'Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day. But when I follow at my pleasure the serried multitude of the stars in their circular course, my feet no longer touch the earth.'
 
HomeCalendarFAQSearchMemberlistRegisterLog in

Share | 
 

 The Animal Flux and Thinking

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
AuthorMessage
Pezer
builder
builder
avatar

Posts : 721
Join date : 2011-11-15

PostSubject: The Animal Flux and Thinking   Tue Sep 15, 2015 12:12 pm

A zenith approaches which first waves have already hit accute philosophers but which still grabs the world at large unawares.

Philosophy thus far has been a negotiation with the animal flux, the one we share with ants. Thought has not been seen as a crime... It has been a crime. It has been a crime because it has completely disregarded the power balances it has taken us so long to achieve with this negotiation. Thought, heresy, has been like a cancer from overuse of philosophy, from the freedom it has fed from.

Humanity today remains convinced that the negotiations can proceed, they do not see that philosophy already found its position quite appart from the flux.

Humans, not by virtue of the gods or some mystical fate but by virtue of their own stubborn weakness, have found a place they unwittingly built: the top.

To see the world from the top requires that all of humanity understands its unconditional surrender to philosophy, the abandonment of the flux.

So what? Nietzsche new it: we know how much can be gained in the art of sacrifice... This from a man who was feeling the flux stick to his feet.

All must be sacrificed, an answer given to Descartes: yes, there is a world beyond thought that Aristotle was not ready to see, and we will see it from the top.

God help animals.

 

___________
dionisius against the cross...
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Thrasymachus
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 3699
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : Will to Power

PostSubject: Re: The Animal Flux and Thinking   Tue Sep 15, 2015 1:00 pm

What we must also not forget is that such things are not solely for radical destruction and to build an edifice, "spirit is the life that cuts into life" must always push thought beyond itself in terms of that where though comes from, it had two realms of causation, namely itself and not-itself; logic, and non-logic. There is a trend these days in the world to turn people into robots, this proceeds either as robots of superficial feeling-automation or of superficial thinking-automation, loosely the idols of rock stars or scientists correspond to this.. Both paths are expressions of the one-dimensionalizing impulse, a self-focusing Gravity that wants to anti-gravity anything it can't pull into itself. So we have intellectuals mocking emotions, or emotionalists mocking the intellect. So much modern politics is merely a reflection of these.

Philosophy is a middle path, philosophy shares this role with one other thing as equally sacred as itself: the deep sweet earth-soil of the "innocently human", the person that does not know of these one-dimensional strains, who is "of the earth" both in Nietzsche's sense (not lost up in the "idealism") as well as of the heavens (not lost in the pseudo-Nietzschean "might makes right" self-denying nihilists). When philosophy is absent an authentic human can appear.

Philosophy therefore and at least in this sense cannot be a cure for the one-dimensional, in so far as the "real" humans already resist one-dimensionalizing and no introduction of philosophy is going to aid them, it would only destabilize them further, make them prone to take-over. Philosophy is a rare wine for rare souls who are neither one-dimensional nor "real humans". This is also why philosophy doesn't change the world... History changes it. Which means philosophy embeds its ideas as history, through writing, influence and action.

Anyway I personally have no interest in changing the world, but for those who do, I'm quite sure you have the power to do it. But ask from where your motive comes, to see that it is not already just an expression of your own "non-philosophy", for good or ill.

 

___________
"Since the old God has abdicated, I shall rule the world from now on." --Nietzsche

"It would be wise to exercise caution with one's wishes." --Penny Royal AI

Odinwar <---[truth]---> Jeraz

Peace. War. Love. Wordz




“Grow a pair, preferably between your eyes.” -Styxhexenhammer666

104 Qdd5#
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 4222
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Þrúðheimr

PostSubject: Re: The Animal Flux and Thinking   Tue Sep 15, 2015 1:18 pm

I think I need to assert myself powerfully here on behalf of 'the animals', which is a realm of being that to my mind is not less possssed with consciousness as the human realm. The main difference as I see it is that humans are the weakest of natural creatures and need differentiating conceptuality (which is the antithesis of philosophy as let's say Heidegger too it, and the 'remedy against nature' that philosophy forever seeks to remedy) in order to secure their place in the world. It is wholly instinctive and destructive; human concept-consciousness is antithetical to the world, and only through such methods as value ontology can man immerse himself back into the world, by undoing the arbitrary categorization he has committed to survive the greater soundness of other creatures.

