Nihilism

[Dæmon]

Index
Re-Turning Nihilism

In our effort to define words we have to define what the term Nihilism means.

The popular, Modern definition describes nihilism as the position that denies the presence of meaning, purpose, morality, in the universal, absolute sense.
The absence of these human constructs.
We now know that this is not a nil but a syn, not a negative but a positive, because it is this absence which lends man the leeway to create, to think, to become, in accordance to his own will.
Chaos, along with order, participates in the existent, and without chaos, or the absence of absolute order, the one, life would be impossible.

To clarify we must say ordering, and chaoting, as all is a process towards...

We have defined what negative/positive is objectively.
Satyr's Definitions, and we've explained how superior/inferior can be applied in relation to a projected idea(l), and in relation to a species trait, which distinguishes this species in relation to other species, which in the case of the human species it is intelligence.
We have defined intelligence, as abstracting (processing data), perception of patterns (perceiving ordering), projecting of these patterns as object/objectives (idea(l)s (using the imagination which remains attached to reality rather than detaching from it into fantasy/delusion), and we've (re)cognized courage as a crucial part of human wisdom, see Human Judgement.

We have explored what the concept "human" means, and why male/female is an indispensable part of the category.

Having done all that we can now understand Nihilism as the denial of the absence of absolutes which makes existence, and the experience of existence, possible, and we can now understand how and why it is such  a fundamental part of Modernity, and the Modern psyche.

So, from all this we can now differentiate between different forms of Nihilism, as these are produced by human psychology, since Nihilism is the denial of what "IS", or the denial of nature, existence, and the (re)cognition that this absence of human abstractions, such as meaning, purpose, oneness, morality, and so on) is what allows man to exist and to create and to become.    
All projections of absolutes being rooted in noetic abstractions, and so directed by organic needs, and shaped by organ hierarchies, which we now know manifest as personality, the study of which we call psychology.


Masculine Nihilism = The creator sex expresses his nihilism in the form of absolutes, which he then projects upon a world that lacks them.
He is a positivist, in the sense that he offers to the others what there is no evidence for, and he justifies it by manipulating their nature.
Because there is no telos, this manipulation comes at the cost of his own reasoning.
He must believe his own constructs if he is to convince others of their validity.
This creates the priestly psychology, which, ironically, becomes successful if self-emasculation, self-castration, takes place, bridging the gap between master/slave by turning all into slaves and projecting mastery the "beyond" (before, immanent, above, below - the dimensional factors vary depending no the style and method).

This is seductive to the feminine psyche, or to a child who has yet to mature into a masculine type, resulting in atrophying (retardation).

The Priest essentially emasculates himself so as to appear as part of the flock he must seduce, and then proposes himself as the bringer of greatness, of salvation, of positivity.
Such a type will use grandiose words, will appear as a Messiah and if not recognized, appreciated, by the many, because quantities is how he understands qualities (reducing it all to the binary 1/0), he will suffer greatly.
This type is usually the one who comes with "good tidings", a form of a saviour, messiah complex, or as a good natured salesman, with fantastic, easy, solutions to remedy humanity's woes.      


Feminine Nihilism = The submissive sex expresses her nihilism in the form of being taken by the strongest idea(l).
Since entropy increases with no effort, this may become her strongest seducer. The effortless way in which chaos increases at the cost of ordering, which struggles to maintain, is what attracts such minds to the idea(l) of pure negation.
Being that all organisms are a mix of masculine/feminine psychologies, if the masculine is pronounced such a feminine mind will be seduced by the priestly type, mentioned before, offering a "positive" solution to the absence.
Attracted to the promised power of order, often presented as an absolute and indifferent God, or completion, or whole (outside space/time, and so indifferent to the real), such a psychology will gravitate to the Priestly "positive" messiah type.
If her masculine side is pronounced enough she may become disillusioned by the medium, the priest himself, recognizing him as what he is, but will not abandon the absolute which will remain untouched by worldly attritions being that it is placed outside space/time (immanent, hidden, above, below etc.)

To put the same dynamics in a different context, so as to clarify them, we can divide Nihilism into the "positive" and the "negative" kind.

