Love

The perfect person will just slip into your soul and fit there perfectly, and you into theirs. No force or pressure is needed.

This is what love means, to me anyway.

I completley agree, it's an absolute certainty. If she is the right one it just feels right.

Real love will always rescue you from the depths of any hell.

Shit I figured it out. What Love is.

Two souls tangled up with each other.

Look at this from the vantage of VO.


Omg. This is real.

Yes, this is when its real and it ends, death is a natural result. To live on after this actually means to have to become something else. Which is why the modern world with all its miracles exists. People that got destroyed had to somehow continue existing, and took radical measures: creating a kind of life out of the rubble of their remains.

It's also why VO exists. VO is the re-employment of my being after I was torn apart completely. Which in turn followed the suicide of someone who didn't choose to re-employ. Not just my being was used, of course, my way of recreating life just happened to be with philosophical and scientific materials.

Science and philosophy now are even more alive. I only came alive again after VO led me to another love, which never could become fully unfolded and which the will never have to fully die, and which thus won't have to kill me. Ill tay sort of entangled with her forever.

But yes when two souls get entangled they also get violently ripped away from their old world. Which is why in family oriented societies love is nearly impossible. All that is allowed by the forces of nature there is hypocritical relationships. When there is love it will remain secret, a private affair.

So we are talking about love here as it was invented in the early Middle Ages as the Roman Empire fell apart and the virgin cult branched off into an earthly ideal, the damsel in the tower and the French language.

LANGUEDOC

So Parodites is right that before Christianity there wasn't such a thing as a soul. Not in such a way the it could be entangled with another. It was all still more physical.

What proto-soul and entanglement there was was between members of the same sex. The Greeks -

You may forget but
let me tell you
this: someone in
some future time
will think of us

-Sappho

I suppose the power to create is equal to the power to destroy, if nothing else, itself. Love is a really crazy intense experience of subjective edification, pleasure in the loss of control over oneself that means and requires the existence of higher and deeper orders of control. Thus why love is so close to what freedom is and means.

I think love breaks us down what we used to be and reconstitutes us anew and continually from moment to moment, we become a “self-making making-ness” as such, almost as if the creative-destructive loop were being compressed in space and time: in space as the offshoring of the destructive element’s activity through the most narrow and specialized threads of subjectivity such that is allowed continuous flows of new contents into the soul by way of these more or less stabilized-reified connections so that a machine is set up whereby destruction is applied instantly to anything outside the domain of thd closed love-loop ouroborus between two lovers; and in time as the entrapment of phenomenological quanta in this looping river between and as two souls so utterly connected to each other and in such deep ways even they cannot know and must only “feel”, so that even the experience of meaning itself is changed and time becomes something you define based on every moment with the other person and every little shade and iteration and nuance of that moment, rather than time being something that defines you.

How do I know these things, how do I figure out these things? I am a relentless excess. My soul is such that it generates continuously this overflow and I must do something with it; I drink to suppress and manage it but then the drinking also causes it to overflow out of me, unstoppable, until I drive people away with my manic energy and constantly messaging them, because for me every single moment and idea and sentence spoken or written between myself and another person becomes a potential universe, into which I am able to dump some of my excess out of myself. Philosophy is a side effect of all this, for me anyway. Love seems closer to the roots.

I enliven my soul in love, in enjoying and partaking in the pleasures of other’s excess so that I have something to relate my own to more truly and completely. Taylor Swift’s music for example, or a great conversation over drinks with a great woman. In a back and forth existential dance I want to intake all of their excess into myself and discharge all of my own excess into them, and since we are like volcanos always erupting inside of ourselves this just works. And yes this means of communicating soul to soul and excess-exchanging has to be created, had to be created in human history. And it barely just exists, it is very rare. But imagine down the road at some point in the future when this thing I am describing, this thing called love, is as common as simpler pleasures like drinking a glass of wine.

This kind of love activates me in ways I cannot be activated otherwise. It needs to be reciprocated moment to moment, then this kind of excess-looping thing can generate totally new subjective states and possibilities in me, and I can become like an entirely new person, the best version of everything good in me. It all comes out, naturally and effortlessly, one after another after another, ideas, emotions, energy, all of it. Everything in consciousness. Therefore I conclude that this kind of experience of love is basically what consciousness is, at root; what we call love is the totalizing self-activation of consciousness aggregating itself hierarchically within itself according to its own principles, and requires this presence and image of the other person for whom this activation can occur and be equally as meaningful as their own activation is for us. The elevation and exchange of excesses in motion.

All of this bullshit about love, it’s unrequited nature in my case, is turning my focus back to my writing. I’ll push my books out to the world, now. And try to market them as I’m able.

I’ll be remembered as the Future Nietzsche. Maybe I’ll change my name on the books to that.

Also I’m going to publish all of my writings in private message, chat, and letters about this love experience I had. “Love’s Excesses” will be the title. With the intro I’ll write it should be at least 200 pages. And I already know the quote or at least the person I’ll use to quote from, to open the book. Rachel Whetzsteon, a poet from NYC who killed herself on Christmas due to extreme boredom and unrequited love. It’s perfect. She is a great poet too.

Bleed openly.

Also a line from Taylor Swift, to open the book.

After all that nice smooth tequila this beer tastes extra bitter. Good. How appropriate.

Four books, not too bad. About 1000 pages. But I can do better. It’s only a beginning. Daemonic excess, Value Ontology, and tectonics break upon the shit in the soul and transform it into something qualitative, something vital, something necessary. Something living.

