Youtube Philosophy

Your videos are always a pleasure to watch. Thanks.

Remember too that youtube algorithms deprioritize non-corporate content. And they mess with view counts. Likely your videos have more views than stated, maybe many more.

Thank you. The judgment of my own people is of course the most important.  And you may jsut be right - I know for sure that some videos have gotten capped at around 50, as often videos would reach 50 views in a few hours and then not a single view more in months. I have no way of knowing whether the video is then shielded from appearing as suggestion to others, or that the viewcount number is actually artificially reduced or kept in check - but there is also the fact that so many video talkers get tens of thousands of views usually while sharing far less substance, so there is a matter of pride involved. If people don't hook onto this style of thinking, then Ive been overestimating them.

In any case Ive got a collection online now, if there ever would appear a thirst for my type of thought, it's all there.  I'll keep posting old videos in this thread, along with videos by other authors and encourage you to do the same. As you see I classified music under philosophy as well for this occasion.

In the end it's a matter of economy.

wasnt satisfied with this one, new version coming up anytime soon

I love conclusions. I oftentimes disagree.

Quote :

Commentary from around 20:00 - Nature as eternal as Will to Power - essences as wtp/self-valuing types - whatever occurs in time has a form, an essence, finitude, limits, borders. Essences can have antitheses - anti-essences - nature can not.

The Occident wrote:

Of course! The essences of phenomenology are ways (methods!) of self-valuing. And human nature, the only method which We consider worthy of bearing the name "human", is the way of life of the Shepherd of being, of the essence of our phenomenal world. And this in the first place means being EACH OTHER'S Shepherds, each other's Fathers, disciplining and breeding other humans. And this we have done by talking to each other, telling each other things, SHOWING each other things--the most intimate things, which are the mysteries of being a man. Only insofar as we teach our learning are we philosophers! And be it in the way of Heraclitus, of talking "in ourselves"...

The Tai Chi (Yin/Yang) symbol is a neat thing. No matter how far out one goes there is always the potential for a return to balance.

(I actually speak more about harmony than I do balance.)

Did you see that one with the trees woven into each other? It's a nice variation on the theme.

Why Harmony rather than Balance?

A basic form of balance:



I disagree that balance is static. In fact, balance can never exist without motion, if only since motion is basically all that exists. There is no static part of this world.
When things stagnate, that means they are out of balance. When they are in balance, they distribute their force consistently, and fully exist.

Stasis is always the result of a balance of active forces in opposition. Think about relativity physics, you only get a "non-moving frame of reference" when you have two different moving frames of reference whose respective velocities correspond, thus creating stasis from movement.

Balance is not a bad thing, but it gets improperly reified and deified, especially in Eastern religions. This is one thing I dislike about Eastern religions, Buddhism and Taoism in particular. In order to understand why balance is desirable we need to understand what balance is, and what it is not -- it is not non-movement, it is not non-activity, it is rather dynamic activity and movement that has corresponded to other activities and movements in order to produce a shared values-space. A context.

Space and time are contexts that have been produced as shared values-spaces by the coordinated dynamic activities of different self-valuings and different layers/scopes/levels of self-valuings. This difference is continuum-like and refers to what, in part, I mean when I say "tectonics".

Balance for its own sake is a great evil, and ends up destroying all balance, by destroying the reality of the dynamic active forces in coordinated opposition-movement... by destroying the more individual local self-valuing for the sake of a group-level valuing expression, namely by putting the cart before the horse. Same thing has been noted about Buddhism by others like Nietzsche, by many others in fact, also including Zizek more recently, that it is in a way an expression of nihilism in its valuing of passiveness over activity, of valuing non-being over being, of valuing non-desire over desire. The whole "balance is good" taken out of proper context is a symptom of this nihilism.

Fixed Cross wrote:

I disagree that balance is static.

It's okay to disagree with me. I'm not going to force you to be right.

T - The third part of my kabbalistic video treatise above, the one dealing with Chokmah: Wisdom, is basically an investigation of how the monadic principle, in its manifestation as partial impulse/will/entity, produces balance by its absolute movement with respect to any other such manifestations.

Incidentally I came in here to post the fifth part.




I would further say that only weak Eastern philosophy-students would think to disregard movement around a core of contradiction/difference. The essential "speech" of Oriental Philosophy is Tai Chi and the koan.

But do not ask me where I am going,
As I travel in this limitless world,
Where every step I take is my home.

- Dogen


Actually the man has much sharper writings, I learned a lot from him at a time, I learned about being rooted in myself, as I learned to see trees, and even the sun, as rooted in themselves while sitting on these rooftops, learning to enjoy myself in that rotten environment I had inherited of the madness of others, and sustained with my own.