The pure Nihilist, or the honest one, is the one who wants total annihilation - craves it as a solution to his existential wakening.
He does not deny the absence of absolutes, but denies the ordering which struggles to maintain itself within (inter)action, within the Flux.
He is usually fatigues, existentially, not wanting to participate in the agon any longer, and feeling ashamed of it he may try to convince others to join him in his self-destructive, annihilation of world.
Now only does he want to deny himself the experience of existing, as need/suffering, but he wants to leave nothing behind to shame him with its endurance.  
This is the honest Nihilist.

But then we have the most popular form of Nihilism, which characterizes Modernity, and it comes in multiple variants BECAUSE it nullifies existence, rejects the phenomenon, which would restrict his options, and frees himself, noetically (fantasy, self-numbing, delusion, escapism etc.) to then live in his own world (subjectivity, perspectivism.
This kind is a by-product of civilization because this turning inward, excluding the real, would result in a quick death if not for the protective, sheltering of human artifices, which maintain a protective cocoon so as to then exploit this type for various reasons, not to be explored here.

The "positive" Nihilist negates the real, the absence of absolutes, not by wanting to annul it further, but by projecting upon it a nullifying absolute - a human construct.
This is from where his variations come from. His solution tot he absence of an absolute take on as many forms as the human imagination allows, and since the imagination is now liberated from the real, the phenomenon, the noumenon can combine concepts in as many ways as can be imagined.  
This detachment is what he calls his "freedom" and "infinity"; a non-restrictive expansion of time/space; possibility unbound by probability - chaos unhindered by ordering.
The "positive" Nihilist is hypocritical. He lies to himself, if not only to others, using the proposition of absolutes as a seductive offering to those who crave meaning, purpose, an object/objective they cannot produce in themselves, and those unable to cope, psychologically, with this absence.

In the context of semantics (language, symbols, numbers/words), the negative Nihilist will not only deny words as meaningful but will deny words utility.
Not only do all words refer to nothing but human constructs, for them, but they can never refer to anything real.

The (re)connection of nouemnon with phenomenon is rejected, as impossible, and unwanted. The words are supposed to remain toys, detached, to permit a solipsist immersion, and to finally detach all minds from reality, as a negative state.
Words are to remain detached and malleable: meaningless, with no reference to anything outside the human brain.
This would be a self-annulment,a s the individual has been taken out of existence.
But it will also propose a reinforcement of the mechanisms that protect this detachment form resulting in death, or pain/suffering.
So, they will acknowledge otherness in the human sense, while rejecting otherness outside the human.
Subjectivity being reconstituted as a collective unconscious with no reference outside this collective unconscious - a sum of subjectivity within a greater Subjective.
The Matrix metaphor.

The "positive" Nihilist will choose a different path towards self-negation, and rejection of world as void of absolutes.
Because he cannot rationalize the presence of absolutes based on experience, connecting noumenon to phenomena, he will project this artifice, this Absent absolute, outside space/time - in other words outside existence itself...into a noetic non-existent plane he will define as more real than reality, or "better" or as a hidden immanent world never present, void of presence.

The process is quite easy. The mind takes the experienced, the interpreted abstraction literally (the word/symbol is the real), or he overturns the experience of existence (nullifies it) as (inter)active, as linear (case/effect), as Flux (negating fluidity, phenomenon, with a static absolute, a nouemnon).
To protect it from scrutiny, exposing it for what it is, he will place it in the before, after, hidden, and it will always be a word with an emotionally positive nuance, protecting it from assault (love, value, compassion, God, empathy, consciousness, pleasure, Being, One...etc.).

Detachment from the real takes the form of detaching the actor from the act, the apparent from the appearing, the noumenon from the phenomenon...the word, referring to an idea(l) from the real.  
Once this detachment has been manufactured, for those that could not do so themselves, it seduces those who desperately want to escape the determined, and their own appearance; their existence.

It becomes popular, and because quality has now been associated with quantity, the majority is taken as evidence of validity, of value.
The projected goal (object/objective) is the idea(l) that nullifies the real, and this goal, projected outside space/time, is what lends it value, purpose, meaning.

The majority is essential, as in popularity, because such contrivances can only be convincing, can only result in a cocooning, if many are a part of the lie.
Without this numerical sheltering the Nihilist faces grave consequences. His delusion must be encased within a multitude of like-minded individuals who, like schooling fish, will protect him from the repercussions, and give him a  sense of safety.  

