Have you read this carefully?

Have you read this carefully?
orgyofthewill.net/
It resumes where Nietzsche left-off (1900 onwards): making sense of the decline of Europe, rise of the USA, slave/consumer society, and the technological and information age.

Just to anticipate the usual (and only) objections..
>too edgy
Harsh truths can only be communicated through harsh words. But harsh truths are what philosophy exclusively deals in! Consequently philosophy can only be communicated through harsh words.
>too egoistic
Ecce Homo features a similar self-awareness of genius, you never know how serious or true it might be.
>no defining terms, explicit arguments or evidence
holybooks.com/wp-content/uploads/Nietzsche-Beyond-Good-and-Evil.pdf
(See: pages xviii-xxiii, Introduction IV.)

Other urls found in this thread:

culture.vg/reviews/in-depth/la-mulana-2005-pc.html
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

ib4td

Attempt at a new system of government, one not based on lies. Both despotism and democracy based on lies, though democracy on a greater lie than despotism (which is why it's so effective with subhumans). Attempt at a meritocratic system, based neither on heredity nor elections, but on challenge — pure and simple competition; but not merely on popularity, as in democracy, but on physical and above all mental prowess — i.e. on sports and videogames

> Harsh truths can only be communicated through harsh words

n... no? tact is a thing? decorum is a thing? what romanticized dead poet society bullshit is this you fucking teenager

> But harsh truths are what philosophy exclusively deals in
go jack your dick raw to banksy and fight club you fucking nerd holy shit

Your post might be interesting, but you're still using a tripcode, poseur.

>n... no? tact is a thing? decorum is a thing?
They are different tools for a different job. Harsh tools are by definition those most difficult to even understand, nevermind accept. So the strongest possible efforts are needed to disseminate them.

'philosophers, bad conscience of the age'.

td?

the delete, because threads about this always get deleted

Any idea why? I don't see how it's any different than the other popular contemporary "philosophers" like Jordan Peterson, Sam Harris, Nick Land, REI, etc.

I don't know. I also think it's stupid that we get to have huge threads about Dark Enlightenment bloggers like Moldbug or whatever but threads about icy get deleted

He's pushing 40 and there's still no-one in the world taking any notice besides people like OP, who are basically just another variety of the resentful people he spends so much time deriding.

>Harsh tools are by definition those most difficult to even understand, nevermind accept

Who defines a harsh tool like that?

>He's pushing 40 and there's still no-one in the world taking any notice
You know that Nietzsche was self-publishing and almost completely unnoticed, ignored (nevermind being understood) until after his death?

>besides people like OP, who are basically just another variety of the resentful people he spends so much time deriding
What exactly is resentful about the OP? Recommendations are pretty positive/agreeable in content, as far as this board goes.

hi alex

Writing angry tirades about video games and /r9k/ tier whining about women on your blog is not philosophy no matter how many times you try to shill it here.

The only difference that seems obvious to me is that someone like Icy is more likely to offend people more deeply or personally, so his content would be more likely considered problematic.

>Writing angry tirades about video games and /r9k/ tier whining about women on your blog is not philosophy
The OP specifically asks if you read it CAREFULLY, which you didn't, since the blog obviously doesn't contain those. Even at best the mentions of either topic are in the minority.

>no matter how many times you try to shill it here.
Accusing someone of being someone else is a weak tactic. Especially when ecelebs have enough followers, even disciples, that makes the distinction completely pointless? Why would it matter if Icy himself was posting it? His fans could do the same. Weak objection.

>You know that Nietzsche was self-publishing and almost completely unnoticed, ignored (nevermind being understood) until after his death?
And so I should directly assume from Nietzsche's case that Icy is the same? And what about the other 9,000 bloggers who have gone unnoticed and misunderstood today?

>What exactly is resentful about the OP?
Fuck you, how do you like that answer?

Someone should show Orgy to Peterson and see what he makes of it btw lol

A careful reading only reveals informal fallacies. Better to go into it already agreeing with the text rather than wanting to be convinced. It may seem hard to accuse someone who has written this many words as being 'lazy' but there's no rigor in its composition, no exhaustion of its ideas. Either way, if you're trying to be convinced of it, or going into it already agreeing with the ideas, I honestly don't see the point.

this thread is an orgy of the shill desu

>And so I should directly assume from Nietzsche's case that Icy is the same? And what about the other 9,000 bloggers who have gone unnoticed and misunderstood today?
You're free to ignore it if its so irrelevant like those. But instead, you seemed to highlight its being unnoticed, as if that refuted the content or interest in any way.

>Fuck you, how do you like that answer?
Oh, so you were projecting.

