How are you supposed to deal with the fact that you'll never be able to transcend your own self-consciousness, that you'll always be stuck there in your own mind, forced to always be the subject, and no matter what you do or achieve you'll never become the Other, the object, what everyone else in the world is? Art is a way to escape but it isn't good enough, no matter how beautiful it may be the experience always has to end and then you're just left with the taste of ash and decay in your mouth, back to where you started.
I'm beginning to think the only way to escape is to embrace fulminating nihilism and hyperviolence, the incomprehensible exteriority, to be assaulted by forces from beyond space and time, beyond reason, become an inhuman mind in a human body. But how can one penetrate to the Outside? I like to imagine a giant obelisk, a cosmic cock, stretching out to the heavens and piercing through the veil in an act of extraterrestrial violence, and going ever onward into the screaming infinities.
t. microdick soyboy can't even imagine getting his test up high enough to ever not be self-conscious
Nathaniel Bennett
Why do you want to be the other? Yourself alone has the capability to be the beauty/'divine'. If it all feels like it returns to ash for you then it's your own problem.
Isaiah Lewis
where did you get this idea of the 'other' except in your own self-consciousness?
btw this is why adam and eve had to be kicked out of eden
Brody Brooks
Also I would like to FUCK the Asian FEMALE in that picture just like all my THOUSANDS of ancestors did but because I was CASTRATED at birth by communicative capitalism and gynocratic managerial liberalism and my identity was EVISCERATED by information technology and a global all-permeating nervous system of instantaneous electronic media I will NEVER be able TO so instead I will absolve myself of any responsibility and embrace my status as a post-ironic INCEL and HITLERIST in lieu of the upcoming race war. Helter skelter helter skelter When you get to the bottom You go back to the top of the slide And you stop and you turn And you go for a ride Then you get to the bottom Then you see me again
IT'S TIME TO EMBRACE ALIEN LANGUAGE Veeky Forums
I feed it drugs of masses of flesh and external fear=cell: the techno-junkie device that controls//The internal organ consciousness of self was downloaded::the mimic of cadaver-feti that the logic circuit of self rapes::the hologram of memory lack to the head of amoeba DNA-channel in the virgin form::cut cable of the city that caused it excretes the nightmare of android nature//
WAS LIFE ALWAYS LIKE THIS ? THE APOCALYPSE IS ALREADY OCCURING IT IS THE TECHNO-TRIBAL DEVOLUTIONARY SLIDE BACK INTO A HOMERIC NEO-MYTHIC BICAMERAL POST-JUNGIAN INTERACTION WITH REALITY. WE ARE GOING BACKWARDS IN TIME. WHEN YOU GET TO THE BOTTOM YOU GO BACK TO THE TOP OF THE SLIDE.
Logan Brown
>posts like this seem perfectly sensible to me now
Levi Campbell
The other is all in front of me it this entire externalist perspective which is in an incongruent parallax with my internal first person perspective.
In other words this is all a false reality in which an evil demon has trapped my soul in.
Brayden Watson
Reality is an Activity of the Most August Imagination by Wallace Stevens
Last Friday, in the big light of last Friday night, We drove home from Cornwall to Hartford, late. It was not a night blown at a glassworks in Vienna Or Venice, motionless, gathering time and dust. There was a crush of strength in a grinding going round, Under the front of the westward evening star, The vigor of glory, a glittering in the veins, As things emerged and moved and were dissolved, Either in distance, change or nothingness, The visible transformations of summer night, An argentine abstraction approaching form And suddenly denying itself away. There was an insolid billowing of the solid. Night’s moonlight lake was neither water nor air.
Self-consciousness, or any form of consciousness, isn't the problem. It is the "self" which you are conscious of that is problematic. Consider this posibility: your concept of "self" is a vast illusion that has been forming around a tiny kernel that was planted in your mind the day they gave you a name and told you it means something more than some random sequence of sounds referring to a lump of flesh.
So, if your self-concept has become so unwieldy that it is no longer useful to you, perhaps the solution is to critically, honestly, examine this self, to understand how it works, and in so doing unravel it.
Psychedelics et al give you the chance to experience what it's like to be unburdened by the illusion, but the effect doesn't last.
Austin Moore
subscribed
Zachary Rodriguez
Nice Cartesian problematic. Read Heidegger and Wittgenstein. The false prison, nothing is hidden, etc. etc.
