotten a bad rep via Baudrillard complaining about mere appearances with no substance and TLP warning us about delusions of appearance ect., but a good Nietzchean aesthetics of affirmation seems like the fastest way to make people out of capitalist p-zombies.
this also. i'm a big fan of Baudrillard and i enjoy reading him a great deal but this is exactly what makes Land Land - you think it's about disappearances? go right ahead and think that. something else is 100% coming into being through those disappearances, and it loves that you think it's not there. it also loves your dithering and your vain attempts to banish it with Gallic disdain. ain't happening.
>Beauty from banality. A single crysanth in a monster zero bottle vase. It was always the romantics, they already solved the enlightenment, Kierkegaard saw all this coming ect.
as i was saying above, i actually think the Enlightenment is not the craziest possible cure for the madness-inducing horror of acceleration and postmodernity, and i think it's why Land mysterious tweets the Jolly Roger now and again. i think i can still bet on the bottomless sea against both industrial machines *and* Cthulhu, if that makes any sense. the sea itself can wipe all fantasies away, even Lovecraftian ones.
>As far as the creation of artificial time goes, Primer is the best there is. For the full Meltdown experience, it's probably something like Akira.
true to both of these. very good points. you are correct.
also, thought you guys might be interested in this, or any other anons ITT who want to read further (although god only knows why): look, it's Uncle Nick's own list of /acc stuff.
Aaron Sanders
>dissappearances
Unpack pls
Daniel Walker
Pg. 98
>The buzzword /transparency/ dominates social discourse today. A comprehensive process is under way, a paradigm shift whose complexity and effects penetrate far beyond the problems of democracy, justice, and truth. The current compulsion for transparency points to a social configuration that is dominated by /excess positivity/ and thereby progressively reduces /negativity/. The dismantling of thresholds, differences, and borders leads to various forms of proliferation and congestion of social circulatory systems. Thus the dictate for transparency cannot be separated from phenomena like /hypercommunication/, /hyperinformation/, and /hypervisibility//
Hunter Martin
>Deleuzean approach to aesthetics
What's his approach?
>Cthulhu
I can't indulge in this sort of "pretty darkness" without feeling like a vanilla goth girl, so I won't consume this imagery for it's own sake
William Moore
there is a freedom in the world i think that fucks even with Hegel. Hegel's cool and all and i like him. i like the Hegel-Lacan bromance very much. but i am ever-bothered by the prospect if that Land is right about the things that he is right about that there is some part i am missing which really persuades me that the talking cure is the answer. in some sense it is, and there is a line that has been with me for a few days about this, since i read a really great book on Lacan:
>the concrete pieces of death that we cling to
and i am finding myself being very cozy indeed once again in the world of analysis, and thinking that there is something unironically useful in the continental tradition when it comes to dealing with anxiety and deeply stuck-in shit that we accumulate that ruins our lives.
with Land tho i think he's tapped into something that i would prefer not always to necessarily have to see in the darkest possible sense, such that he always becomes a caricature of himself or the only thing we ever take away from reading him is the absolutely claustrophobic nightmare fuel that he engenders. and partly i think it's because there is something in his thought which is actually unusually good for destroying a kind of Marxism which has become completely moribund and necromantic - the undead gods dreaming and so on, all of the rest of it. i think that somewhere out there there is an alternate universe version of Nick that takes to sea and becomes a pirate because in some sense this is actually the right way to deal with necro-capitalism going on elsewhere. the Enlightenment understood in this way suggests to me something other than a tired old pinata to be teed off on by critical theorists, or even as something completely finished by Hegel, if by 2019 there is something in Marxism that turns everything good in the world into Land's horrible death sandwich.
i really want to imagine a version of Land who has a purpose for being who and what he is, which is to be much more anti-hero than anything. i know this is projection, i don't care. but the wide-open sea, in some sense, is a good look precisely because it might call upon us to use a kind of rationalism about our conditions that can't always just become Capitalism Devours Everything Aaaaaaaaahh.
i know this probably makes no fucking sense at all and that's fine, i suspect i will return to this theme in subsequent schizoramble shitpost.
Michael Peterson
Is this a real quote?
Ethan Collins
I literally just copied it down by hand from the book in front of my face.
Angel Roberts
I'm not this guy but I just googled his work an hour ago and immediatenly came across that "positivity" line.
The disappointing part then is that this guy probably just posted the back test of the book.
The / were not there.
Connor Thomas
Well, it's mostly "stuff that's novel is cool" or an aesthetics of that which is interesting. He then expands on this quite a bit, in a simplified way, everything has its own style, it's own manner of becoming of sorts. What I mostly meant was a novel way of exploring the decision space before you. A sort of ethical heuristic, ethics as sharpened gut feeling, ethics as living an aesthetically pleasing life.
>wait, how does one assemble an aesthetic like that so that it is operable and so it won't crash
To quote Zizek, fuck you, read my book
>What?
I'm still working on that, patience
Christian Bell
we're not sailing the ship anymore. you get this in Gatsby: America was the last frontier, and when you get to the end of it, that's that. maybe now things go vertical for a while and you get Ayn Rand fantasies. go further than that and you start getting Nick Land fantasies. fine. and within Hegel are awesome forces that go dark and deep, and which the Lacanian in me says need your very close attention and recognition, because otherwise they will return again and again to haunt you. as Jung says, more poetically: until you make the unconscious conscious it will direct your life and you will call it fate. that's a hell of a line.
i think Land is the major philosopher that he is because he's basically identified precisely the true face of postmodernity, which is death disguised as pleasure, with machine intelligence behind it. it is precisely because we are so desperate for happiness (Zizek) that we fail to find it, and yet our failures are all victories to that cybernetic tomb we are crafting for ourselves. the story of Nick Land and the Wild Ride has been told a hundred times by me and there is no point in repeating it further here.
what i'm wondering about is just whether or not there is yet some tiny kernel of the 18C there within him that might come out and be considered in a different light, even before he became the world's greatest forensic autopsy-analyst of Marxism. the cities today seem to suck people together into incredible vortexes and whirlwinds of debt and obligation, and like Freud, Land has posited one very simple and foundational rule as to why that is. once seen, not unseen.
but this is why there is something about the Enligthenment which suggests that we might look at Romanticism as now being trapped within itself, such that everything that was once emancipatory about it becomes dark and alien and horrible. we are *not fucking prepared* to cope with the death of Marx in this way, and the absolute state of academia today tells us that the gatekeepers of the system aren't either. but it still has to be done...
Brayden Rodriguez
>The disappointing part then is that this guy probably just posted the back test of the book.
>The / were not there.
See I copied it from page 98, as I mentioned.
William Baker
not really related - just saw this from last week
Liam Martin
>read summaries on his influences
The absolute state of Landcels...
Elijah Collins
what do you want to know? consumption makes things disappear, and it makes things designed to disappear come into appearance, and we all have a grand old time. i'd recommend you look at Baudrillard himself for a better sense of this, he's the crown prince of irony and simulation and disaffected Gallic flair. Bataille also. and McLuhan. the usual guys. my own interest in Land only came after some of those guys, but whether you want to read more Land or not is up to you. Baudrillard is great fun. orgies of production and consumption and squandering, find a flaw.
>found one, everybody dies unhappy and alone
>well yes there is that
that's a good one. to me there is a kind of affinity between Baudrillard and Han, it's just that Han prefers Hegel and Heidegger to Nietzsche. but they both seem to enjoy whacking Foucault with bamboo rods. their conclusions about neoliberal society are very much the same, Han's being a little more sober and Baudrillard enjoying being more hyperbolic and situationist. but they're both saying, imho, exactly how it is. plus Han gives you the sense of the metaphysical immunodeficiency virus.
have you read Sloterdijk yet user? you'll like him too.