If we are to explain it naturally it is the same psychology which enables an individual to immerse itself within a group, sacrificing self to make the immersion harmonious, because facing the world on its own, directly, is not possible.
This insecurity, weakness, makes almost any self-sacrifice a matter of survival.

The individual now co-exists within a different world, so as to deal with the actual world.
The Nihilist needs mass appeal, mass participation, multiplicity of subjectivity, to make his own escape plausible, just as the fish needs others who will exhibit a uniformity of behaviour to make its participation in the swirl of fish, confusing predators, possible...and the Priest needs a following to make his submission before the ONE less shameful, and less costly.
His emasculation is compensated for by lording over those who are lower than him, as they cannot be the medium connecting the weak with this supreme power, this gift, this message....this Word.    

[Dæmon]

The old saying "Beware of Greeks bearing gifts" must be modified to "Beware of Nihilists using words".

The symptomatology of Nihilism will follow.
It permeates what we call Western Culture, because it has been infected, thousands of years ago, by a mental virus, a memetic pathogen.
The pathogen infest the weakest of the weak, spreading throughout from these vulnerable spots.
It has been called by many names, but the most recent, modern, ones are: Liberalism, Feminism, Marxism, Secular Humanism, and straight out Nihilism.
Past monikers are: Christianity, Monism, Islam, Judaism...the last being the infection point where the virus came into contact with Indo-European, manifested as Hellenism/Pax Romana.    

We begin with a inversion of the current definition of Nihilism as the absence of meaning, purpose, morality.
All these being human constructs, noumena (abstractions), with no reference to anything but back to human abstractions.  
These words are used and abused, precisely because they are entirely human constructs.
There is nothing to limit their application.
With nothing apparent to refer to, they are "free" to describe whatever human abstraction man invents.
In the case of morality the word has been detached from its biological function, as a social behaviour enabling cooperative harmonious coexistence, and has been used as a substitute for the other human construct symbolized by the word "God".

What will follow is a brief, and helpfully concise description of this mental virus which has now become so ingrained in western minds that we can only call it Modern.

@

Detachment of symbols, metaphors, words from appearances, the real, the phenomenon.
The practice involves the maintenance of words, representing noetic abstractions, in a state of perpetual limbo.
The mind disconnects the symbol from its reference point, and redirects it back to the mind, which is then shared (hive mind) as a community of the like-minded.
Since a reference point is required to substitutes for the one missing, the mind reconnects the abstraction to an emotion, a lower cognitive process, and then supports its word using animal instinctual criteria, then determining it as involved in higher cognition, or it is enlightened, superior, awakened.

This condition of self-referential looping, is considered an ascent, as it is a breaking away from reality, the world, towards the stratosphere of noetic constructs, no longer constricted by the base, earthly, the phenomenon, the apparent - the world.
The effect is that of expansion, of liberation, an emotional (re)action to the detachment, even if noetically, from an indifferent, harsh, threatening, uncertain world of (inter)activity.
This is called Subjectivity.
It is also given many different other labels, which will be explained in another entry.

@

Multiplicity as evidence of freedom.

The modern mind correctly assumes that having more options, is a sign of freedom, but it associates a detachment from reality, which limits options, as the epitome of liberation.
The effect is one of multiplicity, void of content.
Whereas minds referring to reality, are limited by this reality which is not in their wilful control, the Nihilist experiences no such constraint.

It can now use words in almost any way he wants, only limited by the central Scripture of words, the Dictionary, and this because his condition is reliant of community which he must remain within and in constant contact with.
His noetic constructs becomes increasingly fantastic, each generation adding more to the mix.

Because realists cannot and will not detach from reality they presume a conspiracy, or an illness, because for them remaining in agreement with another, for any period of time, is a sign of being brainwashed, given the multiplicity of options available to a mind that is no longer attached to reality, and dismisses it as illusion.
For the Nihilist words are games, toys, to be used and then abandoned for others.
The idea of being limited in this is authoritarian, brutal, enslaving.
Change is how the Nihilist experiences its own detachment form reality, only this time it is not forced by an external world, but is governed by internal whims, tastes, sensations, emotions.