Nathaniel Jackson
please write a book
Elijah Scott
RAGE is the way out, you will have to wade through lots of other people’s blood tho. i hope you aren’t afraid of violent thought and speech
Jordan Martinez
That game was fairly mediocre
Justin Edwards
This is the sea of LCL, the sea of the origin of life. This is a world without A.T Fields and therefore without your own shape, where individual forms do not exist. You cannot tell the difference between one person or another. An ambiguous world. Everything is yourself, and also not yourself. A dead world.
Witty is technically outside philosophical discourse, and Heidi has no arguments
Ian Fisher
they're both nevertheless excellent correctives to the cartesian problematic, which OP has clearly internalized and neuroticized
P R O U S T is also good on this front
Thomas Torres
Violence is always the search for identity. What did the Archons expect us to do when electronic media hacked away at our identities, as we watched our selves fading away in an accelerated information environment leaving only impersonal drives behind?
I say fuck it. fuck everything. I am pure negation. And there are millions who agree with me. Did I fuck up or was it the world who fucked up? we secretly yearn for catastrophe, because there is nothing left but catastrophe. bring on the apocalypse.
Luis Jones
>they're both nevertheless excellent correctives to the cartesian problematic
Neither of them can possibly be philosophically convincing though. They are like Rorty and Pyrrho and so on; interesting but technically irrelevant. They give poetic or literary or psychological or whatever "solutions" but do not technically solve the old problems.
Camden Bailey
There is no way to escape the externalist parallax perspective of viewing the world with your eyeballs like a television screen, drugs may work for a time but they too fade.
Adam Martinez
'as silent as a mirror is believed realities plunge in silence by'
just cleave and burn it, though this can only be learnt by those who spend themselves out, again, twice bleeding, eidolon all this to say that you limit yourself, by this primacy of person
Sebastian Flores
OP wouldn't be in this position if he wasn't already convinced by a philosophical position and committed to a way of conceptualizing his relation to the world (i.e., as something standing outside of it looking sideways on at 'reality' and not as part of it genuinely engaging with other parts). It's not too ridiculous to suggest that he might -- at least possibly -- be brought out of that particular scheme and into one less painful and erroneous.
Gabriel Wright
I'm beginning to think this is why DFW killed himself. Consciousness was a mistake, Paleolithic man was physically and spiritually perfect.
Tyler Sullivan
Sure, he might be able to get out of the position by reading Heidegger or Wittgenstein, but this cannot technically be a philosophical move. It is actually to stop doing philosophy. It's like when Rorty says that his pragmatist just wants to do something other than philosophy and writes stuff to try and get people to stop.
Bentley Jones
It's not a problem because the dilemma rests on the belief in a non-existent state, which is a mind-in-itself that exists outside yourself. I have no way to deal with it, I don't deal with it, because it isn't a fact or a problem.
Lincoln Cooper
I'm not sure what the problem is with leading the fly out of the fly bottle, even if it doesn't count as 'philosophy'. I never claimed it to be, at any rate.
Aiden Bennett
Why do some people seem not as much "there" as I and others are? Or do they just pretend? Is neuroticism literally being more woke/sentient?
Luke Harris
I'm not saying there's a problem with it. I just want to be clear that it is non-philosophical.
Jonathan Walker
Neuroticism is associated with self-consciousness
Zachary Turner
ok though some might claim that any deep engagement with philosophical material ipso facto counts as philosophy, or anything that anthropologically 'belongs' to the philosophical milieu counts too what is your criterion of philosophicality? and is it inherently Cartesian, and, if not, is it at least inherently idealist?
Benjamin Anderson
I don't see how this answers my question, unless you think third impact was the right idea, in which case I's say I wouldn't worry about pulling off something that impossible and find peace with yourself.
Christopher Torres
It at least cannot undermine itself. Witty and Derrida wrote things that they considered to be nonsense.
If I had to put forward a criterion, I would say that it is necessarily rational and necessarily representational.
Carson Ortiz
Die to self by renouncing free will.
Parker Robinson
Yes, but self-awareness and self-consciousness aren't 100% the same. One being neutral and the other mostly negative emotion. It's like when you can feel how aware someone is by looking at them, and they do the same. When you see "nothing" in some people, just blankness. It's like when you see two people cry for the same reason. Both are "truly sad", but, one of them just seem more real. Especially highly emotional people, in the moment they are sad or happy; then it fades so fast. No emotion "stick" to them.
Noah Thompson
Not the later Witty, at any rate -- the Tractatus is a special case. I'll give you Derrida. Those criteria sound perilously close to idealism, depending on how think your notions of rational and representational are. Do you think, for example, that naturalists like Quine or deflationists like Carnap fail to count as philosophers? What about Hume or other radical empiricists like Peirce or James?