I am radicalizing in this position somewhat now that it is clear to me that this perspective is not at all favored; I am absolutely certain that man can only change 'for the better' in my terms if he begins to recognize consciousness in animals, and begins to differentiate between different types of animals as he differentiates man from beast; to recognize the diversity of self-valuing and of conscious self-valuing is the only way to value the world approximately 'as it is'.

The concept humanity is not important to me anymore. I have seen to many too great differences between humans to consider them to be one species. What is important is the concept of the philosopher, who forms as I see it the center of all of nature - precisely because he no longer centralizes man without offering other creatures a chance to outshine and outdo the man. Nietzsche's animal metaphors are a sign of a returning sanity; the time when man set aside animals as side-phenomena originated with the Bible and must end in this coming time.

Animal, god, or both; philosopher has no use for 'mankind' at all. 'Mankind' is just an incomplete collection of incompatible wills; a true beautiful natural species of man may arise when man realizes that he needs animals to be in the world, to look at himself, to put himself in perspective, to love himself.

We know little of the processes in the minds of animals - for all we know it is true that "man is the dream of the dolphin", to push it beyond the acceptable here; I simply want to stress that VO makes it quite clear that intimate knowledge of another beings inner dynamics is impossible; we can only judge behaviors, and only have use of judging them when they are not induced by humans, in some form of 'test'. To understand a being we need to see it operate on its own terms. Understanding never involves its function or rank into our own world. It is always a pure 'gift' - one takes the time to immerse oneself in the other beings world. As soon as it stats to hurt, we know that we are actually seeing something; that our blindness to terms other than our own is being lifted, that light comes into the cave.

I foresee and support a growing human sympathy for animals, as the only means to ground our own species on this planet. I think this is philosophy, and that philosophy can not progress without this fundamental earth, 'funk' -- such words mean nothing if they do not refer to animal life.

 

___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Online
Thrasymachus
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 3699
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : Will to Power

PostSubject: Re: The Animal Flux and Thinking   Tue Sep 15, 2015 1:31 pm

I love that we've found this striking difference in all our views here, it's rare and I'm sure really useful for us. I'm going to spend more time thinking about all this and reply after that.

 

___________
"Since the old God has abdicated, I shall rule the world from now on." --Nietzsche

"It would be wise to exercise caution with one's wishes." --Penny Royal AI

Odinwar <---[truth]---> Jeraz

Peace. War. Love. Wordz




“Grow a pair, preferably between your eyes.” -Styxhexenhammer666

104 Qdd5#
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 4222
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Þrúðheimr

PostSubject: Re: The Animal Flux and Thinking   Tue Sep 15, 2015 1:31 pm

Our power to destroy animals is the very same as our power to destroy ourselves. It is only by disregard that we determine where to aim this power; if we do not cull it at the outset as a general principle (self control) then the mind will end up devouring itself. Mind is a phenomenon that is fundamentally disruptive and destructive, and its traditional logics and positivities are only forms of destruction and disruption that sustain themselves. They are helpless and lead only to greater need of more destruction. The only way to 'heal' mind (make whole) is to structurally limit its scope - to keep it from trespassing into the perspectives of different natures. This means also to leave Aboriginal and Arabic tribes have their rites and beliefs, and to actually start believing in the things our western minds profess - or to stop professing them. From the amount of lying that is common to man and the way he regulates his societies alone it is clear that what we call human reason is in an experimental phase at best.

 

___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 4222
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Þrúðheimr

PostSubject: Re: The Animal Flux and Thinking   Tue Sep 15, 2015 1:38 pm

Capable wrote:
I love that we've found this striking difference in all our views here, it's rare and I'm sure really useful for us. I'm going to spend more time thinking about all this and reply after that.