The result in a constantly shifting mix of "individuals" with no sense of self, and no world to discipline them, being easily manipulated by clever minds that can now use emotions and their addiction to remaining free form anything real, to direct their activities.

@

Uninhibited by anything external, anything outside human brains, the Nihilist uses words with he creativity of a child playing with toys.
It's only limit is imposed by a vague Dictionary definition.

This is why abstractions associates with phenomena can be freed from space/time and placed in any sequence, in any place, with the only guiding principle being emotion, or gratification.
The word's meaning is entirely emotive.
It is judged and justified using pleasure/pain criteria, and in relation to a positive emotion: such as love, compassion, hope, freedom, God, immortality etc.

"What feels right is right", as it were, replacing the "might is right" now used as an example of a subjective mind, like their own, imposing their constructs upon others.
At this stage reality has been completely forgotten.
The one challenging their subjective delusions, is automatically someone imposing his subjectivity upon them - authoritarian.
The rule being that the only limiting factor is a Dictionary (or some other word based Scripture, such as Bible, Koran etc.) and the subjectivity of the other.
It is implied that in a community of detached delusional minds the only moral rule is that you do not disturb the other's delusion, and he will not disturb yours.
Debate, conflict is accepted, within limits, but nothing that threatens any subjective delusion will be tolerated.
The practice of debate is only meant to strengthen the bonds that govern this community of detachment, and to reaffirm the "right" to remain as delusional as you wish, if you do not bother the other.
No matter how ridiculous the other's subjectivity is the Nihilist will refrain from exposing his delusion as weak, because this sets him up to be exposed in turn.
Ergo multiplicity is sustained as a symbol of free-thinking - independence meaning free from reality, which most often refers to a determining, immutable past.

The opportunity is taken for the mind to strengthen the detachment from reality, by covering up holes in his mental constructs.

@

Another general rule governing Nihilistic discourse, is that you never mention what you, or the other, can do nothing about.

This immediately renders most "negative" aspects of reality as non-applicable, or as part of the unmentionables.
To say something honest, objective, about world or other, must be accompanied with a solution to it - a hope.
The majority of what is perceived is not to be spoken, and he who does must benefit from this unseemly, uncivil, practice.

Therefore, nothing too disturbing is ever permitted entry into the Subjective solipsism of the modern.

What remains of the word world is now only what is, and can and ought to be corrected.
All that is permitted to be spoken of will be solved, resolved, turned from negative into positive.

Everywhere the modern looks he sees problems that will be solved.
Even the unknown is made known by giving it a label, a symbol, a word: God, Humanity, Universe, Whole, One.
Baptising it with a word makes it intimate, more certain, less threatening.

And so when the word God is discredited it is replaced with a new word, with the same non-referential, emotional, noetic contrivances: morality, humanity, one, order, and so on.
The unknown, the un-knowable, the absent, is made present as abstraction, as feeling, as dictionary entry, word.

@

In the either/or dichotomy of simplistic binary logic, what even animals are capable of, the dilemmas arise, and the solutions presents themselves as emotional appeals, and moral options.

The Nihilist taking the only thing he can understand, his own absolutes, his own emotions, and simplicity as a guiding light, assumes that whenever a superior probability is presented it is an expression of an absolute certainty, or of an omniscient truth.

This is also a defensive method, dismissing all superior perspectives on the ground that they are not absolute truths, or accusing them of proposing an absolute truth which is indefensible.
Now their own simplicity can hide behind the common ground of imperfection, for that which is not perfect must be equal.
Either/Or.
With no omniscience, no God, all is relative.
Degrees vanish in relation to a fluctuating world.
All is either/or, and since what is left is nil, then some settle for nil, while the majority, of the more hypocritical kind of Nihilist, settle for emotional justifications - in the absence of absolute knowledge, the deciding factor are emotional.,
Here, because emotions are shared, common, base, all find congruence in the lowest-common-denominator or they are monsters with evil intents.

@

Words are central to the nihilist's psychology.
They are the vehicles of his escape from the base, for him, the earthly, the worldly, the real.
They are sacred, divine, magical, because they do not have to refer to anything outside his own mind, or the minds of those with whom he shares a vocabulary and an agenda.