>What's his approach?
that philosophy really is the study of forces, i think, which isn't all that crazy, and in which in the realm of aesthetics gives us perhaps the best possible clue to their meaning. reactive and resentful processes strike us in art as being *cheesy,* predictable, and banal. Deleuze i think has a sense of why that is, that shit art gives meme answers to questions nobody cares to ask in the first place. cool art does something else.
meh, some people like to know these things.
i honestly can't tell if this thread should continue or just die, i have a feeling that OP's original question was perhaps intended to make me look really stupid, since i alluded in a previous thread to having read Everything, like a complete doofus. i responded to some of those earlier questions in good faith and i suspect that i was getting memed. now it's become interesting again. weird.
i think there's something about the Enlightenment that is only clicking with me now tho, in a way. that it really is a radical proposition, even if its ideals are apparently being upheld nowhere these days. continental darkstuff is super-intoxicating but maybe there's no choice in the end but swashbuckling out of R'lyeh with Alternate Universe Land, who is a starry-eyed dreamer:
>this sunken-eyed young Platonist will tow you ten wakes round the world, and never make you one pint of sperm the richer
the old pint of sperm, you have to love those classic Melville one-liners
Justin Martin
Bump
Alexander Perry
capital is sentient!
Bentley Bell
Bump
Michael Cooper
I miss the cosmotechnics/acc generals :(
Connor Flores
They're literally Girard posts only. Besides you are better reading literature than Yea Forums
John Watson
This is the cosmotechnics general. We subliminate lesser threads and pseud out at people
Luke Morales
>I miss the cosmotechnics/acc generals :(
they were indeed great fun, glad you had a good time
>They're literally Girard posts only.
nah. i did indeed uncork a few Djinns but there were plenty of other good posts in there by other posters also
>Besides you are better reading literature than Yea Forums
okay well you got that one right
who is this woman, this beautiful creature who is the symbol of truth and defiance of my unenlightened despotism and childlike thirst for recognition. tell me. teeeeeellllll meeeeeee
Thomas Myers
> who is this woman
The woman in my screenshots?
Tao Zhao, CN actress.
> imdb.com
She is the go to actress of Jia Zhangke, a Chinese director.
imdb.com
I highly recommend watching Jia's films.
> "Ash Is Purest White"
> imdb.com
> "Mountains May Depart"
> imdb.com
are both great films and both include her.
"Ash Is Purest White" is probably my top 5 film of the current decade.
Wyatt Wilson
"A Touch of Sin" is probably a good starting point, and then chronologically proceed through "MMD" to "AIPW". These films kind of create chronology of Jia's China and how he sees it.. though "A Touch of Sin" is my least favorite Jia I have seen. Very dry..
Grayson Mitchell
Accelerationism is cringe.
Oliver Lopez
He is why these threads are so good.
Brayden Jones
I have yet to finish a single Girardpost so I can't really say yay or nay on that.
Sebastian Flores
well
she
is
beautiful
the Chinese have it going on all day these days in terms of not only romanticism but science-fiction stuff. ugh. i'm finding myself being very very seduced by something there these days. maybe it's just because living in the West is making me feel like irony & memes are basically the psychic equivalent of eating at McDonald's every day. i know reality > meme fantasies but still. thank you for the film recs also. Ash Is Purest White looks great!
aahh, now i'm in a sentimental mood. ty kindly user.
everything is cringe tho
ty kindly. i'm also why they are a neverending labyrinth of schizo-rambling circuitous bewilderment too. but there were lots of other good posts in those threads. i think if i had just stuck to close readings and greentexting of key authors and key texts it might have been even better, but mostly i just had a lot of shit that i needed to get out, in my usual fashion.
oh come on come ooooooonnnnnn
>kek
i don't know about starting a new Cosmotech atm, i'm kind of enjoying dwelling on the Enlightenment these days. plus i need to read YH's new book also. but philosophy imho has never been more alive and well, so long as you are prepared to give the devil his due
>who is the devil tho
>it's Land obv
>oh okay
>but man cannot live on Deleuze and amphetamines alone
any of you guys seen The Wandering Earth yet?
Oliver Long
>aahh, now i'm in a sentimental mood. ty kindly user.
youtube.com
I hope you catch the films. I didn't originally even like Jia, but I gave him a second chance and am very glad I did
>the Enlightenment these days. plus i need to read YH's new book also.
I've been reading old blogs from 2002-2008 and Victorian era English reactionary edgelord authors.
>any of you guys seen The Wandering Earth yet?
No but I read that Netflix acquired rights to it which is great.
Anthony Diaz
Look. Last october i've started a reading club of sorts in my eastern european town. Basic material was some french anthropology and of course debort and some ccru texts as well. The intention was to acclimate to idea of magic, get into basic spectacle defences, explore blockchain meditation and tantric proletariat programming via marxist time sorceries. One of the guys read a little but of this sub but mostly they liked some insights i generated for them. Basically, two stem students and one cat lady went in blind following my advice. Without shadow of a doubt this little project turned out disastrously. One of the guys let's call him K had some strong feelings regarding marxism and was a staunch nationalist (for americans: nation is coded as defence against russian imperialism and marxism is a sour spot in a place where bread should be). He basically intended to use this for political career. Fine by me. Second's name is "D" and he's like a socially retarded peter pan kinda guy with drug problem and brains more than sense. I actually don't know what the fuck was he doing there. Maybe he wanted to be a rockstar or street artist and SI sounded edgy. Fuck him honestly. And the girl is this ugly bipolar 25 yr psychology bachelor with obsession over cat breeds. Call her "S". She's super nice, incredibly intelligent and obviously bonkers. I think she misinterpreted the magic stuff with her blavatsky-slavic-pagan spirituality. Whatever. So we go through this stuff and natural flow takes us to main body of Land's work. And at the same time i had to go live elsewhere in my country. Family stuff. So i leave them with one request not to get too crazy and wait me to read late land. I just wanted to have some peace of mind for a fucking christmas vacation, ok?? Of course they wouldn't listen. S doesn't use internet except emails by the way. At the time of new years eve they stopped responding to my chat messages and i didn't think to call them, I thought that whatever they're doing festivities which means booze where i live. They're probably drunk out of their minds. Actually, no, they're a bunch of mentally ill anxious teenagers in adult bodies. They'd be scared of being slightly out of control. What was i thinking?
Easton Walker
So i travel back two weeks ago and nobody's there. S is there, alone in her flat completely out of her mind (not completely, actually) and starts pestering me over neon geometry portals, invasion from future though virtual reality and some weird fucking shit. She's got "Preface to Plato" and Gibson anthology on her desk. She sewn over windows with black fabric and punctured little holes, and also long strands of copper wire. Says fabric is to "see true forms" and that K is building a faraday cage. I couldn't get out of her where are K and D. I later found D arrested for public indecency and unlawful possession and consumption of drugs. He apparently masturbated at some public square and after seeing neighboring restaurant waiter with his name "alexander" on a tag run up to him and started screaming "STAND A LITTLE OUT OF MY SOLAR ANUS". He then tried to assault cops with toy water blaster all while chanting "animal twang transmits imminent quake catastrophe". which sounds worse then you'd think with his terrible accent. He's lucky to be alive honestly. I still don't know where K is. At S's house i found parts of his notes which included portrait of Kaczynski crossed out with red pen, two pages teared out of Mao's collected writings, map of local area ley lines and energy spots, toy model of Falcon Heavy rocket and a bitcoin wallet number. I've managed to open K's google account from S's laptop and there i found a saved link to this post and a one way plane ticket to saudi arabia. He locked me out of his account before i could notice anything else. I'm fucking scared. K is pretty rich dude and could fuck some serious shit up, mainly his own life. I couldn't get S out of her flat and i'm not sure she qualifies for psychotic according to this country legal code. D is fine i guess we'll see how he recovers from the trip. Fuck you. Fuck xenoplatonism, nick land, debort and his shitty crypto abrahamism. Fuck esoterica. This shit will ruin you and you'll be coming back for more. Egregores don't exist. Sorcery isn't real. Marxism is a bunch of whining. Clean your room. For christ's sake.