I feel the same. They're not that easy to find.

 

___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Online
Pezer
builder
builder
avatar

Posts : 721
Join date : 2011-11-15

PostSubject: Re: The Animal Flux and Thinking   Tue Sep 15, 2015 2:21 pm

See? The differentiation is already happening, the depth manifesting. Philosophy is among us!

I feel, as more animal than philosopher, very thankful.

I honestly believe that some philosophers are more radical than others, as we need them to be: the ones who only want to philosophize.

We are their counterbalance, all we need to do is not demand anything of it... Or do! And respect its produce.

The last word is the philosopher's, because the philosopher demands only philosophy.

 

___________
dionisius against the cross...
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Pezer
builder
builder
avatar

Posts : 721
Join date : 2011-11-15

PostSubject: Re: The Animal Flux and Thinking   Tue Sep 15, 2015 2:33 pm

Ethics? What ethics? Only wisdom.

Only philosophical work can accomplish this:

An idiot might look at a whale and say: I must not harm it!

A philosopher might look at a whale and stand in awe... Of himself!

An enlightened human animal might look at the whale and say: I know it has blubber... What would a philosopher say?

 

___________
dionisius against the cross...
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Pezer
builder
builder
avatar

Posts : 721
Join date : 2011-11-15

PostSubject: Re: The Animal Flux and Thinking   Tue Sep 15, 2015 2:47 pm

Put another way: there is no holy grail in philosophy, only in politics.

 

___________
dionisius against the cross...
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 4222
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Þrúðheimr

PostSubject: Re: The Animal Flux and Thinking   Tue Sep 15, 2015 4:03 pm

Excellent - let me start to push it, explicate.

I believe that some species of non human animals are capable of philosophizing in the sense that I understand the word; contemplation of the situation one is in (the world) and ones own position in it. Trying to differentiate the two. That first of all (and none has passed beyond it) is the task of philosophy. Perceiving Being as beings and beings as self-valuings and thus be-ing as self-valuing is one way in which such contemplation has finalized into a thought that can be universalized, and which as a universal can propagate the perfection of that process of contemplation. This process was the differentiating of struggling-thinking in general from my own struggling-thinking by the medium of other struggling-thinkings; Nietzsche to begin with, and then a number of significant others; I would estimate that there have been almost ten people who have struggled against me successfully - as a success for me - to accomplish a breaking-open of an artificially unified universal x into two particulars, or a forceful turning 90 degrees of my perspective so that I got a profile view and a sense of will where first I only saw intent; but most of all, the being made all too aware of a weakness in oneself, a weakness often not intellectual but temperamental, preventing the intellect from doing its due diligence. My whole issue with Jewishness was my Achilles heel, I think I am more or less cure of it now. For this I had to realize the animality in all gene pools, and remember the practices of my Lithuanian forefathers of bathing in ice water, such small images I have of them, that make them other than "Jewish", as if this term is a representative of a single quality. This single-quality ness of terms, I hate it. I hate it like the criminal gentleman hates torture but endures inflicting it because there are things at stake. The term selfvaluing designates no specific quality, except the specific quality of being the condition to what we may recognize as the codependence of qualities that makes up the world; in as far as it is a quality it is one of two, the other quality being 'unqualifiable as being'. I have every intention of staying true to the principle in its purest sense; this is my prerogative because I am the one who most deeply needed the principle, otherwise I would not have been the one to collect it from the well. I take it absolutely literally; there is no essential difference between anything I can, in a direct encounter, recognize as a self valuing and myself. At the moment of recognition, there is neither this person (I) and that person (he/she) but there is a situation of mutual self-valuing, which is to say of potential intelligence and potential conflict-eruption. Intelligence is what self-valuing engages in when it feels it is on the winning hand. Eruption occurs when a significant loss threatens to become imminent. Therefore it is always an error to presume identity before an encounter, unless one is out for conflict and this is only when there is little to lose and much to gain. Ironically it does usually lead to that loss of what little was left - conflict not embedded on the train of intelligent creation is always formally destructive versus oneself; it is a piece of the set of which the knife that cuts into life is also a piece. It is a philosophers condition, certainly. The philosophers conflict pulls the world into itself so powerfully that formal intelligence can not escape it; he must invent something more radiant than the light of reason to escape it - the philosopher is the condition of the insufficiency of reason to being. Thus all rational life is a form of philosophy, but the philosopher is the person who consists of it. "All genius is born in a prison" - the philosophers prison is language and logic, he sees all too clearly that they do not add up to the world. The tyrannical thinker will seek to conclude that the world does not add up to his reason, but the philosopher only allows himself to think the world, and notices that thought is not especially fit for that, that it has to be made fit, whipped into shape. Thought as the human race (amidst who knows how many other types) has produced is both a lame duck and a rabid dog. It does not know itself, thus it is either passive to the point of non existence or absolutely chaotic. "Intellect" is what remains when different chaoses clash. Philosophy is riding the hound on the back and strangling it into submission, and then looking it into its eyes until they go from red to whatever color they normally are, and the pupils go back to their normal shape, and the tongue disappears into the mouth once a while. It's a monster alright, the world, and it takes energy to tame energy. That is just one of the reasons why I can not afford to disband the animal realm into the distance. I require it to be closer to us, for a reason too great to specify, but of which a part is that most men are not born to think their way through life, and no man who does not think his way through life is subject to laws that differ from the animal world - in as far as I am not a philosopher, I am as much cat or bird as I am human - I behave much like an animal, never quite take the human seriously because he seems constantly immersed in things that bring him dread and dull harm. Of course there are very many animals that are quite absolutely removed from me - animals I refuse to engage as self-vauings. Taste is all that matters. I don't eat cat, and I don't eat duck either. Ducks are human, much more human than certain religious nuts I won't mention by name, to point out one branch of damaged self-valuing that counts as man, animal nor god; broken being made out of tantalus-like sub-entities.