I think there would be no way to bridge the independent/academic chasm between them. Peterson would probably dislike the lack of rigour, sources, and the harsh/popular tone. Even the age gap seems relevant, kek. And that's ignoring that they are even separated philosophically on the deepest levels (on ethics for instance).

I'm guessing you didn't read the Beyond Good and Evil commentary? There's no point in me trying to convince you on this OP text if your approach to these kinds of aphorisms is already automatically filtering canonical stuff like BGE into the trash just because of its style.

Clearly "tool" was written where "truth" was meant.

Accusing people of shilling is an evasive tactic. Do you think internet-famous people wouldn't have people posting their stuff for free, just out of their own interest?

I see a lot of people interested in icycalm here. Some people are eager to jump in, others are intimidated. I've read his oeuvre about eleven times, so I just want say a few words and address people who are thinking about reading him or are just beginning.

Before you embark on your journey into the mind of a genius, you have to understand a few things that are very important. When we talk about icycalm, we’re talking about a man whose I.Q. could not be measured. Past 200, I.Q. tests get imprecise. We don’t know whether we’re dealing with a man with an I.Q. of 200 or 300 or what. We can’t measure it. When it comes to Icycalm-tier geniuses, the standard tests simply don’t apply. You see, Icycalm could have entered any field he wanted. He was a real-life Will Hunting. He could’ve been a doctor or a lawyer, or both, if he wanted. He could’ve been a pioneer in physics. He could’ve been a codebreaker for the NSA. But no. He decided to be a writer. He decided to devote his life to video games and to illuminating for us the way to critique them. That was the beauty and the tragedy of his life. In one way, it’s a blessing to have been born in Icycalm’s time, to be able to read his blog, to see his famous forum posts, which are already transforming people both intellectually and spiritually. On the other hand, I will surely die before we know even half of the secrets buried within the labyrinth of Orgy of the Will. That I consider a curse.

It’s been four years since Orgy of the Will was written and scholars have only begun to come to terms with its full implications. This is what you must understand. Icycalm reverse-engineered not only video game critique, but all of Western literature as well as language itself. Packed within Orgy of the Will is Hamlet, The Brothers Karamazov, Gravity’s Rainbow, Ulysses, and everything else. Hell, it even serves as an overview of human history, from dawn to today. It’s a web page you could spend a lifetime studying. A lifetime spent in bliss, no doubt. It would be more worthwhile to spend one’s life reading and rereading Orgy of the Will than to achieve being “well-read” in the traditional sense.

You must understand that, on your first time through, you will not understand everything Icycalm is trying to communicate to you. Don’t worry. He knew things about life that we won’t discover for decades. Your job is merely to get on the road. In the decades to come, we may, if we’re lucky, discover scientific applications for the new ways of thinking Icycalm gave us. We may have to throw out science altogether. We simply don’t know. For now, we have to be content with our vanguard roles. We are the ones who will break the ground and loosen the soil for Icycalm’s future interpreters. This is not only our pleasure, but our duty. And for that, as Icycalm famously said, "I wish you way more than luck."

>"I wish you way more than luck."
You coul dhave replaced this with something he actually said..

he did say that.

did you miss the part where i said i've read his works eleven times.

Sorry. Must be behind one of his paywalls.

yeah, well, im a philosopher-king level member so...

Because of all the errors, this seems like pasta.

But if anyone here is actually an enthusiast, what stuff by him do you like most?

I thought his "genealogy of 'art games'" and "orgy" were the best in terms of philosophy. But I only read his free to access stuff.

Hey can someone who subscribes to his site screencap and post this review of La-Mulana: culture.vg/reviews/in-depth/la-mulana-2005-pc.html

>629. The population decline of the master race (whites + Japan, who are essentially the whites of Asia) is a phenomenon no one seems able to explain. And yet it's not such a complex matter if you have even a modicum of understanding of what life is all about. Reproduction, like all life, is all about sacrifice. If we take the parents as isolated individuals (as opposed to parts of a cosmic chain), they stand to gain nothing from the creation and rearing of children. The benefits they would receive in old age via means of their children's caretaking are nothing compared to the insane costs they'd have to incur to raise them in the first place, so the transaction is a net expenditure on their part, and by a vast margin. Now the hyperculture of the master race has created a consciousness of how important the rearing process is, and how costly if it is to be done right, so even when members of the master race reproduce, they only create one or two descendants, as opposed to the constant mindless shitting out of fetuses that they used to indulge in when they were uncivilized, or indeed that the subhuman races still continue to this day. So that is one important factor for the master race's population decline. Without it, things would be dramatically different, since with the amount of resources a typical middle class family lavishes on a single child you could raise an entire village of little Middle Eastern towelheads or niggers. In simple terms, the master race is going for quality over quantity, and that's a major part of what's causing the decline.