With words he can dismiss the past/nature, he can reinvent humanity, baptise himself by another term, find justice in an an cruel world, find confidence through association - a community of shared linguistics.

The nihilists will detach the word from its reference point or he will slander words altogether, denying them relevance for all minds, for all time.
He will have no trouble comprehending nihilists like himself, but then will feign an inability to comprehend words when they are attaching to the apparent.  

Words are the noetic floating systems he uses to stay adrift in the tumultuous seas of (inter)activity...up there on the surface, hoping no wave will drown him, because he never learned to swim, but only learned how to float...and even floating is given to him, as words with no depth, no substance, no connection to the abyss.  

@

It is because the nihilist is a self-deluded hypocrite, that he can only comprehend those that challenge his delusions as such.
It is because he dreams of changing the world, if not to escape it, that he can only comprehend others as wishing to change reality, to challenge what is, and not only as those who wish to confront human lies, and to challenge nihilism.

It is because the nihilist is part of a cult of shared self-hate, world-hatred, expressed for the reason already given, in multiple ways, that he can only comprehend those who see reality as it is, as cult members.
It is because he is ill, and feels insecure, and lost, that he can only relate to others on that level.

The nihilist abhors value judgement, in relation to a goal, an object/objective, not of his kind.
This is why he must reduce the objective to an emotion, an appeal to a shared weakness.
God, as universal Truth/love, is shape-shifted to Objective Morality, with good/bad, standing in for God/Satan.
All must refer to this emotional human construct.
To go outside of it, into objectivity, is to place this coward in unknown waters - which must be given a name he can relate to.

Objectivity ceases to be about world, outside human words, hopes, emotions, and is returned back to the familiar territory of mind, noumenon, abstraction.
He can only relate to world through others, and this other is usually some famous figure.  

@

Using others as supportive elements is another Nihilist tendency.
The quickness in referencing credentials, to schooling, trying to impress, or to imply that he knows what he is talking about because he refers to "great" minds, is a symptom of insecurity, because no matter what the Nihilist intuitively senses his own condition.

And so "intellectual discourse", or dialogue, becomes a posturing based on knowing, and on parroting others, and not about personal conceptions about a world all have access to.
The implied elitism, of being part of the few who have access to profound knowledge, contradicts their egalitarian, democratic ethos.
The insinuation is that if you are "trained" sufficiently, infused with the proper understanding of what others said, and told why they said it, in accordance with cultural norms, you can be respected.
The obsession with education, and with reciting knowledge, acquired through second-hand sources, is an indication of a personal failing - ether stupidity, or cowardice in seeing what is always in front of you; requiring no proxy.

Deferring to an authority, if not God then to some famous rich individual which becomes a shared icon, is a way of escaping the natural selection process.
When the mind cannot take responsibility for itself, and feels that it is not up to par, it seeks out a icon to hide behind and to find confidence in.
The proxy is also a potential scapegoat.

If this icon proves to be weak, then he is discarded, and so changing your mind about everything, indicates a reliance on others (power in association), and it also indicated poor judgement.

@

Bragging, posturing, inflated egos while ego is denied...

The quickness in which a Modern Nihilist tells you, using words, what he wishes you to believe about him, indicates the reverse of the intended.
It is always the one who will name-drop, will brag about how much he gets laid, how much money he has, what schooling he has, how happy he is, whom he knows, that is the one who is desperate to hide his innate inferiority.

When stressed the fall-back defensive position symbolizes a retreat.
As always words, symbols, references to other minds, is how the Nihilist escapes, or tries to escape the reality of what he is, in relation to world.
Words, once more, come to the rescue, for he can claim whatever he wishes using words, which refer to nothing real, as in behaviour, (inter)action, appearance, apparent.

Using the word "happy" for example, implies what the individual wishes to plant into the other mind as a possibility.
Repeating the word reaffirms it, and the individual hopes the word will root itself in the others mind as a judgement about him.

@

Considering the power words have for the Nihilist mind, an almost magical power, exposing him to reality and also offering him a way out, we can understand the love/hate relationship he feels towards them.

Sometimes wanting to discredit them even as tools, and at other times worship them as saviours.
Words are all a nihilist has, since he no longer wants, or cannot, see, and hear, and feel the world directly, but only experience it through proxies.
Because all is via a proxy, all must be increased in volume in sensation, to make him feel something vicariously.
He sacrifices pleasure, at times, just to avoid pain.
Words have the power to make or break him, because he is completely given over to their power.
The magical escape also makes him vulnerable to manipulation, by those who understand what words are: tools.

@

The central common them, shared by all nihilists, no matter what method, what words, they use, is a desire to detach from past/nature, and pretend that it no longer applies nor affects them in the present.

World-Hatred often exposing a self-hatred, a disappointment with self as it relates to others, and to the world, is what these nihilists share, no matter what multiplicity of methods they use to detach and discredit and dismiss.
This denouncement of sex, race, of nature, as the sum of all past nurturing, and the hyperinflation of the nurture, the social influence, exposes them as what they are.
The idea(l) that everything from sex (gender) to race, and from homosexuality (sexual mutation, dysfunction) to stupidity (learning disorder), are socially produced is part of this idea that all that nature has rendered can be corrected by the interventions of man - and this will not produce a need for further interventions to deal with the collateral effects of the previous ones.

A highly romantic idea(l).

This is sometimes accompanied with a cynical fatalism as in "It will all turn out for the better", or "It's all part of a bigger plan" abandonment to human consults.
The inability to differentiate natural from artificial where world of man is confused for the world itself.
Confusion between the mathematical/geometric method of human cognition with a universal plan, a hidden logic, a reason.
Fatalism as in the faith in this belief, and how it is directed by some underlying will, some reason, some consciousness, some order.

@

no integrity, no honour, no accountability.
The motive here is living a life in ignorant bliss, and the future can take care of itself.
disconnecting from past, tradition, inheritance, is what creates this me-me, individuality.
a shallow birth to death identity, earmarked by consuming, pleasuring; masturbation of mind and body.

What do lies matter when you die and you hold yourself accountable to nothing and nobody?
All that matters is fooling as many who are alive along with you, as possible : pride of the degenerate.

Eat, drink, fuck, pleasure yourself in any which way, consume and be consumed, use any orifice for any deed, and then die knowing you were not judged and could not be judged by anyone, at any time, for any reason.
Nobody knew you, or could ever understand your complexity.

@

One of the nihilist's favourite lies is how complex humanity is, and in particular how complex he is.
He may think all is knowable, but this all never includes him.
He may claim to know a dog better than it knows itself but this never applies to him, in relation to a higher mind.

He cannot be accurately understood, valued, known, unless he tells you himself.
He is true to his own word, because words are magical, mystical and he controls them.
Nobody can judge him, because there is no standard which applies to him...all being subjective standards, he thinks.
No matter what he does, how he behaves, what choices he makes, nothing matters, and all is correctable.
Nothing is determined by the immutable past, forever condemning him to repeat these behaviours, and choices.

He is his own standard.
This is the basic principle of nihilism, with only the golden Rule, the social contract, as the limit.
All is morally maintained.
A Christian threat/promise.

It bleeds over to feminism and the idea that females are complicated, incomprehensible to men....they exists on another plain, a different planet.
this is how female nihilists, modern women, comfort themselves when they behave in contradiction to their social memetic norms, and in accordance to their natural instinctual proclivities.

Why do they change their minds constantly, why do they contradict their words with their actions, why do they do the things they do...nobody knows, nobody can know, they are genius, they are governed by a mysterious logic.

@

Victim psychology is the emotional string binding all nihilists into one cohesive group.
There are many shared identifiers, masked as multiplicity and the many ways the real is avoided and escaped, and victim psychology is one of the central themes in their mindset.

First, they are victims of chance, of the world, born as this sex, or that race, born in this situation and that circumstance, born of a past that they do not like nor feel proud of.
If not of the world then they are victim of another, a will outside themselves.

And for this reason, all who expose them to a world that challenges their delusions is the v one victimizing them.
Because all is subjective, in their minds, even evil, immorality, the indifferent unjust world, is also a subjective construct, and they the victim of an evil mind.

@

Nihilism or any degree of it, is only viable when there is a protective umbrella, a cocooning will, to protect it from the repercussions of denying, ignoring, dismissing reality.
The natural consequence of any level of detachment from reality is death, or some severe cost.