You see, it is his imperfection as self-valuing that makes man what he is, we agree on this - man has such a long infancy and childhood, he is helpless for so long, that he can very easily become a totally dependent part of something and never a real entity. He is part of being, but he is not fully a being, as he does not know how to distinguish himself from those whose values he has been compelled to identify with. This is also why man can be supremely self-valuing; he has so many slaves at his potential disposal. But I draw a fundamental line between the awakened and the comatose; for the simple reason that I do not believe in miracles. What is, is. People already are what they can become, their genes, physical circumstances, and their astrological configuration - all bases are covered, all that's left is home, and you've got to run with what you are for what you're worth.

 

___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Online
Pezer
builder
builder
avatar

Posts : 721
Join date : 2011-11-15

PostSubject: Re: The Animal Flux and Thinking   Tue Sep 15, 2015 4:59 pm

What if what I am, what I am worth, is a selfishness refined to absolute tyranny?

Philosophy came to me in a different way. Everything seemed at one point like it was well on the way to delivering all the best in the world to me. In blind faith, I accepted all that came. My first knocks were hard. They were hard for a while... I lost faith and accepted the elixir of Lethe. But, ah! What a trap hedonism is for the tyrant... Faith was rekindled. A faith that no longer said "somehow it is coming to me" but "I know that I can make it." The hard knock of communism... Disguised as other things, as cooperation, as a sharing of ambition. When I heard the words "what is is, what is not is not," a shade so profound appeard behind all my intelligence I could not contain my joy. I remember turning around, in my communist naivte, waiting to see it dawn on my brother citizens. :O. "What is cannot not be, what is not cannot be." This was extended to the gods. The tyranny impressed me, it sounded familiar.

Fast forward through Heraclitus until Nietzsche.

Some people say Nietzsche is the death of religion. I always knew him to be the death of blind tyranny. What a delicious loss... But now, it seemed it was the rest of my brothers who would not relinquish tyranny. It dawned on me that they simply don't know how to bleed, that they were all shadow and echo.

Lethe again, now with a death wish. A hedonism of the dusk... But death did not come. How the fuck does one live with one's self?