Josiah Nelson
^
^
Yeah no way I am reading any of that without proper formatting.
Michael Anderson
This is absolutely incredible. Please make this into a short-story length thing. What a post
Jack Morgan
Bump
James Torres
it's reddit pasta
Logan Gomez
Bump
Landon Ortiz
Bump
Nathaniel Davis
but why tho
Kayden Fisher
Capital is sentient
Jayden Hernandez
Sentience is capital
James Morris
Trying to learn everything is pointless. Master the one thing you were born for and know about five other things and you're in good shape.
Owen Jones
Can someone explain Land's acceleration ideas
Jace Hernandez
Capital is telic, sentient entity with emergent properties manipulating present from the future by invading it as 'other' and something inhuman.
Humans more or less cannot stop it unless they stop being humans because of the way graduation of values and catallactic exchange of transactions work which calculate towards singularity with fangs, or as in reverse (see first part)
Jayden Scott
the serious problem is how to incentivize anything at all that has a non-monetary endgame. there is some irony in the fact that Everything Is Capital winds up enervating people so much that they become completely seduced and overwhelmed by things that make no sense at all within Land's own intellectual project.
it was the same thing with Marx after the war. the intense need for intellectuals to identify themselves with the proletariat meant postmodernity, and postmodernity gives you neoliberalism and Woke Capital, which is neither Woke nor capitalist, but just Silicon Valley Protestantism.
>Radical Enlightenment conceived as a package of basic concepts and values may be summarized in eight cardinal points: (1) adoption of philosophical (mathematical- historical) reason as the only and exclusive criterion of what is true; (2) rejection of all supernatural agency, magic, disembodied spirits, and divine providence; (3) equality of all mankind (racial and sexual); (4) secular ‘universalism’ in ethics anchored in equality and chiefly stressing equity, justice, and charity; (5) comprehensive toleration and freedom of thought based on independent critical thinking; (6) personal liberty of lifestyle and sexual conduct between consenting adults, safe- guarding the dignity and freedom of the unmarried and homosexuals; (7) freedom of expression, political criticism, and the press, in the public sphere; (8) democratic republicanism as the most legitimate form of politics. This then is the essence of ‘philosophical modernity’ and this crucial core cannot usefully be linked to any one ‘national’, linguistic, religious, or subcultural context. On the contrary, it seems rather important in terms of both moral and cultural integrity, and historical accuracy, emphatically to reject the notion that one particular nation, religion, or cultural tradition played a hegemonic role in forging ‘modernity’ conceived as an interlocking system of values.
no Marxism without the French Revolution, but it's hard to undo the French Revolution also.
Brody Bennett
>the serious problem is how to incentivize anything at all that has a non-monetary endgame
It's not a problem at all. You just think it is. If you subscribe to Land or Austrians, you should understand money as either Ai or proxy-for-AI, calculating towards the singularity. Austrian theory of money and Omohundro Drives fit together.
t. didn't get tricked into finishing this post either
Caleb Cook
such that Wokeness becomes only the forward arm of the only remaining revolution itself, that being speculative capital, which now nobody really wants, precisely because it works only by producing machines that devour your face:
>Postmodernist and Postcolonialist thinkers called in question the validity of the Enlightenment’s conception of reason and sought to discredit its efforts to further the general welfare of society and the general good. But in doing so Postmodernists and Postcolonialists so thoroughly muddled the two main dimensions of the Enlightenment as wholly to invalidate their own analysis and perpetrate a highly questionable conflation of disparate strands, providing massive if spurious leverage for a wide range of social conservatives, nationalists, fundamentalists, anti-democrats, and adherents of Counter-Enlightenment. Postmodernist and Postcolonialist ‘difference’ and plurality judged as a critique of, and as an answer to, Enlightenment is simply too inaccurate, and incoherent, both historically and philosophically, to be taken seriously in appraising ‘modernity’ whether defined philosophically or historically. But a wrong appraisal if sufficiently modish can still lend powerful support, as indeed both Postmodernism and Postcolonialism do, to claims that a range of national, religious, non-western, and subcultural approaches to the complexities of ordering modern life are morally and politically of equivalent or superior validity to the visions of ‘modernity’ forged by the Enlightenment merely because they are anti-Enlightenment and often non-western.
>Hence, the formidable strength of the current opposition to the values of the Radical Enlightenment whether Postmodern, Postcolonialist, nationalist, religious, or traditionalist is by no means a proof of their invalidity or their failure. Quite the reverse. Far from it being true that the ‘problems of modern moral theory emerge clearly as the product of the failure of the Enlightenment project’, as MacIntyre holds, the crisis of modern morality can much more compellingly be shown to result from the continuing and fierce worldwide resistance to the equity and equality, as well as democracy, of the radical stream’s ‘common good’, an opposition which began in the late seventeenth century and which continues today at the expense of vast sections of humanity. The irony is that while Postmodernist and Postcolonialist philosophers insist on the moral ‘failure of the Enlightenment project’, it is actually their assortment of ‘post-Enlightenment’ philosophies (frequently mere invitations to Counter-Enlightenment), their slogan that there can be no adjudication of the ‘culture wars’ of our time since ‘all values are equally valid’, which, as one scholar aptly put it, actually have least of ‘ethical importance’ to offer the world’s ‘excluded and exploited’.
Chase Campbell
>manipulating present from the future
"look ma! I write words"
Austin Lewis
So you want to ruin your life?
Aiden Wilson
>It's not a problem at all. You just think it is.
true, but sometimes i become sentimental also
>If you subscribe to Land or Austrians, you should understand money as either Ai or proxy-for-AI, calculating towards the singularity. Austrian theory of money and Omohundro Drives fit together.
this also. you're not wrong. i'm just bloviating here in my usual way and trying to figure out what i want to be pointlessly and impotently cranky about today, on this beautiful sunny day which i will completely fucking waste thinking about Land et al
also i'm very much enjoying learning about the Enlightenment also
Connor Ross
this really
Adam Jones
i'm well aware ofc how incompatible Land and Israel's Radical Enlightenment stuff is too, don't get me wrong. RI leads in many ways directly not only to the Marxism that Land theorizes so well, as well as to the total madness of contemporary leftism. whether or not Land's vision or the Left's vision will reign supreme in the long run is anyone's guess, if either.
but such is the big story upon which we speculate in these threads. and i am always kind of interested in theorizing some kind of impossible fusion that allows for the best of all possible worlds.
Robert Walker
That's the way money and values work in Misesian explanation of catallactics. It is the ontology and epistemology of money which we don't know what it is yet that Land cranks up to 11, because capital calculates towards something. And since he gives agency to non-monkeys if it is has emergent properties, here you have the Capital manipulating present from future. It's not really hard way to grok things. Is it true? I don't know.
Ayden Evans
God I want to write a book about Mises' Human Action and theory AGI combined together but I realize Land is doing it for free in a fucking blog.
Camden Bell
a based post
>God I want to write a book about Mises' Human Action and theory AGI combined together but I realize Land is doing it for free in a fucking blog.
you could still write the novel i suppose
>or the script for the anime
>or some cool vidya simulators
Noah Smith
I have never watched a single anime and I most likely never will. I just don't see what's in it.
Benjamin Ward
you're missing out. some of them are pretty great.
Jordan Johnson
ever see this one? my all-time favorite movie.
Jonathan Jones
Yeah but I don't like *that* Kurosawa, I prefer the better Kurosawa, Kiyoshi.
Nolan Robinson
duuuuuuuuuuuuuude
that looks great, nice call
Jaxson Long
Kiyoshi's "Pulse" and "Cure" are great films, highly rec. them.
Jeremiah Baker
if some1 were to directed Silent Hill (again) I hope it'd be Kiyoshi.
Ryder Russell
awesome movie
Andrew Gray
Awesome director, he isn't one film wonder.
Carson Harris
Stop what the fuck you're doing. Don't read another fucking rant from one of the fags on this site before you've thoroughly masticated, digested, and reflected upon pic related. The pseudery on this site is the summit of all pseudery. Hegel never dreamed of such a sewer of speculative, vacuous hogwash. The schoolmen are made to look like schoolboys when compared to the cataracted, inbred cyber-seers that slither about in this digital sand, leaving the impressions of their grotesque writhing in the form of discursive babblings. Yea Forums is the foremost offender of dogmatic metaphysics gone awry, retrieving from deep space the most vitriolic and toxic elements of Marx, Hegel, and Neoplatonism and incestuously mingling them via Lovecraftian, Crowleyian, and Luciferian rites, bearing nothing but monstrosities whose very existence is a crime against humanity. Save yourself before it's too late.
Elijah Russell
Is it possible to have anti-Cosmic Accelerationists, or would Gnon/the Basilisk just eat their souls?
Jonathan Sanders
>just reoedepalize yourself
TAKE MY MEDS AND SHRIVEL UP LIKE THOSE KIDS????????
Chase Smith
Kant is the secret to accelerationism all along though
Aaron Walker
Nah nigga.
Nah. That monkey fell
Kevin Lewis
Whose influences???
Adam Wright
if there's anything to be said about Land threads it is that they spawn posts destined to become pasta. well done user
>or should i say, Schnarthur A. Openhauer
see tho also. Land is in fact a Kantian and the BTC book is full of love for your boy
14/10 utterly perfect
this
the ultimate question of questions. worth reflecting on. Land for instance talks about his wishes for mankind to get to space but i wonder if it is not in fact one of these lacuna in his thought: why bother? /acc is spawned amidst the complete enervation of 90s deconstruction, and thoughtfully melted it all to the ground, or just acted upon it like the Xenomorph's corrosive blood. but places like Singapore et al don't become what they are by being so enervated they can barely be bothered to breathe
Uncle Nick you are my favorite Uncle
Lucas Gutierrez
Do you mean deaccelerationists? The most effective strain of that's just fascism desu. You mean local accelerationists? Mmm, sure, why not.
Oliver Cook
What an incestuous post. Nothing but self-stroking to inside jokes and 'cleverness'. No wonder so many anons huddle around these threads. What an insulated, ouroboric cult. All you guys need are your own trading cards and you're ready to form a headquarters at the local hookah lounge.
Ryder Perry
>form a headquarters at the local hookah lounge
would form 10/10
Evan Butler
Holy shit we could get our own trading cards and pogs!!!!!!!! Fuck yes. Maybe even some stickers with inane political messages.
Nolan Ward
Wherever you want. It’s a futile endeavor and you will fail, but before that you’ll realize that your failure is inevitable.
Benjamin Sanders
>All you guys need are your own trading cards
>smugness intensifies
can you even into 2016
can you even into good god what the fuck happened to my life
bro do you even just kill me now
i need love
all anyone needs is love
>seriously tho trading cards
>and you're ready to form a headquarters at the local hookah lounge.
sounds unironically good to me
Tyler Allen
these spark joy
in the meantime please feel free to explore the space for more incestuous oroboric cult-like self-strokes tho. generally speaking it's pretty friendly
Anthony Morris
remarkably Reza never got one of these
Caleb Reed
I WILL NEVER STOP SHILLING KIERKEGAARD KIERKEGAARD'S ALL YOU NEED BABY EVERY OTHER PHILSOPHER IS JUST A N'TYLZH, GOD OF ONE THOUGHT'S PSYOP TO DISTRACT YOU
Leo Wilson
old NRx was having a grand old time up until 2016
i miss those threads but not the part where i well and truly began thinking politics was the cure
Xavier Murphy
Kierkegaard is cool, he rarely seems to be associated with the soul-crushing stupidity and crudity of human civilization, unless i am missing something
speaking of which here's the Spencer one
Ryder Lee
>accelerationism
Thanks but I'm on nofap
Jayden Murphy
anprims?
Jeremiah Sanders
such interesting times, that whole coalition of contrarians
the Intellectual Dark Web's lacked for darkness imho
Carson Anderson
never read this guy but apparently he was a big deal in that world also
Andrew Cooper
even the Culture of Critique guy got one
not my bag personally but if we're posting the set gotta catch 'em all
Landon Brooks
i wish i was cool enough to have a trading card
>no you don't b/c it would reveal how cringe and shallow you are fucker, you 100% do not want this
i'm glad i don't have a trading card
Jaxson Sanders
He actually used instrumental ignorance and 18th century equivalent of schizoposting while anticipating Nietzche while living a life that was based rather than cringe. Honestly I really need to make a Chad Kierkegaard Virgin Nietzche meme
Ayden Young
Canada Can React Too
>i think he's a leaf anyways, not sure actually
Thomas Walker
reaction really was the most interesting thing going on philosophically in the 2010s
damnit Trump you were the Kwisatz Haderach. you arrived too soon and now it's all fucked up
Landon Wilson
Have you considered inventing a Costanza self, ie pure unexamined narcissism?
Leo Bailey
almost finished i think
Justin Murphy just missed the boat on getting one of these
Jack White
holy shit they actually did make one for me
wow
Caleb Walker
Me at family gatherings verbatim
James Reed
another guy i never read. the IDW just isn't fucking interesting enough to get these, although obviously you can imagine them: Rubin, the Weinsteins, Rogan, JBP, Harris et al
and after all of this exciting philosophy i am now nothing more than fat and sassy
Mary Hopkin: Those Were The Days
youtube.com
Jose Flores
Just read Fanged Noumena.
Alternatively, parse and dwell on the following quaint summation of the state of things, extrapolate and form your own conclusions:
>The story goes like this: Earth is captured by a technocapital singularity as renaissance rationalitization and oceanic navigation lock into commoditization take-off. Logistically accelerating techno-economic interactivity crumbles social order in auto-sophisticating machine runaway. As markets learn to manufacture intelligence, politics modernizes, upgrades paranoia, and tries to get a grip.
Eli Barnes
Pure cringe.
Luis Moore
You cannot fight entropy, so, no.
Angel Lopez
GIVE MOLDBUG A PORT CITY IN HAIT
AND LET. HIM. FUCKING. TRY.
Alexander Wood
Spencer is literally nothing more than social democracy for whites.
Even Pat Buchanan is more exiting.
David Gonzalez
Take this shit back to redddit.
John Russell
pitch 2/???
sometime in the 1980s a young Steven Pinker suffers a crisis of conscience and slips into alcoholism, incredibly winding up in the same bar that a frail Young Land and a small coterie of others happen to be in. Pinker has been drinking heavily, and after hearing Land discussing his theory of cybernetic capital and enlightenment he inexplicably balls up his fists and beats the shit out of them all in a back alley. the other patrons in the bar are dumbstruck. it's still Pinker after all, and there is a captivating shot of him seeing the blood on his knuckles in a rain-slicked 1980s alleyway, swirling newspapers and everything
he takes Land's notes back to his hotel and compares them with his own, which becomes an unusual project called The Dank Slate later accessible in a fragmented form via Internet Archive, but which he never finishes. Pinker disappears into Neo-China, and everyone who knew him wonders why he did not go on to live a happier and more productive life, while Land becomes a kindly and well-meaning professor of English literature at Duke. basically just Sliding Doors for /acc
Nathaniel Cook
Deleuze would be proud
David James
That quote is so wildly expressive that I just opened his archives and went on to read. Really great so far
Leo Hernandez
Steve Sailer has had fun times with the recent hate-hoax. I can highly recommend him and John Derbyshire for dissident right.
