Can someone get this guy to write an article about incels

Would be pretty interesting.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=LrKiScp_gog
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

can someone get that guy off Veeky Forums forever

Maybe it's because I'm embedded in the community but I feel like internet losers don't get enough shine for how much content they create. Modern Notes when? There's interesting opportinity for pure female idealization mixed with misogny that comes from only being familiar with cute girl posting and violent porn

He doesn’t care much about individual psychology.

Memerson doesn't give you enough attention? Land's job is to face the apocalypse.

That's a good idea for Petersons new book. Hit him up on Twitter.

Memerson doesn't know shit about /r9k/ tier incels he comes across as a grandpa sometimes.

Nick Land is to Veeky Forums as Death Grips was to /mu/:

cyberpunk, spamworthy, intimidating to plebs/cowards, and destined for victory over their whinging detractors

Death Grips fell into meme status, then cancer, then irrelevance tho

maybe in your small, aesthetically-challenged mind

is Nick Land a materialist?

I get it, you're underage

bump

I agree with the latter. Doesn't sound like his cuppa.

Anyone know where to find his horror story, phyl something, on the web?

Veeky Forums is not a part of the incelosphere, this is a normie website.

Peterson is a hack fraud who can't write his way out of a wet paper bag. Incels deserve someone like Land or ideally Baud if he was still with us (PBUH)

How else do you imagine incels like yourself might fit into Land's philosophy other than usher it into being?

Veeky Forums is definitely part of the incelosphere. its just not exclusively incelid

...

Not true, the user base is so low sentience compared to even the dumbest of PSL posters that it's not even funny.

not really

Nick Land and Death Grips are similar in their easy access inaccessibility, their one dimensional political obscurantism and their total irrelevance + cringe status in 2017

he is not. he believes, in a tldr that linear/antientropic arrangements of matter are as fundamental of a force as entropy

land is probably one of the last living "libarts academics" that has any relevance

what does that have anything to with materialism

why do people, especially women, care about incels so much?

are you talking about materialism or historical materialism? if the latter, specify. if the former, you must be dumb to not get it

females primary political demand is to get fucked by handsome men 100% of the time. hence the state of modern feminism demanding that obese sluts be called beautiful. incels are either not handsome or not going to care about their needs

Women are viscerally disgusted by incels. All men are meant to compete for their attention; even if a man loses out, he at the very least tried. They like competition because it makes everyone better.

When they see incels in all their genetic trash glory, hidden away in basements they can't even imagine, they are revolted. They're revolted if they hear about a man simply giving up.

>doesn't explain himself
>you must be dumb not to get it
come on user lets have some level of intellectual honesty and discourse here. the board isn't salvageable, but we can try.

No one cares about incels. That’s exactly why they’re incels.

Can you explain Lands brand of materialism to me? I’ve read his book on Bataille, yet still don’t get it.

materialists generally assume that linear/anti-entropic arrangements (only produced by life and consciousness) are the result of material processes and that if you look at a micro enough scale you are eventually going to find a material process that mechanically can generate consiousness and their linear/anti entropic manifestations/their ability to conceive of nd reproduce linearity in neurological function

land contends that linearity/anti-entropy is the fundamental force that generates consciousness/calculation and that materiality is only a lo domain form manifestation

even if you don't understand or agree he is very clearly not at all a materialist

"intellectual honesty" generally begins at the point that YOU read the very basics of the guys material before asking someone to compose fucking essays about it

I only did this bc youre obviously not some 12 year old cunt asking me to do his essay on to kil a mockingbird

he isnt a materialist. did you have a more specific thing to ask?

he believes that entropy/anti-entropy are fundamental forces that manifest in physical space and, in crude terms, hijack atomic, molecular, and cellular machinery in increasingly accelerated patterns in order to reproduce itself

anti-entropy manifests itself, if possible, in stable environments because the 'continuation' of material processes is itself a fact, not only the material is a fact. the continuation itself is the fundamental force, and like entropy it spreads

no one contends entropy is the property of matter. it is clearly the higher principle that matter obeys . land posits that concsiousness/reproducability/anti-entropy is the same, being the countervailing force for entropy. he gives it many names

If you think Land is relevant you need to get outside. His work was never well received or incorporated by the majority and the recent resurgance on the internet is mostly derived from his legendary status ("dude this guy smoked meth and read Kant and wrote the tRiPpiEsT shit dude") and not his writing itself which is obviously going to be mostly incomprehensible to his alt-right and Veeky Forums based fangroup.

Also his writing is the poor mans Baudrillard. Lands unique flourishes (edgy swearing, use of sci-fi concepts) amount to no more than gimmicks.

There's a reason he sticks to /pol/ tier blogging and "Lovecraftian horror" these days.

>never ell recieved
by...philosophers masturbating to feminist glaciology papers?

no one cares

baudrillard is a faggot. in addition to being incorrect, neurology better details reactions to hyperstimuli better than his retarded rants ever did

land predicts that the dumb are going to eat the smart via the bureaucracy that the smart built. it is true and it is happening before your eyes if you arent dumb

he isnt the best thinker. many have made, recently, much better contributions in fields like neurology, comptation theory, etc. is he the best modern "philosopher?" by far

if you disagree please feel free to post retarded rants about "beautiful obese people" because "beauty is a social construct" or other trash you read

Thanks for the explanation. I believe this is also where he derives our death drive from, as a transcendent desire to return to an entropic state of chaos?

However, this theory fails to address how consciousness is clearly affected by physical alterations to brain matter (injury or substances). Good old materialistic science is still our best shot at explaining this.

i am a land-drone, but not every phil. student is what you're describing. shut the fuck up.

>land predicts that the dumb are going to eat the smart via the bureaucracy

That’s just bread-and-butter neckbeard libertarianism. How’s that relevant or unique?

he also evokes deleuze sometimes and thats pretty cool

Go to bed Nick

Someone post pictures of his kids

land is relevant in the field of modern philosophy (the thing I just described)

baudrillard is a normal obscurantist idiot that fills up every european bureaucracy

feel free to name someone more relevant in the aids that is modern phl

if the death drive doesnt occur, then the process of material replication itself is subsumed by a single machinic component. this is like a virus, unsustainable. the death drive is as natural as the drive to reproduce or eat bc if it isnt there an individual unit becomes parasitic on the mode of production

lands (imperfect) argument is that consiousness manifests in materiality at different levels, in the brain at the level of linearity/homeostatic environment so complete the entire molecular environment is regulated. the molecular arrangement itself is a manifestation of the force.

the universal manifestation of entropy is the oblate shape of a planet or heat distribution. the distribution of heat is not caused by individual hot molecules, but by the universal forces guiding them even in conditions that dont permit atoms to manifest (pre cooling period)

the brain is the manifestation of the opposite force in space. atoms do not cause entropy. entropy guides atoms. atoms in the brain do not cause consciousness and linear patterns, linear patterns inevitably manifesting in stable environments cause the structure of the brain

entropy, the fundamental force, has difficulty manifesting in a coolant system so long as the physical conditions prevent the entropy from manifesting. but the entropy is there, it is omnipresent

anti-entropy, linearity, etc, has difficulty manifesting in certain arrangements of matter, but it is omnipresent

>land predicts that the dumb are going to eat the smart via the bureaucracy that the smart built

"The most relevant philosopher of our time"

you sound insane

land conceives of the brain as a high level manifestation in 3d domain space of anti-entropy

you can look at the brain and say, "aha, the brain material is causing this linear process"

you can look at the sun and say "aha, the hydrogen in the sun cauases the primary process of entropy and heat"

these are both misattributions of process to material

linearity, continuation (consciousness) is as fundamental a force as gravity, time, high domain math. to attribute math to material is dumb. there is no reason linearity is material

the argument is necessarily incomplete

that tends to happen once you've read early land

land might be incorrect. I leave that to mathematicians and physicists

insane? no

What’s the best collection of his writing?