Here we are. I had, and have only one answer. One that has multiplied in a series of time equations. One that requires the question: how do these shadows and echoes serve to feed it in the honesty that pride requires to endure?

The answer, ever so deliciously circular, is philosophy.

Stupid men already have their lives figured out, they certainly don't need philosophy. They certainly will never be philosophical. But pride deserves the entire world, and philosophy deserves pride.

Philosophy isn't power, or destruction, or construction, or health necessarily. It is sanity for those who know how to bleed.

So, if we are to gain self-control and put a harness on our intelligence, let it be directed towards the economy of musting to bleed.

 

___________
dionisius against the cross...
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 4222
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Þrúðheimr

PostSubject: Re: The Animal Flux and Thinking   Tue Sep 15, 2015 5:26 pm

Quote :
Stupid men already have their lives figured out, they certainly don't need philosophy. They certainly will never be philosophical. But pride deserves the entire world, and philosophy deserves pride.

I wrote earlier that consciousness is in the final sense perhaps nothing but pride, and its derivates positive and negative, and if so, that philosophy is nothing but the highest human pride.

It shames those whom it does not cause to bleed.

"Let us bleed too!" They exclaim and invent gods that demand their babies or engage in wars that demands their other children.

Quote :
Philosophy isn't power, or destruction, or construction, or health necessarily. It is sanity for those who know how to bleed.

So, if we are to gain self-control and put a harness on our intelligence, let it be directed towards the economy of musting to bleed.

There it is! The birth of nobility from the politicizing of philosophy. The birth of blood from thought and necessity, as thought was once born of bleeding necessity. Valuing as bleeding-for, this has always been the standard of evolution.

 

___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Online
Thrasymachus
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 3699
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : Will to Power

PostSubject: Re: The Animal Flux and Thinking   Thu Sep 17, 2015 9:34 am

Let me see what I can say here.

Animal consciousness is a subset of human consciousness. Humans are animals that became something more- what exactly differentiates us in this way? To answer requires that we hold a basic, rational understanding of what consciousness is. I could elaborate on that here but I won't since I e done that elsewhere, and I'm sure we all know more or less what I'm going to say about it.

Whatever lives in animals as their consciousness also lives in man, because man is an evolutionary progression from animal, to.... man. Again I don't really feel like outlining it all, maybe I'll do that later. But our own experience as humans differs from the experiences of animals in at least one important way: we have symbolic language built upon logic and upon a massive shared history of ideas and text. The fact that human language is rooted logically (it has delineated grammar) is especially important, because we use our sounds, unlike other animals, to reflect logical dictates and thus to identify facts as facts which means as separate from the object itself identified: a certain animal may have a vocal utterance it has associated with a particular tree, something it shares with its tribe, and thus has a "language" it can use to speak of the tree (even this is far fetched, most animals of course don't have a specific associated sound for certain objects in their environment, but rather for immediate projection of their own internal state of feeling-awareness such as is interpreted as behavior to mean "danger over there" or "food here" or "my mate") but even so, in this highest state of language possible to an animal (and not even available to most animals) it isn't possible to even identify the basis concept of "tree" at all, there is absolutely no analytical differentiation or abstraction from "this object here" to "a class of objects that share such and such properties with this one object here". That sort of thing is quite impossible for animals to do.

Nevertheless in their brains they have what we call instinct and inherited genetic memory, which is basically setting up the neurology in such a way so that certain sense-impressions conforming sufficiently to certain boundaries are able to be identified because of how they fall within that range: an animal can have an inborn ability to recognize a good smell or a bad smell, or to jump away from a snake or from fire, likewise the attenuation of that capacity allows for graduated capacities for more advanced experiential learning in so far as the "image" categories implicitly hard-wired neurologically are somewhat plastic and can be changed or added based on new experiences: having a feeling of pleasure or pain can associate physically in the brain to a sense-impression group and thus together that all forms a mental object which, rigidified as memory, can then later act as a basis for categorical action in the presence of any new sense-impression that manages to fall within the parameters of that mental object. This is a higher kind of learning that animals are capable of.

