Stupidity vs Conspiracy

I read today an interview with a wannabe-stockbroker. It was informative in that it produced the knowledge in me of the asperger-syndrome dominance in the people who are expert at categorizing and projecting gains and losses in a context of short term gain. Mathematical minds with little conception of value. The derivatives of the economical word, the fabric of the crisis if one would ask me about it, are mediated by derivative minds, minds produced by the existence of logic. Minds where self-valuing is not developed in other terms than its capacity to operate. "We", this world in crisis, rely on handicapped consciousness. Our time in the world is a niche, a curiosity, from the viewpoint of a wholeness, of sanity. We can not address the problem directly, we can only address it's cause which is not active but an absence - the void where once lived the idea that man was headed toward a destiny. The lack of this is what supports the rule of stupidity. The lack itself is not stupid, it is produced by a lack of philosophy, of courage-will-subjectivity, result of belief in the authority of the status quo. It is simply unworthiness that produces lack.

It is not that there is a void where something was, it is that there is a lack of activity.

This phenomenon of seeing nothingness is an attempt of the mind to cover for the fact, previously covered up with superstitious imperatives, that we could be doing a lot more, that a lot more should already have been done.

This is a sign of health.

If human reality/hierarchy has been pyramidal, the result of the collapsing of the top leads to a vast amount of possibilities. As Nietzsche pointed out: the direction taken may end up depending entirely on how well built the base of the pyramid is.

Fixed Cross wrote:

I read today an interview with a wannabe-stockbroker. It was informative in that it produced the knowledge in me of the asperger-syndrome dominance in the people who are expert at categorizing and projecting gains and losses in a context of short term gain. Mathematical minds with little conception of value. The derivatives of the economical word, the fabric of the crisis if one would ask me about it, are mediated by derivative minds, minds produced by the existence of logic. Minds where self-valuing is not developed in other terms than its capacity to operate. "We", this world in crisis, rely on handicapped consciousness. Our time in the world is a niche, a curiosity, from the viewpoint of a wholeness, of sanity. We can not address the problem directly, we can only address it's cause which is not active but an absence - the void where once lived the idea that man was headed toward a destiny. The lack of this is what supports the rule of stupidity. The lack itself is not stupid, it is produced by a lack of philosophy, of courage-will-subjectivity, result of belief in the authority of the status quo. It is simply unworthiness that produces lack.

This modern mindset, which entirely lacks philosophy and fills this void (almost) entirely with religion/spiritualism/political ideology (e.g. poor philosophy) is myopic in the extreme. It does not live outside of time, which is to say fully within time, as the philosopher and (some) artists do. An entire 'system' has been built up naturally and over the course of centuries around the predominance of this mindset, this unworthiness as you call it, in society -- this system is called "economics" or today just "capitalism". Or alternately "freedom" or "democracy". These are really all examples of the same principle manifesting in various domains.

If the 'top of the pyramid' collapsed, my guess is it would quickly re-assert itself in some new (superior, condensed) form. To assume otherwise is to give modern man a lot more credit than I think is evident he deserves. Modern man clamours for freedom but does not want to learn what this means, what this entails. He is very much like an adolescent who demands "responsibility" but does not really want/know how to become responsible for himself, let alone for the world around him. If we think about it, the exeriority to social power, this power's limit, has steadily decreased across history; today, technology and economics and media-consumer culture bind the social power to nearly every strata of civilization. Little escapes its reach, save some philosophy and science (and some (largely impotent) art). It has been my experience that most people are not even aware there is any exteriority to social-power at all (to the limited extent which they are able to conceptualize this notion at all, of course).


Pezer, I very much like your insight that seeing the void is a cover-up for seeing alternate possibilities. This is very good. And as Fixed Cross noted we can only address the problem as its being a lacking, a "void" which represents a lack (of alternate possibilities). Seeing in this way forces us to see what could be (often at the expense of what is). And we must not forget that a void begets what it lacks -- the more acutely this modern lack resembles an absence of activity-creativity-possibility, of philosophy, the more strongly will this void call to and necessitate this very same active, creative, philosophic content.

Void is negative pressure, and cannot be sustained indefinitely. It implies, calls for what it lacks, and the stronger and more well-shaped the absence, the greater the call.