The only way it can persist and multiply, is because there is an ulterior motive for preserving it.
The only ulterior motive is because of Nihilism delusion and its vulnerability and dependence upon others, to maintain itself.
It is a mental virus propagated and maintained through weakness, dependence, inferiority...which is the majority vote.

The "Might is Right" is exposed as belong "Right is Might" and those seeing clearly honestly, have an advantage over those that hide, forget, deny, reject a world they cannot escape.
As always, nihilism inverts concepts.
It presumes that it is because some subjective mind says so that it is subjugated to a world being exposed by such a mind.
It presumes that only hypnosis, trickery, rhetoric, is at play, because for it only words have substance and are real.

It confuses success, dominance, based on clarity, honesty, objectivity, for a imposition of subjectivity, because it requires a mind to direct it, to tell it, to lead it.
He who sees the world as it is, and not as he wishes it were, will succeed within it.
He who is blind to it will accuse the first of being a manipulator, because he denies objectivity so he can only understand dominance subjectively.
In the nihilist's mind the individual decides what is objective, and so objectivity for it is a subjective construct.

It cannot understand a world outside human opinions, determining if these opinions are more, or less accurate.

@

One of the first presumptions of the nihilist, one based on all that has already been mentioned, is that all deserves respect, or all is worthy of consideration.
It's logic follows from the either/or foundation - no absolute means all is ignorant, in equal degree, because there is no objective way to determine what is more objective and what is less so - no hierarchies.

The absolute serves two functions: 1] it provides an external logos, an authority, to subjugate all subjectivities to - equality nuder a one God, a one specialist, a one mind, and 2] in the absence of said absolute external source of authority all are uniformly ignorant, the negative becoming a unifying negative.

No other way to decide is ever explored and accepted.
This is why objective reality must be ridiculed or converted into something they can dismiss as subjective or as a human construct.
Essentially, no matter what you say it is to be taken seriously or as seriously as anything anybody says, and this is most effective when what is said is about something the Nihilist feels insecure about, such as the injustice and cruelty of nature, or the immutability of the past.
to not abide by this parity of deservedness is an aggressive act.
The only deciding factor is majority vote, or some popularly accepted authority figure, which has ceased to be the god-head.
In other word, only via a proxy mind, is the subjective evaluated as superior-inferior, since the objective world cannot be evaluated directly, without discovering how indifferent to subjective interpretation and cruel, unforgiving, it is.

Basic things like the evolutionary function of the orifices, and of the sex organs, and how appearances indicate essence, are dismissed on the grounds that no authority has validated this, and there is no real absolute way to determine what is most probable.
In other words, the nihilist chooses to ignore his own sense if this protects him from a disturbing perception.

The matter of complexity enters the scene when the mounting evidence tilts the balance in a direction which the Nihilists does not like.
Now all is too complex to decide.
This is particularly so when it comes to humans.
Nihilist logic indicates that if there is no absolute certainty then all possibilities are equally valid, escaping the obvious.
Once more, more probable versus less probable is dismissed in favour of parity through shared ignorance, or using the negative as an argument for the positive.
Christians claim that in the absence of no evidence disproving their God then all possibilities are open, which then gives credence to the emotional angle, turning it into the decisive component.

@

The nihilist contains his thinking within cultural and social realities. He cannot explore further back, discovering from where memes emerge, and how genes manifest as memes, then expressed as principles, ideals, morals, world-views.

For modern all must be the product of a reason, a will, a human motive, and nothing pre-existed the emergence of social and economic systems. This is also part of the inversion. Where memes emerge from genes, in their convoluted minds, the reverse is the case.
All genetics is the products of memes, of socio-economic artifices, and human interventions.
Ergo all is noetic, as in founded on human prejudices, requiring an external god, authority, to validate them.
Millions of years of evolution ignored for the last 2-3 thousands years of human culture.
Therefore, for nihilist’s gender is a human fabrication, having no connection to sexual roles, as these evolved to facilitate reproduction.
This connects to the logic that all orifices are human playthings to be used in whatever way the individual wishes, having to predetermined genetic function and reason for evolving.
And if gender is a human artifice, a social construct, then so is sex, and why not race, and appearance in general. Now that man can intervene technologically, with techniques, upon the manifestation of thousands of years of evolution, covering them up, nothing is except from human covering-up and correcting.
And when such a mind, raised in sheltering environment, is never made to face the consequences of his own stupidity, he becomes cocky, dismissing suffering, need, war, violence, all that troubles and confronts his ideal world, his desirable reality.
He then accuses others of wanting to change the world, when he's already done so, and is now attempting to complete the task by replacing reality with human artifices.
Unable to complete the task he suffers from the pains of an evil world contradicting his naive premises.
Then the dilemma arises.