As humans we do this too, as I said we are animals but with something more added atop; in terms of brain structure this something more can in part be pointed to where we have so much more neocortical substance through which massive amounts of connections are run through as memory, impulse control and emotional recognition. But the reality of human consciousness does not reduce to this material stuff, but reduces to the combination of this material with that which lives across it ideal substance rooted in complex self-recognizing and self-responding patterns. We are always "inside our own cognitive process", this is what subjectivity is or at least what subjectivity proprioceprively experiences itself as. All animals have a subjective self-experience. We may not know what it "feels like" to be another kind of animal, but we can certainly know that animal doesn't possess a logical structure capable of symbolic abstraction and categorical identification, it cannot "think" in so far as to think means to cut out part of a sense-expedience and mental object and reify it independently, thus juxtaposing upon a field of mentality external to that object properties, aspects, and relations. Animals don't comprehend facts, they respond to things, and are structurally-unconsciously able to respond to facts only in the limited sense of the kind of genetic or learned image-categorical responsiveness I mentioned above. I don't believe a monkey or a dog or an eagle had ever sat around contemplating its own existence, that would be neurologically and conceptually impossible for it to do-- it cannot organize itself as being, as one object separate from other objects and then absolutely subtract itself out from all else to form the basis for an identity capable of becoming the object of a mental act like wondering "what am I?"

But to what FC says about animals I do believe they have ghosts of these kinds of recognitions, unconscious fleeting impressions and barely-realized possibilities for moments of more factual kind of responsiveness. Animals are alive and I like animals, I don't believe in using them as mere ends and I don't think humans are "better" than animals, and there is a sense where I certainly agree with FC when he said the difference between two human beings can be greater than the difference between a human being and an animal; it's just that humans have a different kind of consciousness and being, we are a different kind of thing fused atop a common kind of thing that we do share with other animals. I think in certain situations animals can become a little more like humans, there are chimps that have quite varied linguistic vocabulary for other chimps and for identifying social relationships, there are dogs that learn how to respond to and mimic their human counterpart's emotions. Dogs have even been shown to perform rudimentary deduction of "if not-p then q". I have no doubt that animals have a varied emotional experience because emotions are developed atop varied feelings that further attenuate themselves according to learned social dynamics and predictive patterns, both of which animals do possess. An animal can feel anticipation, fear, pleasure or pain, but it cannot feel regret, or hope, or love. At best its pain of loss can suffuse a large part of its own self-valuing to the pout where we might call it sadness; its expectation and excitement might peak in its predictively orienting itself to an upcoming experience that we might call hope; or its attachment and the pleasure-necessity of it to another of its kind might become significant enough that we might say it loves. But even so, and I'm leaving the door open to these kinds of possibilities, these experiences are only somewhat alike to how we humans experience these.

Never underestimate the power of being able to name something. If I were to get a brain injury and lose my ability to speak or think in language, I could still indicate for or against things, positively or negatively toward another person or food or whatever, in my own self I could have these basic differences of identification and "for or against" feeling, and I could still feel pleasure and pain of course, but I would no longer be capable of recognizing or responding to things coherently and in terms of those things, or in terms of a more specific kind of response and feeling.

A good thought experiment is to imagine yourself losing the ability for language. Imagine you right now have all ability for thinking or speaking or reading words vanish, then what is left over? Seriously, try it. It's really profound to contemplate. When we get a sense for this we can get a better idea of what it's like to be an animal. But again doesn't mean I am trying to demean animals in any way, nor to say we shouldn't value them. I agree with FC that how we treat and think about animals generally reflects how we value ourselves as well, quite simply because of the externalized capacity for compassion being related to the self-recognizing objectifying capacity of conscious awareness, as well as because when we see an animal we are also quite literally seeing in them something of ourselves. If we love something human, another person say, it is not only the "pure human" that we love but more broadly than that, we also love in terms of the animal that is also in them. And even higher emotion and thought is still based in, if you go down far enough, more pre-human animal consciousness.