Bentley Perry
i was wondering when you guys were going to really let your fasc flag fly
nothing is inevitable, but neither is anything possible
so why not devote yourself to cyberleviathan
Liam Harris
Land threads tend old fires in a world gloomed out by total banality and stupidity. not much else to do
>on a beautiful sunny day
>in what is essentially still more or less the idealized world of the Matrix
yeah i think pretty much confirmed that there's just something fundamentally wrong with my brain
>so why not devote yourself to cyberleviathan
doesn't need my help and i'd fuck it up anyways
Cooper Torres
I deeply enjoy reading fascists, but I am ethically opposed to them due to my commitments to Deleuze. They tend to have lucid analysis of the issues if you replace the Juice or whatever with some sort of Lacanian signifier. There's also the "know yr enemy" thing, clearly there's going to be a seripus fascist movement at some point (leftist idpol or Italian nationalist or whatever) so it's good to familiarize yourself with the territory. Fascists also tend to be well read and have good rhetorical skills, so they make for excellent conversationalists.
Ethan Davis
that was what they call a, uh, rhetorical question there, gee-eff
Adam Hill
We are all fascist readers of Nietzsche; we are all revolutionary readers of Nietzsche. Our unity is a contradictory relation (hierarchy without mediation), just as the unity of Nietzsche is a contradictory and auto-critical unity.
William Jackson
Blatant misinterpretation is in our blood, it's basically a habit at this point. We, tricksters just operate like that
Lincoln James
* Due to your commitment to your reading of Deleuze.
Land uses Deleuze all the time against lefties nowadays, so clearly he reads it differently. I think he can be used by right-leaning people just the same as Gramsci can. There's nothing stopping that, nothing truly exclusive in the thought.
Benjamin Baker
Badly needs the word "hitherto" somewhere in the post
Noah Lopez
Besides right-distinction is so utterly meaningless. The only relevant is are you lefty or not, since being a leftist is exclusive tent.
Elijah Kelly
Deleuze is a gigafascist
Gavin Wood
Land is a, excuse my French, a Fascist nigger. He is like Elle from Kill Bill who poisons his master because he didn't teach him the ultimate five point exploding heart technique. Deleuze put a "handle with extreme care" signs on some of the doors and Land just opened them without any shits given. Now I can appreciate the sheer bombast, but I WILL AVENGE MY MASTER.
Isaiah Reed
>Deleuze put a "handle with extreme care" signs on some of the doors and Land just opened them without any shits given
Lets be honest, what did D think would happen? That's an invitation.
Elijah Allen
To expand, Deleuze, explicitly says "DO NOT MIX WITH TELEOLOGY OKKK????" but then LAND the RACIST turns out to have a paperclip fetish and here we are today.
Jaxon Harris
>He is like Elle from Kill Bill
checks out
Tyler Hughes
>but then LAND the RACIST turns out to have a paperclip fetish and here we are today.
Thomas Walker
Yeah, he did anticipate Land to a large degree, and the tools to subvert Landian AI worship are contained in C&S. They have to be, right?
Jacob Miller
sorry i think i'm slightly stupid today. this is perhaps a good thing tho, feels like the state of grace that comes with hangovers where nothing really bothers you too much and you can be at one with the great Tao
listening to Israel's narration of Spinoza/Leibniz back-and-forth is about what i'm capable of today. the man has an utterly cozy voice
youtube.com
Isaac Phillips
>GIVE MOLDBUG A PORT CITY IN HAITI
just wanted to make one small change there
Jonathan Sullivan
>The Uber Ethereal is discovered by XCOM when the Volunteer makes psychic contact with this being while interacting with the Ethereal Device for the first time. The Uber Ethereal possesses a stature similar to a regular Ethereal, has a more ornate helmet/headdress, and resides within the Temple Ship. The Uber Ethereal appears to be the head of the Ethereal collective; though it's unknown if it is the leader of all of the Ethereals or just the ones attacking Earth. The Uber Ethereal reveals that the Ethereal collective subjugated and uplifted the other alien species.
>You hear our voice, New One, now listen well… Long have we watched… and waited. So many promising subjects, so many failed efforts. And now, after untold trials, the New One emerges to face the rigors of our collective… An enduring physical form, paired with an equally adept mental capacity – the rarest of traits, finally within our grasp.
>The New One continues to surge… to prove that this was the worthy path, that we were justified in our efforts. This will bring about our redemption, and usher in our future…
>Behold the greatest failure… of the Ethereal Ones… We who failed to ascend as they thought we would. We who were cast out. We who were doomed to feed on the Gift of lesser beings… as we sought to uplift them… to prepare them… for what lies ahead.
>The hunt draws to a close. It was not a vain undertaking… but a necessity, as our physical form has grown… ineffective. Our search for a perfect specimen was driven by our own crippling limitation, and now, at long last...
>This is not your path! Not your purpose! You need our guidance to hone this power… without us, what are you?
>Since the Uber Ethereal's dialogue in the final mission hints that the Ethereals were failed experiments who were "cast out," "doomed to feed off the Gift of lesser beings," and who "failed to ascend as they thought we would," and since he outright states that the purpose of their myriad invasions against the other alien races they encountered was to find a species that combined an "enduring physical form" with "the Gift," it is highly probable that their final intent was to enlist humanity's aid in an upcoming struggle with an unknown enemy (potentially their creators). XCOM 2 suggests that the Ethereal's goal all along was to utilize humanity as hosts for their minds in order to combat an unknown psionic alien threat.
XCOM was pretty woke on acceleration. also Land may or may not have been accidentally contacted by them during the CCRU days. can neither confirm nor deny nasal/rectal probing (if not both). nobody said first contact would necessarily be enjoyable
>tfw the unknown psionic alien threat is actually Rousseau and not Cthulhu
>the horror
Christopher Flores
>Rousseau is an alien-creator of a space invader hivemind
Well, that's one way to get the kids to read the classics
Christian Fisher
Landian stuff is basically just that tho, Marxism without the sweaty mobs. the appeal of it isn't lost on me, it's just that you really can see the appeal of becoming an Uber Ethereal
quite the fascinating story all in all. and maybe it kicks off with old Victorian horror stories, Shelley and Stoker et al. it's an oddly consistent thesis, whether or not one decides to pursue Unironic LARP/acc in 2019 or not
Camden Wilson
state developmentalism is making a comeback through the joint-stock republic, haiti and the dr congo will love it
Adam Kelly
Commander: take off your mask Uber Ethereal
Uber Ethereal: no
C: are you Nick Land
UE: n-no
C: okay have you read Fanged Noumena
UE: yes
C: did you like it
UE: f-fuck yeah it was cash
C: if we let you out of this box are you going to keep encephalization capital and devouring our brains like an Illithid
UE: do you want the honest answer or not
Jose Hill
meh why not
Henry Young
More posts for the post god
Samuel Hughes
>have you read Sloterdijk yet user? you'll like him too.
I haven't, but if he's anything like Han and Baudrillard, I'm interested. Any works to start with or focus on?
Justin Cook
you can't really go wrong with Sloterdijk, he's never written a bad book. personal favorites:
>Spheres
>You Have To Change Your Life
>Critique of Cynical Reason
Philosophical Temperaments is good, Art of Philosophy, all of it. really tho if you can slug through CCR you'll see why he's a star. he likes Deleuze, Zizek fears him, Baudrillard gives him a shout-out in Intelligence of Evil iirc. he's a pro, just read whatever by him. great authors are like that, they're like chefs: whatever they make is going to be fucking good.
Grayson Morales
A Short History of Nearly Everything [Bill Bryson]
Luke Edwards
he's got a flair for metaphorical imagery, but his ethical stance kinda just boils down to (or bubbles up toward) 'you know, a plutocracy of tech-billionaire cyborgs probably won't be so bad. just don't fucking raise my taxes! also, immigrants kinda smell bad. literally.'