Really makes you think.

That graph doesn't reflect #629 though, since he expects the red line to weaken as their own quality increases.

seems like a lot of vitriol from someone claiming that harsh truths are illegitimate

>on sports and videogames

wonder if icy calm and this guy would be friends

Go back to writing about arcade games pls.

>making sense of the decline of Europe, rise of the USA, slave/consumer society, and the technological and information age.

Plenty of philosophers and authors have done this, including Spengler and Evola.

You seem to be assuming that their quality will actually increase at some point.

As the real successor to Nietzsche, I have to say that this is utter dreck and no one should waste their time on it.

Orgy of the Will isn't "where Nietzsche left-off", it's basically the Chuck Palahniuk of philosophy

I think Fight Club is one of Icy's favorite movies lol

Would Nietzsche have liked arcade games too?

There's no point in reading something that ignores canonical stuff other than Nietzsche. I've taken notes while reading a single text before, tracing connections between history, art, philosophy, science, etc. But they're just notes that have to contend with notes on other texts, to build to something more than just meandering ideas that stem from mischaracterisations of opposing arguments and equivocation fallacies.

But no, the only similarity BGE shares with the OP text is the numbering system. The development of arguments in OoW is not as robust or logical as BGE. If the length of paragraphs were similar, maybe it would read better because it could lead to better coverage of single points. But there's no determinable way to get anything out of this text other than it reinforcing views you already have.

>4. The so-called "real" is merely someone else's fantasy.

Is this a conclusion? A premise? Who's fantasy is it? Who are these people he's talking about? Popular belief? Anti-racists? Subhumans? Microscientists? Shallow thinkers?

>and I say infinite

Why?

The text leaves more questions than it answers and not in a profound way.

holy...
it's edgy with a wicked sense of humor!
i want more...

>There are people in this thread who actually read Orgy of the Will

l o l

>739. How revenge works. Lowering others indeed raises you, but by far less than if you had invested all that effort into directly raising yourself, because when you lower someone the entire rest of the universe is raised too, so most of the effort you expended is divided among raising countless others. That's the difference between direct raising (working on yourself), and the indirect kind (trying to lower others). But for those for whom raising themselves is too difficult (because they lack the energy, or merely even the knowledge of how to raise themselves, which is itself a kind of energy: the crystallized energy of those who worked to invent that knowledge), revenge and acting like NPCs and zombies in a movie in which someone else is the protagonist is the only option, and that's why they prefer it.
>And I am okay with that. Because my movie requires many NPCs and even many zombies. So come at me and do the worst you can. I will be waiting for you. Or rather, I'll be setting in motion events that will compel you to seek me out and to attack me. And you'll play your little roles perfectly, like the good little extras that you are.

Toppest of kek. Some autist's power fantasy.

hi alex
you're cringy af

Bad comparison. Icy lacks resentment towards things like globalism (which he sees in a positive light), you have to be careful not to immediately tarnish everyone with the /pol/ brush just because they reject the current political mainstream.

Again, the same thing can be found in Nietzsche, who rejects egalitarianism, liberalism, etc. but at the same time considers reactionary/traditionalist resentment movements to be even worse than those (since their fear of decadence and desire for the past are worse than even a hypocritical and decadence [which only strong societies would tolerate!] movement).

>Plenty of philosophers and authors have done this, including Spengler and Evola.
Yes, but only in the style of pessimism. Alex Kierkegaard affirms the events of the 20th century in the same way Nietzsche affirms what had been up until then a pessimistic view of the Will.

>ctrl + f + "subhuman"
>233 results

Fuck off Alex. Your hyperbelligerent edgelord style is slightly entertaining for a short while, but whenever you try an actual argument instead of an aphorism, you fail so hard that it hurts.

Go do some super-cool death-drive street racing in Sweden you fag.

alex is incapable of conversing normally with other people for some time without breaking out into expletives

"not an argument"

Okay, okay, maybe the orgy doesn't provide any new ideas. But does it contradict or misunderstand nietzsche in any way, and if so how?

p1: Everyone who uses the term PuA in a philosophical work is a fucking retard who should not be read
p2: Alex uses the term PuA in a philosophical work
c: Alex is a fucking retard who should not be read

>558. We build our Overman, and the aliens build theirs, then they fight each other, and the Big Bang happens and we start over. "Is that it?" Yes, that's it. It is your shallowness that wants something "deeper" (i.e. something you can't understand), and it's my depth that wants something shallow (i.e. the opposite to me so that I can be destroyed in the process towards it and begin again). All the rest are excuses.