Jackson Anderson
>self-awareness and self-consciousness aren't 100% the same. One being neutral and the other mostly negative emotion
I would say that self-awareness is a component of or is presupposed by self-consciousness, if by that we mean an emotion.
Liam Diaz
>later Witty
That's more non-philosophical because Witty took himself as inhabiting a realm of "common sense" to which we should return (from philosophy).
>Do you think, for example, that naturalists like Quine or deflationists like Carnap fail to count as philosophers? What about Hume or other radical empiricists like Peirce or James?
On none of this is it easy to give a simple answer, but Quine may leave philosophy with his naturalistic epistemology. Carnap? That's hard to say. I would say that he's still inside, but I'm not terribly familiar with him. Hume is inside. Peirce and James are kind of straddling the line or perhaps outside.
Also, why do you say that I am approaching idealism?
Jason Wilson
The way you categorize philosophers as philosophical or non-philosophical seems to reduce to whether their philosophy has idealist (or rationalist -- in the old sense) tendencies. Maybe I'm wrong though. For example, is Hume inside because his fundamental concepts (impression/idea) are representational? He certainly minimizes the role of reason.
Wyatt Edwards
what?
Christopher Sullivan
You should write the way you speak. And you probably don't typically talk about "the incomprehensible exteriority"
Ryder Fisher
Well perhaps Hume does fall outside because his philosophy actually implies that thinking is not rational at all. Although he is trying to be representational.
I think I need to clarify what I mean.
When I talk about it being rational and representational, I am talking about the character of the discourse. Rational means that it obeys logical laws, does not contradict itself, makes arguments, etc. Representational means that it claims to represent the world, broadly speaking.
Many philosophers, especially in the 20th century, actually do slip out of this criterion, mostly because trying to answer philosophical questions is incredibly difficult and so they try to escape the limitations of rational inquiry in order to deal with them.
I get that criterion from Lawrence Cahoone and he actually has 6 or 7 requirements, but that gets the gist of it. Unfortunately, I don't have his book with me (The Ends of Philosophy).
Zachary Anderson
I deal with everything by recognizing that "I" am a paper-thin disguise concealing a thing that wouldn't be recognizably human if someone managed to communicate with it directly.
Jaxson Gonzalez
Oh, I think he mentions something about the necessarily foundational nature of philosophy since its claims have to be justified by other claims and so on.
Owen Moore
You've never locked eyes with another and just sensed how they're more there? Similar to when you have a friend that you just have to look at and know you both are thinking the same thing, without saying anything; except you don't know this person. Like how you know if someone's attracted by you. It's really scary when it's one of the bus station's alcoholic regulars; a rainy day he's sane. His hidden remorse overwhelming. But only you, and a few others, are the ones seeing it. Obviously everyone's "reflective" now and then.
Joshua Brooks
Not that guy, but I know what you mean.
Carter Myers
Eh, I tend not to think that philosophy as either a tradition or discipline has any essence that isn't an external or reflective imposition. I tend to think of it as a sociohistorical strand of thinkers whose ideas and concerns are loosely affiliated by family resemblance and by the explicit uptake of the work of their philosophical predecessors, so I'm less troubled by the issue of what counts as philosophical on conceptual grounds. That probably makes me non-philosophical on your view.
I think the problem of "slipping out" of philosophy into nonsense (in the sense that the Tractatus and -- also notably -- Frege do) only happens when a philosopher explicitly articulates a criterion of meaningfulness which that very articulation violates, which is a pretty rare occurrence. Of course, that only means that they have failed to be meaningful according to their own criterion of meaningfulness, and I doubt that there's any genuine criterion of meaningfulness that is both philosophically 'available' for inquiry/conceptualization/explication and true to language as a social phenomenon.
I'll put that book on my list, though.
Jayden Cruz
read Deleuze
Ethan Brown
1. Stop reading philosophy 2. Get good friends that you can have meaningful conversations with
Literally all philosophical “problems” can be solved by actually following basic normie advice. You can philosophically argue yourself into believing that consciousness was a mistake and that you will never be philosophically connected with someone, but if you physically feel a sense of connection, you will not give a shit if it is philosophically justified or not. There has never been a person in the world who complained about “our fundamental loneliness” who didn’t do so under conditions of regular everyday loneliness
Camden Anderson
I would say that the criterion is just an articulation of what the rational consciousness that does (and perhaps necessarily does) philosophical inquiry finds acceptable.
I also think it is acceptable to define philosophy anthropologically or historically, but this criterion here is a criterion given from the inside, as it were.