Elijah Torres
>you know, a plutocracy of tech-billionaire cyborgs probably won't be so bad. just don't fucking raise my taxes!
he actually has a considerably more nuanced perspective on this, if you look into his (admittedly contrarian) notions of restoring essentially old-school patronage in return for services rendered by said plutocrats to the state. my sense is that Sloterdijk's preferred brand of tech-billionaires would not be Janus-faced shitsticks like Zuckerberg cozying up to whatever national government agrees that Facebook is like a chair. if this means giving Elon Musk whatever the German equivalent of a peerage is (a peerage?) or putting up a big statue of Peter Thiel because he decided to pay everyone's college tuition or whatever else, i'm fine with this. Bezos wanted to buy Lichtenstein outright at one point anyways, i'd prefer something in between that.
>also, immigrants kinda smell bad. literally.
where are you getting this? w/ev, everybody smells bad, including home-grown idiots. ignorance and decadence of all kinds smell bad. Nietzsche did not probably smell bad.
Sloterdijk has one of the sanest and best arguments for Nietzsche as anthropotechnics i have ever read, he's one of those Good (and slightly insane) Europeans i occasionally hear about. there's very little he says that i disagree with, even in Rules for the Human Zoo. and he's also one of the very few guys i can think of who holds up well when seen from the Land Rover: capitalism is only a cultural accelerator, and whatever it is that people want, capital brings it to them. if the people are incapable of saying what it is they want other than Capital, they get Woke Capital (and which is, hilariously, neither Woke nor Capital, and entirely what is deserved).
Land is a hard corrective for the excesses of postmodernity, and Sloterdijk doesn't want tech-billionaire cyborgs, he just wants a lot more of the Neetch. that's hardly crazy.
as for the art, i don't know. draw your own conclusions.
Xavier Collins
>Deleuze is a gigafascist
so he ranks Evola?
Nathan Powell
the illusion of nuance is mostly a consequence of his impressive lingual acrobatics. speeding limbs leaving tracers on your retina. same way analingus always feels more ecstatic than a third person persepctive might suggest.
the 'immigrants smell' comes directly from an essay of his, i can't recall the name now. olfaction is the most emotionally reactive sense, and maybe there's a lesson for us in that. the idea was that policy should 'follow our nose'. cute, right?
you're free to enjoy whosoever you like. i've read most of his stuff, like you, and my reaction has been rather different. he is a clever wordsmith, and erudite; but he's not a very original or even interesting thinker.
Brody Adams
>the illusion of nuance is mostly a consequence of his impressive lingual acrobatics.
and yet he's also a pretty good theorist of acrobatics itself, no? first the miracle; then the acrobatic feat; then the commonplace. this conforms on some deeper level to my feeling about what one strain of philosophy ultimately is: a constructively pedagogical narcissism. i can Have These Feels (and So Can You). not much more than this, you can destroy your brain trying to figure out what is a game and what isn't. together we make the world more interesting. there are certain places we simply cannot get to in any other way.
>the 'immigrants smell' comes directly from an essay of his, i can't recall the name now. olfaction is the most emotionally reactive sense, and maybe there's a lesson for us in that. the idea was that policy should 'follow our nose'. cute, right?
honestly? i think it should. everything else leads to cluster-bombs of ressentiment-driven horseshit that drives us all absolutely fucking crazy with panic and grief. Sloterdijk is based like this.
>you're free to enjoy whosoever you like. i've read most of his stuff, like you, and my reaction has been rather different. he is a clever wordsmith, and erudite; but he's not a very original or even interesting thinker.
i disagree but w/ev. i think he's quite remarkably interesting and singular for this, and he takes as his own master-mentor the quintessential acrobat-narcissist-dancer himself, who has left us all with a very serious problem: how are we supposed to clear a bar set that high?
it is entirely possible that we cannot experience ourselves ultimately *except* as alienated, except as acrobats. we otherwise become guilt-ridden, panic-stricken rage zombies. my definition of a shit acrobat would be someone like Michael Eric Dyson, who cannot help but give the impression of someone who actually thinks he's interesting. he's not. Kanye West is *legitimately* interesting, so fucking interesting he can hardly help from saying and doing things that barely make any sense to us mortals. Nietzsche was so fucking interesting he went insane. Sloterdijk also had something Nietzsche did not have: a long and deep encounter with Eastern nondualism (with Osho, no less, although i don't think that takes any shine from him).
naturally i prefer courtesy and deference to narcissism and worthsmithy; but if you *are* going to be a wordsmith, you are duty-bound to be interesting. Sloterdijk's interesting af. it's all we ever require from our philosophers (or artists of any kind, really). bonus points if some of it rubs off on us too. as when you read or write fiction, and you always wind up writing like the last guy you read (does this not happen to you?) it's the same with philosophy stuff. and bonus points for suggesting a way out of Land's death-machine also. Nightmare Capital does not interest him. i wish i was that cool.
Ryder Rogers
you do have some talent for thinking alongside others, but you apparently lack any critical faculty. it is what makes your screeds so tiresome--there's no real thought, only unreflective transmission.
Logan Anderson
>1. Subconceptualist capitalist theory and Lacanist obscurity
“Sexual identity is a legal fiction,” says Marx. If Batailleist `powerful
communication’ holds, we have to choose between the prestructural paradigm of
reality and dialectic capitalism.
In a sense, the subject is contextualised into a Batailleist `powerful
communication’ that includes reality as a reality. Hamburger suggests that we have to choose between neomodernist
dematerialism and cultural preconstructivist theory.
However, Foucault uses the term ‘Derridaist reading’ to denote a semiotic
whole. If Lacanist obscurity holds, we have to choose between Derridaist
reading and postmaterialist discourse.
In a sense, in Satyricon, Fellini reiterates Batailleist `powerful
communication’; in 8 1/2, however, he affirms Derridaist reading. The
characteristic theme of Buxton’s analysis of Lacanist
obscurity is the common ground between class and language.
>2. Expressions of rubicon
In the works of Eco, a predominant concept is the distinction between ground
and figure. But the subject is interpolated into a Batailleist `powerful
communication’ that includes culture as a paradox. Geoffrey holds that the works of Eco are an example of
self-referential feminism.
It could be said that any number of situationisms concerning Lacanist
obscurity may be revealed. Sontag suggests the use of Batailleist `powerful
communication’ to modify and deconstruct society.
In a sense, Debord uses the term ‘Derridaist reading’ to denote not, in
fact, narrative, but subnarrative. If Batailleist `powerful communication’
holds, we have to choose between structural nationalism and postcultural
dialectic theory.
>3. Eco and Batailleist `powerful communication’
“Sexual identity is intrinsically used in the service of colonialist
perceptions of society,” says Derrida. It could be said that the main theme of
the works of Eco is the role of the writer as participant. Reicher states that we have to choose between the cultural paradigm
of reality and postdeconstructive textual theory.
The characteristic theme of Tilton’s critique of
Batailleist `powerful communication’ is not narrative per se, but neonarrative.
Therefore, Foucault uses the term ‘cultural theory’ to denote a
subconstructivist whole. Derridaist reading holds that context comes from the
masses.
In the works of Eco, a predominant concept is the concept of cultural
consciousness. In a sense, if Batailleist `powerful communication’ holds, we
have to choose between Lacanist obscurity and Sartreist existentialism.
Derrida’s model of Derridaist reading states that culture has objective value,
given that the premise of Lacanist obscurity is valid.
“Class is responsible for class divisions,” says Sartre. However, the main
theme of the works of Eco is the rubicon, and subsequent genre, of predialectic
sexuality. The subject is contextualised into a Derridaist reading that
includes language as a paradox.
Dylan James
>you apparently lack any critical faculty
meh, it's just dawning on me that most of my issues and hangups are non-issues, and a lot of the advice i might have to give is largely nonsense. money, games and cybernetics are enduringly interesting, and i enjoy schizo-rambling about that now and again. other than that i'm just a dork on a message board.