>557. Ever seen a mother hold her dead child in her arms and cry? That is the cry of a hyper-predator who sees its hopes for world domination dashed. And you were told she was being "selfless"...

post your favourite orgies of the cringe

>730. All logic is circular logic — anyone who has understood Gödel properly or is even at all honest with himself in his logicizing should be able to understand this. The only thing separating superior logic from the inferior kind is the size of the circle.
nice try circlelet

>587. Would you spend the night hanging out with a weight lifter or a D&D player? That's the only aspects of their personality you know: one lifts weights, the other plays D&D. To me there'd be no question. Weight lifting is boring, D&D is awesome: the D&D player, please! Or a master PUA or someone who's been playing games since Pong? The gamer without a moment's hesitation! The PUA will be a moron who can't go five minutes without thinking of girls, scanning the room etc., while the gamer will be a genuine individual with a passion for art! It doesn't matter that women would have chosen the other option in both cases! Women are stupid! And the fastest way to become stupid yourself is to adopt their stupid values! Which is precisely what "alpha PUAs" end up doing in their quest to understand them and sleep with them! Which is certainly a necessary prerequisite to being good at what they do, but that doesn't make it a valid strategy for everyone! And especially not for those who expect something more out of themselves and of their lives than to become good at ejaculation!

>Coherentism 101

Truly the heir of Ni-chii kawa san desu baka

>There's no point in reading something that ignores canonical stuff other than Nietzsche.
The 'Read' section shows his main influences.

>I've taken notes while reading a single text before, tracing connections between history, art, philosophy, science, etc. But they're just notes that have to contend with notes on other texts, to build to something more than just meandering ideas that stem from mischaracterisations of opposing arguments and equivocation fallacies.
Fair enough, but I still feel that your complaints would apply to the canonical aphorism-writers in general.

>The development of arguments in OoW is not as robust or logical as BGE
I think the amount of argumentation varies at both. Parts of BGE have none at all, they are explicitly first-hand opinions or observations.

>Is this a conclusion? A premise? Who's fantasy is it? Who are these people he's talking about? Popular belief? Anti-racists? Subhumans? Microscientists? Shallow thinkers?
It's an obvious reference to perspectivism, with a psychological suspicion of what makes people privilege one perspective with the label "real".

>>and I say infinite
>Why?
Similarly, this was an obvious reference to the eternal recurrence (if you don't know it, it's 'the law of conservation of energy' applied to our conception of time and space).

He doesn't want to write an essay on such things because he probably assumes interested readers would familiarise themselves with Nietzsche first (his main influence and creditor).

>The text leaves more questions than it answers and not in a profound way.
On the contrary
>He could refract an idea which everyone thought simple into a hundred others, as the prism does with sunlight, each finer than the other, then gather together a host of others to recreate the white light of the sun, where others merely saw disorder and confusion.

Alright, before I'm looking this up I have to say I don't believe this is real. It has to be parody.

>620. And why not gay marriage? The family is dead, we might as well bury it. I am still waiting for animal marriage. Hopefully it's next.

Wish I could sage this

I've found a gem:

>646. To understand what "beta" means, one should consider the epitaph on the monument at Thermopylae by the ancient lyric poet Simonides:

Go tell the Spartans, stranger passing by,
that here, obedient to their laws, we lie.

And the fagot PUAs look down on "betas" lol. Heartiste and Roosh and Krauser and all the other ugly little losers look down on the Spartans lol. These gammas and omegas with their wretched little blogs and badly written ebooks, have misunderstood and misinterpreted reality to such an extent, that they have managed to convince themselves that they stand higher than immortal heroes...

>699. Veeky Forums is without a doubt the worst website in the history of the internet. I have never seen such an agglomeration of stupidity and wretchedness anywhere else, nor would have imagined that so much ugliness — mental, and no doubt also physical — could be possible in this world if I had never come across it. And they are all fully aware of this, which is why they prefer to remain anonymous, and almost immediately trash everything that they write, since they know it's rubbish. We are talking about individuals so weak and fearful that even the nicknames used by forum users feel too restrictive and oppressive to them. Individuals so slow and incoherent that they don't want others to be able to connect even as much as two of their posts together and hold them accountable for some measure of logic between them. This is the true bottom of the barrel of (sub)humanity. And that's why I keep an eye on it from time to time. You couldn't even meet such idiots in the street, since people in the street possess at least the minimum amount of strength required to leave their rooms and walk around. So if my site is the greatest site that exists and that will ever be made (and it is), Veeky Forums is the lowest one, and will remain so for as long as it remains the internet's bastion for all those who are attracted by anonymity (which is to say for nobodies).
>And now sit back and watch the torrent of threads confounding anonymity with pseudonymity that will be popping up on there.
all of us BTFO