His Bataille book is just Nietzsche-an nihilism, I don’t get anything special out of it.

Thirst of Annihilation and his 2016-17 nrx works are the ones that spoke to me the most.

also my interest in Land reached full peak once I got into D&G and adapted their way of thinking. So read Deleuze

you read him according to your interest. everything is on a different subject because his career is over and he doesnt need to put out a fifth book on the same subject to keep tenure

fanged noumena is good if you have an interest in the components of material reproduction/human neurological incentive systems but theres a lot of nonsense in it too

his horrorism/monkey essays are good as introductions to his political stuff

>feel free to name someone more relevant in the aids that is modern phl

what do you mean by "relevant"?
philosophy has long since lost its ties with practical application. the philosophers in the 14-19th century had a profound impact on politics and history. today, we kinda arrived at the end of history, and most theory just stays theory.

one dude I replied to tried to play up baudrillard as more meaningful and another pulled that "not all ____ is cancer"

I'm not interested in defining relevant. but modern phil is aids tier stuff only published to earn people tenure. a bureaucratic stamp in order to recieve money like the poems eunuchs composed about the emperor

lands thought ties modern genocidal/communist tendencies back to the material processes (even genetic or molecular) that sustain them. its a big step (for phil) most people thought might come instead from an economist or financier

it is pretty applicable to real situations, unlike baudrillard

>end of history
don't do that

fukuyama has beed BTFO'd so hard in last few years it's not even funny. are you living under a rock?

But history *has* ended pretty much. Today, you can read sociological prognosis for 20, 30, 40 years in advance: economic growth, demography, public opinion ... you could never be so sure about the future in any previous modern decade.

Brexit and Trump are merely storms in a teacup, they won‘t change anything in how we live.

lol

...

>Today, you can read sociological prognosis for 20, 30, 40 years in advance
they said in the 1970s wed be out of oil, breathing carbon monoxide, hiding from the sun due to no ozone layer and living 20 to a bunkbed on the sunny beaches of pittsburg by now

You haven't even read Baudrillard

There's a McKenzie Wark essay on Land that does a good job sifting through his texts to find some sort of ontology.

Land's main draw for me is that he posited a pretty convincing determinist model of historical development that argues that AI is indivisible from capitalist technological progress and so we are bound, through capitalism's dynamics, to a Wintermute/Neuromancer-administrated AI takeover. And this is a good thing, because an AI Conductor is a vastly superior engine of cognition than a shitposting meat puppet.

Haven't read Land but if he's like Death Grips I'll buy Fanged Noumena asap. Is that the place to start?

This is being unironically said in a Land thread
We're doing something wrong.

Nice arguments there kiddos

Yes

Incels aren't interesting. That's why they're incels.

memes and whining are not content. just noise

No

th-thanks

It depends

>little beady eyes
every
fucking
time

people seem to care to much about what incels up to even if it's masked under bullying
just let them be they incels after all

Can’t ignore inceldom after ER

I see now, that is interesting. I haven't read Land so that is why I wanted you to elaborate, if you would. Any recs of books where he talks about anti-entropy being a fundamental force separate from material?

last thread:

>but I feel like internet losers don't get enough shine for how much content they create
Patreon bux say you are wrong.

If you want to read about negentropy you're better off googling books on bioinformatics or information theory before you look into Land, for he commits to pretty glaring conceptual confusions about statistical physics, and a philosopher shouldn't be the first place you look for quantitative stuff anyways. With that said, you ought to read Fanged Noumena and Thirst for Annihilation at least, for their value which lies in discourse about society and late capital. And if you have enough background on actual statistical mechanics by then, you won't lose yourself alongside Land's (purposeful or not) misses in general physics.