 

___________
"Since the old God has abdicated, I shall rule the world from now on." --Nietzsche

"It would be wise to exercise caution with one's wishes." --Penny Royal AI

Odinwar <---[truth]---> Jeraz

Peace. War. Love. Wordz




“Grow a pair, preferably between your eyes.” -Styxhexenhammer666

104 Qdd5#
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Thrasymachus
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 3699
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : Will to Power

PostSubject: Re: The Animal Flux and Thinking   Thu Sep 17, 2015 10:08 am

Let me also add by way of wanting to be as clear and accurate as possible, that I know this is a complex issue and has been conceptually approached in a good way almost nowhere else. So it's still quite open, and I retain that openness to new ideas and data. But what I'm compelled nevertheless to do, as I'm doing here, is to state what I am able most to verify for myself. I'm aware this issue is by no means philosophically exhausted.

 

___________
"Since the old God has abdicated, I shall rule the world from now on." --Nietzsche

"It would be wise to exercise caution with one's wishes." --Penny Royal AI

Odinwar <---[truth]---> Jeraz

Peace. War. Love. Wordz




“Grow a pair, preferably between your eyes.” -Styxhexenhammer666

104 Qdd5#
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Pezer
builder
builder
avatar

Posts : 721
Join date : 2011-11-15

PostSubject: Re: The Animal Flux and Thinking   Thu Sep 17, 2015 10:18 am

Here I will step in.

Words are not what make a human human. Anybody who has channeled an acid trip the right way will feel, in its echoes, the facty fact that we are like monkeys. Without a drug, it can be experienced as quite a cool thing, what really makes us human.

Words are precicely inhuman. Humans are very much weaker than any other animal or plant, and being human is not enough to survive. This is the thing atop. To recognize the need for it is philosophy. A more common practice, however, is to use it as if it where a part of human like any other instinct, instead of the negation of instinct for the very benefit of instinct. Its nature is not originally philosophical, and that is why philosophy has taken its time, and neither is it originally a confusion of it with any other instinct, but simply confusion itself, weakness proud.

Philosophy is the recognition of need where there only was confusion.

 

___________
dionisius against the cross...
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Thrasymachus
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 3699
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : Will to Power

PostSubject: Re: The Animal Flux and Thinking   Thu Sep 17, 2015 10:37 am

I tend to see things from the perspective of universality, by which I mean that I envision a vast continuum ranging from the smallest to the largest, where the points on the continuum are determined based on what we might call "consciousness", what others might call knowledge, what Parodites calls identity. All of these are accurate. Every one life has its need and its birth and death, which for that one life outline the boundaries of existence; but we must set our sights higher and discern more universal developments and boundaries.

The common standard for what counts as "real", and therefore what is implicitly used as a standard of difference for that continuum I mentioned, is physicality. The naive assumption exists that reality = physical substance or size. But instead I see it in terms of ideality, or what is the true basis of "consciousness".

Humans simply have more of that substance than other animals. Call the substance what you like; identity, life, knowledge, awareness, instinct, power, perspective, it's all catching the same idea. So the continuum in an ontological as well as moral sense is rooted in this progressing reality of "inner substance". Man made a threshold transition/leap up to a higher rung on that continuum, but there are still many more rungs to go.

 

___________
"Since the old God has abdicated, I shall rule the world from now on." --Nietzsche

"It would be wise to exercise caution with one's wishes." --Penny Royal AI

Odinwar <---[truth]---> Jeraz

Peace. War. Love. Wordz




“Grow a pair, preferably between your eyes.” -Styxhexenhammer666

104 Qdd5#
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Pezer
builder
builder
avatar

Posts : 721
Join date : 2011-11-15

PostSubject: Re: The Animal Flux and Thinking   Thu Sep 17, 2015 10:48 am

And, hasn't need been called the greatest of all states?

For need of food, water and safety the house cat discovered affection.

Yes. If Socrates or Plato was right about one thing, it was that nothing is invented, but discovered.

 

___________
dionisius against the cross...
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: The Animal Flux and Thinking   

Back to top Go down
 
The Animal Flux and Thinking
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 1

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Before The Light :: Tree :: Lodge-
Jump to: