Everything Is

Its clearly the opposite of deep... and yes definitely more useful than endless abstractions

Define "is."

Klages is nothing like that. Ive only read his aphorisms because nobody has translated the fucker, which annoys me immensely, but he's fascinating.

Woah, slow down Ayn.

Is the future an abstraction? And the past? How do they relate to "is?" The future and past are indispensable engagements that allow our ideas to be effective. Is isness a spacio-temporal event as opposed to some idealized frozen snapshot of the universe at some paricular time? Might that view is "is-ness" as a frozen shapshot itself be a high-order abstraction, with the passing of nature - that of becoming into being as the true nature of "isness?"

Ok I suppose ill just stare at a wall now its all endless speculation

Yes. Experience reality as it presents itself.
You are so engrained in logos (a death cult) the mere thought of existing without it is like death unto you.

Nothing is "no thing", i.e. not a thing. "Everything" is not a thing either.

There are no distinct things, only everything. But where is everything?

Your search for and crusade of truth proves youre still logo obsessed bitch

If youre willing to spend 50 euros theionpublishing has Of Cosmogonic Eros finally translated. Amazing cover as well

There is only what is (and isn't) happening. That's *this* right here: whatever is happening.

The past happened in *this*. The future will happen in *this*. Past and future have no reality apart from *this*.

Where is *this*? Everywhere and nowhere

*This* is not apart from everything.

is that book central to his thought? I really want the one about the spirit and the soul, most of the most interesting aphorisms in the collection seemed to be from that one.

How do you know? You sound so confident.

I'd like to know, where did you get your confidence? But first off, when did you learn the language?

A happening is a movement though, and just as moment-in-itself makes the concept of movement incoherent, the concept of a happening-in-itself makes the concept of event incoherent: relationality is fundamental to happenings. There's really no avoiding past-directedness and future-directedness as productive ingredients of is-ness.

Can't it all just flow, happening and moment? How did your last breakfast differ from a baby's in the womb?

This isn't known.

But it is happening. At least, it appears to be.

Check for yourself, in the immediacy of what's happening. Where else could the past have taken place? Where else could the future take place?

In memory and prediction. Why did you ignore my other questions? It seems that talking about what is opens up a can of nonsense. You're only responding to what you'd like to respond to.

What's happening doesn't depend on anything. It has no need for a past. It has no want for a future. There is no real movement. Where could it go?

When you remember the past or predict the future, that is also what's happening. It isn't happening anywhere else. It's just *this*, appearing to be a memory or a prediction.

As for your other questions. The language and confidence come to me. I have no need for a past to explain it. I could tell you a story about the past. But that would also just be what's happening.