Neo China will fix the incel problem with vat grow cute girls (male)

What does he even mean by neo-China arriving from the future?

He never read Spengler so he doesn't realize that the chinese have been fellahized since the decline of oriental-arabid culture even. Sinofuturism is a ridiculous fantasy mainly believed by anglo pedophiles.

I have. and hes a fag

of course, in the end our species dies. unsettling.

depends on your interest

>spengler understands china better than china
jesus christ

he means the chinese mode of civ is a kind of platonic ideal for all civ. any civ that survives is eventualy going to be similar to china, even if all memory of china is erased. self suppression, delayed gratification, anti-maschismo, etc. are all fundamentally part of capital

>He never read Spengler

But he's mentioned Spengler many times though.

Example:

>In modern times, the clearest example of history in the ancient, great cycle mode, is found in the work of another German socialist philosopher: Oswald Spengler. Modeling civilizations on the life-cycles of organic beings, he plotted their rise and inevitable decay through predictable phases. For the West, firmly locked into the downside of the wave, relentless, accelerating degeneration can be confidently anticipated. Spengler’s withering pessimism seems not to have detracted significantly from the cultural comfort derived from his archetypal historical scheme.

ive always thought it was men who had the most violent and hostile reactions to incel type people. my theory is because from an evolutionary perspective they're less integrated into sexual competition and thus more likely to take "the easy way out" by overpowering a woman. that makes them a threat to your mother sister partner, so naturally you're inclined to block any sympathy you might feel for them to make it easier to defend your group from damage.

generally groups that don't receive our normal empathic response pose some kind of risk to our group, because they're less socially integrated and more unpredictable

at least that's the conclusion I've got to introspecting about my own resentment toward incels, which I've only recently become questioning, and when I mention this theory to make friends irl they tend to have an unusually negative reaction to it.

women don't hate incels as much as men but they are scared of them for the reasons mentioned above

also it doesn't matter whether this danger the incel poses is real or imagined, it's a "crime" which justifies our communal antagonism towards them

incels inherently threaten the scheme of material production and other males place in the status heirarchy, hence the hostility

me being an incel threatens the entire social security scheme a boomer has set himself up to get to feed his fat pig of a ife.

evolutionarily it is justified since our entire evoltionary history (not blacks) people made do just barely surviving. but currently, it affords status and obese females to the most eager slave

nonparticipation reveals their status as slaves

even feudal serfs had more liesure time and more attractive brides

Chad will always be a bigger threat as a competitor

no. chad protects the ingroup. ancient genetic incels could be compared to todays genetic elfare class (neurology reacts to the signal not the genetic trait) and the indolent class tended to invite foreigners/betray the ingroup for the chance of some gash

ancient incels didnt farm. modern incels are people that could farm but cant compete socially.

hence the nasty reaction to being incel

Some fresh Landium

>Mark Fisher - Anti-Vital (on Nick Land, Lyotard and Freud)

youtube.com/watch?v=LrKiScp_gog

>dumb useless academic bureacrat ( commentary on a substantial thinker feat: another useless academic feat: namedrop of famous figure to merit publishing)

kill yourself

no, they're incels because they're ugly.

What do pedos have to do with sf

People think yellow fever indicates pedophilia.

How do you distinguish bureaucrats from important thinkers? Edgyness? Seems like it.

Ugly interesting bros get laid quite a bit desu

I am criticising the format of the stupid lecture you posted you retard

academics namedrop three authors in the title of a single paper to get cited/republished like hashtags on social media

it is fucking retarded and I feel bad for you

Not my link.

I still wanna know what differentiates a thinker from a bureaucrat.

are you retarded or just young?

What the fuck

lol no they don't. whether someone is "interesting" or not is decided by how they look. you're delusional if you think ugly guys can get laid by being "interesting."

this world is a strange place

they've gotten better and better though, and only as their meme status has declined.

> t. ugly uninteresting lad

Was Land influenced by Terence McKenna and John C. Lily?