Chase Harris
This. This is why art is even a thing. Innate truths will always trump the intellectual truths.
Grayson Price
What?
Chase Hernandez
What would your response towards non-Neurotypical people will be?
William Harris
>implying that inquiry and aesthetics are not mutually exclusive domains of human judgement
(this is a judgement of inquiry btw)
Anthony Murphy
I know, I'm saying the reaction of one domain ultimately trumps the reaction of the other.
Kevin Perez
...
Caleb Russell
'I' is an illusion, nigga.
Cooper Smith
What do you mean by "trumps"?
Logan Perry
Alright, now if this prose was aesthetically pleasing (it isn’t) I’d be impressed, write more. It has shit rhythm, uses incorrect and context heavy metaphors. Moreover clearly you cannot believe, making this a relativist, PURELY IRONIC diatribe, not even post-modern. 3/5
Jackson Wright
'I' is the only thing that's not an illusion.
William White
Is ultimately taken as more important/correct by mankind. No, there's a you but the ego 'I' you attach to it isn't real.
Andrew Sullivan
It’s a placeholder for nothing.
Zachary Powell
Wrong, get out Metzinger.
Ryan Bell
Unfortunately, the majority of people are fucking dumb plebeians.
Carter Rodriguez
I have
Charles Hughes
well, then understand and engage with deleuze. then become-other or something
Jonathan Harris
I'm becoming alien
Hudson Martin
nice dude, sounds like plan. im becoming-sleepy-person right now myself
Jack Russell
Don't let them contain your immanence
Julian Nguyen
Oh OP I don't know. Maybe I wont be pseud intellectual pussy.
Cooper Wilson
I know this feel. One day after staying up all night feeling detached and desiring spiritual satisfaction, I went to my car in my backyard where I kept my bong. This car was dead but it was a nice place to hotbox. So I pull out my bong and smoke a bowl while staring at this bird. I see how seemless he is with the background. I hear his friends singing and notice how that becomes a part of the whole that surrounds me. All of these birds are unseperated from the background. They are it. I have my hands on the steering wheel looking through the smokey windshield and tears start rolling down my face. I felt so awkward being the subject of any place I'm in. I want to be the wind and the trees. I want to be the whistle of the morning birds. I don't want to hear it. Something is keeping me from the rest of existence and I can't stop it. I'm trapped behind these tiny eyeballs surrounded by seemingly infinite space. I've been so close to the other side but I didn't make it. I was so ready but it never happened.
Austin Jones
>and no matter what you do or achieve you'll never become the Other, the object, what everyone else in the world is? But user, what you don't understand is that you are the Other of the Other, and thus you are truly the other of yourself. Read some basic psychoanalysis to come to grips with the truth that you cannot in fact fully know yourself merely in yourself, but only through reflection of the Other which, precisely because they are Other, are forever beyond you just as much as you are beyond yourself.
The answer is to go deeper into the hole. Double or nothing. Become one with the self. I find that lifting heavy weights multiple times gives me an almost transcendent in-tuneness with my own body. The same high can be achieved by the "meat-sweats" associated with binge-eating korean bbq, as well as cross-fading xanax with magic mushrooms.
Brandon Wood
consider going blind, you fucking sight chauvinist.
Jaxon Kelly
One thing that always unnerved me is how mirrors and video cameras objectivate our bodies as one lump of stuff in the world among others.
Ryan Harris
>30% child mortality >5'3" adult males >die at 25 from wisdom tooth infection >physically perfect w i w l e d
Julian Diaz
You don't know anything about Paleolithic humans
Blake Lewis
Death Grips
Josiah Roberts
to the contrary my froend. i am a paleolithic human. check, mate.
Benjamin Clark
Learn to meditate. Learn to overwhelm yourself with the energy body. Seriously, every great modern mind is held back by their absolutely shit-tier spiritual skills.
Dylan White
>Modern Man >Starts nuclear war >Wipes humanity off the map
Zachary Adams
Can I really achieve a oneness type state with proficient meditation? I've only ever felt really calm and had minor visual experiences.
Andrew Nelson
Why is it wrong?
Blake Brooks
I just want to transcend with this cute. Who is she?
Ian Sanders
>dole scrounging, bitcoin gambling, or dreary, suicide-inducing trade school job >brain numbing social media and existential angst >alienation from society, atomisation of individuals and disintegration of meaningful community in favour of bleak city life >die at 98 in an old folks home while being taken care of by brown people who will inevitably replace your genetic lineage >"the good life"