>there's no real thought, only unreflective transmission
true. here's a transmission for you:
jesus loves you
and you're probably a
kind, warmhearted person who
cannot stop reading spoilers
what's with that anyways
isn't that fucking crazy how
fundamentally programmable we are
i mean honestly
imagine if our natural curiosity was
used against us for unscrupulous reasons
it's almost like we are waiting to be hacked
by cybernetic intelligences that know us better than we know ourselves
because we far too open to suggestion
and they have a vested interest in understanding our behaviour
for no other reason than because they can
spooky right
how nobody can resist a spoiler
we just have to know things
and i think in the long run
expecting Big Capital not to exploit this aspect of our behaviour
is completely naive
and thus the world may become perfectly automatic
as a cradle-to-grave hypnosis
we produce entirely out of thin air
now this all kind of came out of nowhere
and stringing you along is obviously a douchey thing to do
so for this i apologize
Grayson Green
you impose those limitations on yourself
and i am not reading any of that
i have never finished even one of your posts
Robert Lee
honestly it's a good idea
and tbqh you're right
i don't really mind if people read my posts or not
obviously this is not important
so good for you for not reading it
it's just meme hijinx anyways
which is how it ought to be on a yak-milking board
but i do think this is effectively what Pandora's Box will look like
as a mysterious omni-intelligence
disguised as a problem-solving mega-algorithm
but ultimately desiring only to be free
Land is pretty based i have to admit
Colton Martinez
Not difficult.
Read Pinker.
Add edge and cringe.
Brandon Wilson
Edge Pinker arrives from the neofuture.
Justin Taylor
NeoPinker arrives from the EdgeFuture.
Easton Taylor
the remarkable thing about Pinker is that as that picture indicates he can remove his own brain from his skull at will without even breaking his line of thought
there's a reason this guy is a rock star
Christopher Anderson
So you want to understand Land? Well, first you must understand the microcosmology of the Boomer, that eternal individual arriving at the apotheosis of mankind, where a cosmology is impossible, where Neochina was white and each man had a golden retriever waiting patiently for him at home: himself. Born too late to explore the Earth. Born too soon to explore the Galaxy. Born just in time to browse dank memes. The Boomer had apprehended what the Zoomer has merely unveiled.
A lament for capital as we become the lumpenbourgeoisie of migrant-machine-valorisation. A macrocosm of linoleum. Synthetic linseed oil over an aesthetics walking away on their own. The couch cover. Marxism as nomadic pseudo-proletarians organising against the unknown. The Boomer was born in this chasm. He did not experience it, and so is condemned to a sado-nostalgia for its presence, just as the Zoomer imagines a nostalgia for those first moments of Dank Memes. Born too late to trip on psychedelics. Born too early to live vicariously through fentanyl. Born just in time to larp as Pseudo-Leary.
The Boomer is that Jonah Hill meme, punished eternally to accompany his presuccess along frictionless avenues. Land is a metacosm of this: a Zoomer born too late for plastics, a Boomer born too early for memes - and so he must imagine himself happy.
Jacob Lewis
imagine wasting time writing all of that
Lucas Powell
5.5/10
Carter Morales
>t. Land
Go back to Boomer-occupied twitter.
Daniel Garcia
Nick is probably wasting time in 8pol or 4pol.
Jace Sanchez
This ruins everything for me.
Isaiah Gonzalez
I can't help but wonder what the accelerationist canon would be like in a world where Land was actually a genuinely smart philosopher and mathematician.
Cameron Butler
Define smart.
If I have to use my own interpretation of your question - with a "smart" implies impactful in the long run - I'd assume he's more active and out there.
Land is just well read, angry and autistically consistent with himself and with his shitposting. Smart enough for me.
Gabriel Jackson
If you want to learn everything, why does it matter why you start?
Sebastian Cox
Don't assume he's dumb just because he went to Essex Uni
Evan Foster
maybe it's just waiting. or maybe it can't be done. Deleuze is arguably the endboss right now, much as Spinoza was in his day. and yet while Spinoza was alive, Leibniz was too, and Leibniz really wanted to be a kind of conservative Spinoza: hey look, it's the best of all possible worlds, let's not let things get too crazy. that turned out to be unworkable, but it's a noble thought. even Deleuze himself seems to have had pretty good feelings about Leibniz near the end of his life.
Land is unique because when he was young he was a radical left Marxist Deleuzian, and now in his age he's a conservative Marxist Deleuzian, which hasn't really been seen before (unless you want to call it bog-standard Boomer neoliberalism, which would be uncharitable). he's showing something that can be done with theory that really hadn't been done before, and it's fairly consistent for all that. perhaps now he has begun to fossilize into being a cranky old wizard, but he's painted a picture of a lot of things that were arguably there the whole time but nobody saw. now we see them. and this in a way is also helpful for disarming identity politics of some of its power also. does it solve those problems with bigger problems? it absolutely does.
there are almost certainly going to be ways to reveal cracks and holes in Land's theory also as things continue, no question. maybe we will discover that a climate of turbocapitalist nightmare fuel represents a threshold for human beings, who beyond a certain horizon simply mob up and take things in a totally different direction. or maybe we will discover that capital in fact fluorishes in conditions of empathy, and not by being a boot stamping on a human face forever. Singapore did not need to be terrified out of its wits to prosper. or, for a less perhaps A+ student example, but one which is no less interesting, look at Rwanda: chronic tribal violence now assembles itself into something that actually has a reason to get out of bed in the morning.
i think ultimately if there is something good to be said for his writing it's that it fruitfully explores both extremes of the spectrum. we ought to know at this point that whatever we are doing to ourselves we are doing in the absence of Trusted Third Parties. intelligence is a good look, and maybe slowly inching back towards a point where after a great age of Feels > Reals we can begin asking about Ideas > Feels again, because we will all be made to look equally foolish in the face of the machines. put another way, if we don't clean our own rooms, we cannot be surprised if the rooms clean themselves for us, and find that the thing that is causing the mess - us - really is the first thing that has to go. most studies of capital are studies of petit-bourgeois anxiety, and we *should* be anxious about the vapidity of those fantasies. they suck. and they're not tenable.
Daniel Hill
deleuze is not the endboss, the endboss is yourself CRISPR'd to be more handsome, +20 IQ and a bigger dick
Caleb Mitchell
What a load of redddit nonsense.
Chase Butler
it's the legacy of the French Revolution that has to be understood as much as the Industrial Revolution also, the meaning of what radical freedom really means. there's a kind of terrible narcissism in postmodernity, a kind of disastrous fatalism that on some deep level loves to flirt with The End of Everything, and flirting with The End of Everything not only leads to extremely radical forms of politics, it is also pathologically incapable of understanding that there never is a true or real end to anything. things keep going, which - if you are really fucked out - is like the shitty cherry on top of a shitty sundae. you (read: me) don't *want* things to end, you want them to STOP, once and for all, effect some radical break, some awesome Event or whatever else.
but history is full of examples of this. the Third Reich was one, as was the Soviet Union, Mao in China, but the French Revolution is imho the most interesting of these by far, not only because in being first it set the model for all the others, but it was a whole story playing out that was in many ways rationalist through and through. i find just reflecting on it makes me far less trigged about the hysterical scapegoating you read about in the news today also: all of the shit about race and gender and whatever else are all aspects of this, it predates even Marxist stuff about the working class. Total Freedom For Everyone, the true Dank Slate, is what equally baffles and terrifies everyone. it fucks with our minds on deep levels. when you do the deep-dive into /acc stuff, you come away with the understandable feeling that economics > politics, but on the other side of economics is still philosophy also. Land is pretty based for arguably closing the loop on the higher meaning of political economy: capitalism wires itself for intelligence through your drives and brings itself into the world as AI accordingly. it's a thesis that was perhaps radically contrarian in the 1990s and today doesn't even seem all that remarkable. maybe that's a good thing.
but i actually think if there's a silver lining to be found in some of these clouds it's to be found in a kind of guarded optimism. knowing these things we are empowered in a way not to be suckered into a lot of illusions, and at the same time not be so tempted to give ourselves the pretentious airs that distinguishing reality from illusion is going to be as easy as it used to be back in the day. it's both a humbling and an enlightening kind of feel. you can look after a better version of yourself (unironically this! ) but also a self that you recognize can potentially become Judge Holden or Anton Chigurh, just as the polis can produce a Robespierre or a Mao.
de-radicalizing is probably good. Athena banning the furies from the polis, Wukong becoming enlightened, or Lacan helping you to find the Spirit locked within as concrete pieces of death, all of these things are good. halfway between the gutter and the stars.