>706. The sun: beautiful, glorious, life-giving. But at the same time a giant ball of constant hydrogen bomb explosions so violent that to look at it directly, even though it's millions of kilometres away, can blind you. And it's precisely because it's so violent that it can shape the rest of the universe to such a degree and help create and sustain life for billions of years. Subhumans can see the beauty (or at least part of it, since its full extent is invisible to those with weaker brains), but they don't want to see the violence (let alone the beauty in the violence). I can well see environmentalists, if left unchecked, asking for a ban on nuclear explosions on the sun one day, too dumb to realize that without explosions there'd be no sun!

>728. People writing me off is hilarious. "He has nothing more to say", wrote in 2009 some Game Studies professor on his blog. Before the Genealogy. Before Videogame Culture: Volume II, before Orgy even, lol. — When I have nothing more to say I'll be the one to say so, retards. And you better believe I saved the best for last.

Holy... I want more... Anti-Kierkegaard when?

>18. Soren Kierkegaard: "People understand me so poorly that they don't even understand my complaint about them not understanding me."

>21. The theory "of everything". To realize how absurd the notion of such a theory is consider this: such a theory would be able to predict what you would do before you did it. You would have the prediction before you acted. In which case you could do something else and prove it wrong. The theory of everything would end up being a theory that anyone could prove wrong at any time, lol. The purported smartest theory would actually be, as is only fitting, the stupidest.

>22. A man who has settled down is merely another kind of woman.

I have a friend who lifts at the gym every day and who also introduced our entire friend group to D&D.
I have another friend who's professional Super Smash Bros 64 player who also practices pick-up artistry.
I don't really have a point here. Just thought that was incredibly ironic.

>42. No woman has yet been touched by any genuine philosophical concern whatever.

>44. Reggae is the most disgusting kind of music there is, more disgusting even than the most miserable, most depressing kind of peasant and folk music. And a look at the smelly rastafarian bastards will reveal the reason why. Ugly, lazy, shitty music for ugly, lazy, stupid people. "Don't worry, be happy." Keep telling that to yourself, dude!

>59. Wittgenstein is — once you have got past "that hocus-pocus of mathematical form", in which, like Spinoza, he encased and masked his philosophy — utterly exasperating. Ethics is transcendental, aesthetics is transcendental, logic is transcendental! — everything is transcendental! But all these things are in the universe, you goddamn brainless twit, how can they be transcendental! The universe is everything, nothing is transcendental! that's just a word imbeciles use to signify that they are incapable of understanding something! — And sure enough, he understood neither logic, nor ethics, nor aesthetics — among a great many other things, practically everything! — partly because he didn't bother reading enough of what his predecessors wrote, but mainly because he was a little man with small experiences and therefore incapable of making any progress in psychology, which is where all these "transcendental" categories begin — and end.

Wittgenshit BTFO

he's not saying that you can't lift at the gym and have other interests

he's just saying that purely lifting at the gym or purely being focused on getting women and all that other manosphere redpill shit makes you boring even though it supposedly makes you an "ultra-alpha extraordinaire"

This is like Sam Hyde doing philosophy.

>I still feel that your complaints would apply to the canonical aphorism-writers in general.

I don't think I've ever read any non-fiction or philosophical text that was as 'empty' (in a way) as this. I'm not a fan of Moldbug either but you can see the material he's working with in order to reach his conclusions. No mysterious links to other texts.

>I think the amount of argumentation varies at both.

To the same degree? I doubt it.

>It's an obvious reference to perspectivism

I get it, but it's essentially an unsupported opinion. Why are there quotation marks around "real"? Is he saying the "real" doesn't exist? Is it only the "real" because it's someone else's fantasy, and that there is a "real" otherwise? Does that fantasy just belong to one person? If you discuss the "real" can you only make reference to that person's fantasy?

This isn't refracting simple ideas -- it's making simple observations on complex ideas and ignoring most of what is refracted under scrutiny. It's not keeping track of any other influences that affect a sustained line of thinking. New premises and conclusions are introduced out of nowhere, not from any single source of 'light'. In the end, nothing is recreated.

Like I said, I wasn't trying to make a point.
I just found the passage particularly ironic to me personally so I decided to shitpost.

In that case you would be laughing with him, though, rather than laughing at him.

Those are some badass reading gloves and utility reading pants. People should have more plastic on their clothes, honestly. It's like being a synthetic superhuman.