So glad I’m over her, finally. She taught me how to unlock myself and live outside of myself. But then she abandoned me and forced me back into myself, and I can’t see ever coming out again. Oh well. Good.

Bleed excess openly. That’s the only motto for living that I know.

I have no shame. Good.

“Guilt is merely the first form of knowledge. And pride, not even the first.” -from my lost writings

i now realize the emotion of love is a psychological capitalism. love is the feeling of deep mutual interconnectivity per what i’ve outlined in Social Webs; massive constant exchanges of excesses back and forth are freely given by both parties in order to generate new value on both ends. each excess exchange represents increase in value on both sides.

this increase in value due to the transaction of excesses, is what we experience as the emotion of love.

Or maybe it's more simple. Indeed a christian thing, and one Aphrodite and Eros laugh at.

More self-deceit than actual transaction.

In my experience, the main function of love is to shield the lovers from real world forces. A cowardice.

Nietzsche said it was a victory over christianity. Yes, like in the sense that covering one's self in shit is a victory over a rapist abductor with OCD.

read my thread on social webs.

Ok. But a thing to add first.

Indeed Astarte would veritably scoff.

Where is it?

What is called love is a proxy for knowledge; knowledge of oneself, of others, of information (facts) generally. As well as a proxy for being able to process and do something with that knowledge, to link things in more interesting ways wherein the addition of one new piece of information is able to properly change the entire knowledge-structure if that is what is logically called for.

This is one reason I am a misanthrope now - most people are utterly incapable of doing this, of properly processing new information. At best they attempt to catalogue it somewhere appropriate in their knowledge-sphere, but nowhere does the new piece of information cause logical chain reactions that would produce massive new changes that would be called for, derivatively, based on that new addition of knowledge.

Philosophy, philo-sophy, is called a thing about love for a reason. Love is indeed a proxy as I noted above.

When it comes to personal intimate love of another person, it is all about the excess-transfers between 'souls' (phenomenologically, metaphysically speaking, etc.). Yes we have a soul, and no I am not talking about some religious idea. The soul is a collection of the entirety of our being, at every possible level in which this occurs. Ideas, feelings, remembered experiences, inner visualization, rote perception, heuristics of behavior, desires and goals, actions, language and ideas, unconscious impulses, number and degree of facts accumulated and understood, and of course the impulse or lack thereof to assemble all that together in the most comprehensive, coherent and powerful structure possible. <--- that is literally what "soul" means.

When two people are in love, their respective souls entwine. This is why the phrase "soul mates" has real meaning, why such a phrase even exists. Before you even meet your future lover, your two souls are already in sync and agreement simply due to the large number and degree of similarities between you two with regard to the aspects of what soul means, which aspects I just outlined above. Now when you actually meet such a person, your and their soul immediately begin to form intimate deep interlinkages, threads like a spider's web, and on those threads your respective excesses begin to transact. You move some of your excesses to the other person and they move some of theirs to you. This is why I stated that love is a kind of psychological capitalism, because in such exchanges of excesses every single transaction is freely chosen and represents an increase of value on both sides.

Our body, hormones, etc. are attuned to produce a feeling called "being in love" which feeling is a subjective emotive expression of the fact that such a vast excess-transaction is occurring and more importantly that such an occurrence is producing new value for you, is actually growing and expanding and deepening you in the most literal sense possible. You can liken this to Nietzsche's notion of the feeling of the increase of will to power. We feel ourselves becoming more. That is partly what the feeling of love indicates. But the feeling of love also indicates other things, like security and understanding, new possible plateaus on which to act and engage productively based on how we determine productive engagement according to our own standards of self-valuing; expanded novelty is also an important function of the experience of love and which the feeling of love represents.

Love is simply the 'emotional' (define emotional: bio-psychological body proprioceptive process of feeling massive physical and psychological changes occurring all together at once and felt/experienced as a single feeling and change rather than as all of those individual feelings and changes that in fact amassed together in the same moment to produce the overall emotion) representation of a fact, namely the fact of productive soul-interlinkage causing real and literal increase in our being.

This logic of yours. It's a superstition.

explain what you mean, and then prove it.

i don’t do bullshit. such as one-line dismissals with... nothing else.

ffs this is a philosophy site. i mean jesus

Is bullshit rather not ignoring what is obvious between people who know eachother and eachother's reference points all too well?

But then that is what I mean by the superstition of logic. You ignore what is real by pretending it is it that must pass your test.

Like Zoot. Except you at least have the balls to bring metaphysics into it.

I take valuing as the axiom and from there I explain things like logic.

Love, to me, is simply a strong valuing. Without this very powerful, all consuming, all encompassing experience, the notion of valuing as will to power would not have occurred to me; love to me simply means the thing by virtue of which I understand other things. It is the most irreducible concept in my life, precisely because it is the most comprehensive and all consuming.

It would be impossible for me to understand or approach love as being built up of other things, or to derive it from a combination of other concepts, because I can not conceive of anything anymore as not being built out of valuing, and I can't really conceive of any worthy human made thing, concepts included, as not being built out of love.

Hormones are valuings, and indeed they work together in cohering and amounting in a greater valuing, but I don't think they "cause" love - rather I think love, as a phenomenon, is what causes these hormones to have a function, terms in which they are valued and van self-value; and thereby causes them to exist.

A hormone did not come into being without a function, it did not exist as a consistently appearing substance without its function; it came into being because valuing was expanding and required new configurations of itself.

This is how I approach love in my own life too, as the means by which I know myself, become myself, the criterium for my existence. I don't give a shit about "success in love", I just care about whether Im still driven by love, or by something lesser, in which case I will have to conclude that I no longer exist.