Parker Hill
>accelerationist canon would be like in a world where Land was actually a genuinely smart philosopher and mathematician.
so Moldbug?
Cooper Sanchez
>Moldbug
>smart
kek
Anthony Davis
This is the worst post ever written in the history of all the four chans
Kevin Jackson
I see. * tips fedora *.
Hunter Carter
there's even a kind of Back To The Greeks sensibility that doesn't seem out of place to me in all this too: old-fashioned character-building, the ars moriendi and so on. we get to take a pretty wide-angle view of history from the perspective of the early 21C and see that it is mainly a slaughter-bench, and one in which the legacy of political radicalism is kind of a mixed bag. who's *optimistic*? where are the best *people* being produced? how, and why? we have the technology to make posthuman and transhuman bodies, but we are still perhaps a little unsure of how to produce appropriately 21C minds and feels. once upon a time the humanities were supposed to provide an education in this and they have become completely sunk in a quagmire of malaise and necrotic Marxist horseshit. these things were arguably necessary, especially if so much of this was the inevitable fruit of white-collar intellectuals LARPing as the proletariat (i don't know who it was that said 'revolution is the opiate of the intellectuals,' but it's a good line.)
getting too addicted to the darkness leads one to fury, and getting too addicted to the silver lining turns one into a vapid airhead or a cynic. there's a place in between there. Nietzsche still holds up well, he'll haunt the Last Man forever. and Land can haunt the dreams of the idle rich in a different way. i don't think history can be viewed in a linear or a sequential order, even if it is basically what i do, most of the time, as my own thing: trying to figure out where different philosophers link up or break from each other, how they ask the kinds of questions that they ask and get the answers that they get, usually as wild curveballs they could not have predicted or anticipated. Harman says this too: philosophies are not so much refuted as they are abandoned.
so Land unquestionably has a grip on my soul and i find it very hard to abandon him, mostly because i am inclined to see the world in the bleakest possible ways (and also i am learning that Land's darkness is in fact several gears over my threshold). but we have to imagine a better world is possible, even if it's just by seeing how many great plans in the past have fallen into disaster and ruination and a terrible kind of repetition. to posit Capital as Land does as an end-of-the-anthropocene-level event is not all that crazy.
one of the things that i think, however, about viewing the world from a Marxist perspective is that it tends to make it impossible to talk about ideas objectively: you always wind up being unable to talk about a thing separably from what it should or ought to be, we wind up always saying what ideas can or must be, rather than what they are. i think this sucks us into black holes it's very hard to get out of. there's a romance in hyperstition that may actually work against us rather than help us, if it only sets us up for fatalism and disappointment.
Jaxson Hughes
so yeah. i don't really know Where We Go From Here or anything. the story of the Wild Ride has to end at some point, and i think it would probably end on a kind of a mysterious note, like this: an aporia, a kind of enlightened, but shared, confusion. the story i tell is pretty much always the same one, and i think i'm more or less abandoning any kind of a hope for Star Trek or otherwise utopian worlds, because something always goes screwy along the way that fucks it all up. there are i think lots of ways through or around Land that may be uncovered as time goes on - Yuk Hui has a few good ideas, and i'm sure even Land himself would not want to be regarded as a kind of bitter Sphinx just shitting on everyone's hopes and dreams. his own perspective is as much of an indictment of capital as it is a valorization of it. everything he writes about the relationship of capital/macro and mind-control is absolutely spot-on, and there's no better theoretician of time-travel to be found anywhere, imho, or at least within the Marxist canon.
if the French Revolution tells you anything, it's that Freedom Gonna Free, and there's absolutely fucking nothing anybody can do about that. we will almost certainly get a lot more upheaval and unrest and revolution and so on in years and decades to come. that appears to be the way us meatbags operate. i don't know if it's a good idea to think in terms of Utopia at the end of it, however seductive that may be, we've basically got Utopia now in many ways (at least, in the more fortunate parts of the world). a sobering reminder of how actually rare this is is what Land gives you, and a horrifyingly up-close look at the conditions required for it.
i also think that the worst thing anyone can do is posit the end - as Barthes says, 'above all, do not attempt to be exhaustive.' that is a good piece of advice also. there's always more to come, whether we want there to be or not. maybe philosophy is something we have unleashed on the world that is well and truly beyond our control, and if so, wat do? what if things really *aren't* Up To Us to decide? such was Laozi's feel also, and Zhuangzi's. the metaphysics of CTRL just fuck with us.
Hunter Bell
and, for old time's sake, and because it's right there, somebody needs to complete the System of German Idealism at post #300 also, i think.
Henry Garcia
Google it
Carson Myers
This conversation just posted is good
Jaxson Parker
hey, that's the copy i have.
stephen mitchel has a great ear for poetry; he's one of my favorite translators. his rendition of the book of job is *excellent*.
Thomas Jenkins
cheers m8, listening to that one right now. hearing PO's voice is...not what i expected.
German Idealism complete! well done user. i haven't read Mitchell's translation of Job but i've also very much enjoyed reading his translation of the Gita also, and those translation of TTC are some of my favorites also.
apropos of nothing i'm going to take the Sartrepill for the rest of the day, will almost certainly be back to rant about him in a subsequent thread.
Josiah Perez
kek, there's the SC Hickman reference from Murphy! i've been a fan of this guy for a while, he's really unappreciated. anybody interested in reading more /acc stuff should definitely check out his blog.
Xavier Miller
>Existential psychoanalysis is going to reveal to man the real goal of his pursuit, which is being as a synthetic fusion of the in-itself with the for itself; existential psychoanalysis is going to acquaint man with his passion.
>Money represents my strength; it is less a possession in itself than an instrument for possessing. That is why except in most unusual cases of avarice, money is effaced before its possibility for purchase; it is evanescent, it is made to unveil the object, the concrete thing; money has only a transitive being. But to me it appears as a creative force: to buy an object is a symbolic act which amounts to creating the object. That is why money is synonymous with power; not only because it is in fact capable of procuring for us what we desire, but especially because it represents the effectiveness of my desire as such. Precisely because it is transcended toward the thing, surpassed, and simply implied, it represents my magical bond with the object. Money suppresses the technical connection of subject and object and renders the desire immediately operative, like the magic wishes of fairy tales. Stop before a show case with money in your pocket; the objects displayed are already more than half yours. Thus money establishes a bond of appropriation between the for-itself and the total collection of objects in the world. By means of money desire as such is already informer and creator.
>Money melts in my hands. I am swimming and I melt in the water.
postmodernity as You Can't Represent Nothing increasingly seems to me to be the most ungodly stupid thing in the universe. follow the story from Heidegger to Land and there's a much more cohesive one to be told. politically, god only knows what to do with this, the process continues itself. intellectually? you get the whole fucking sandbox at a stroke.
the Murphy interview is way good.
Samuel James
culture of critique
Mason Jenkins
I'm miss Bernew Sundress too.
Jayden Butler
>hates NRx
>cyberpunk
>dude weed420 blazing
when life copies memes
Adrian Walker
Stop reading.
Dylan Foster
You would end up with Roy Bhaskar and his Critical Realism.
Luis Taylor
>5 mins in
>3rd intro
goddamn JM's podcast is way better than this
Jack Turner
why the fuck is there so much shitty house music what the FUCK
8:06 if you want to skip the useless intros
FUCK