@

[Dæmon]

The Nihilist despises every attempt to connect words, to appearances, particularly when dealing with humans.
The attempt itself is ridiculed, because he denies the existence of an objective world which would connect the subjective via a symbol a word.
For instance, gender becomes entirely a human construct, and has no reference to anything outside human brains, and human social conventions.
The discipline of philosophy is about referencing other minds, essentially a discussion about philosophy, and not the world itself, which is rejected as being accessible or approachable.
Also the word "truth" referring to a more accurate description of the real is made into an entirely subjective absolute that can only be imposed and accepted on faith.
To connect the symbol, the abstraction, to a source, the noumenon to the phenomenon, would take away their central method of escape.
First comes the word, and it is the alpha and the omega.
The word is no longer a tool for dealing with the world but a toy, a ploy, a way of dismissing the world by reattaching the symbol the abstraction back to other noetic artifices.
The mission for the nihilist is to retain the word as an abstraction, a human construct, with no reference to anything outside human minds, because only then can he claim that gender, race, as social inventions, and truth, if it is not absolute, is untrue, and so a democratic decision is required, and only then can male/female cease to have any meaning outside social fashions, and only then can the concept "human" be stripped of its original meaning and become a mystical, magical, idea(l), embracing and saving all who are included within its bosom.
The word "philosophy" is of particular interest for us, because its objective has ceased to be clarity about world, or objectivity, which can then result in wisdom, clarity, a useful application, but it has become a discussion about philosophy - philosophy is talk about philosophy, or philosophers, as the subjective mind can only recognize other subjective minds.
As such, any perspective that challenges this delusion is considered aggressive, or based on purely subjective criteria, such as "I say so".
The idea that an opinion, expressing a perspective, is more or less accurate, more or less objective, based on the apparent, the phenomenon, and the indifferent to all subjective perspectives, world of (inter)activity is dismissed so as to maintain the all is subjective universe.
Even the word "world" has come to refer to the human world, and in relation to human constructs.
World now means humanity, and humanity means world. Not humanity as a species, a pattern, within the world, by humanity AS the world.
Gender being now explained as entirely a human artifice, but nothing else, such as morality, or love, or compassion.
Nihilists are selective as to which words are mystical, profound abstractions and which are evil abstractions easily rejected from human discourse.
Words like love, empathy, respect, sex, race, are not permitted to be connected to anything but back to human noumena.
Empiricism has a limit.

A cult of victim of weakness.

@

An interesting by-product of all of this comes about in time.
The Nihilist begins to believe that denouncing the one who exposes them to an objective world, or a subjective interpretation of world which is more lucid, can protect him from what is being described.
This would be like ridiculing the one who claims death is the end and there is no afterlife because this will ensure an afterlife.
It agrees with the notion that all it takes to change the world is to change your mind.

The belief rest on all that has been mentioned, and it has faith in the assumption that if what is being said about the objective world is rejected, ignored, dismissed, that this is an escape from what was being described.
Kill the messenger and the message is dead, but what if the message was accurate?
Have they dealt with reality by slandering the one who exposes them to it?
Sheltering ensures that the immediate effects of being wrong are never experienced as severely, because of the cocooning within humanity, these nihilists fight to preserve, for good reason.
Only within the bosom of a multiplicity of like-minded individuals can the singular person escape the costs and risks of being wrong.
We call this the social safety net.
Every careless, stupid choice, is protected from its own stupidity, propagating the delusion that all perspectives, superior/inferior, are equal, or that the consequences are so minimal as to make the inferior mind arrogant.
Like when a teenager lives under his parent's roof and because he has it easy begins to believe he deserves it, and that it is because of his qualities.
How many times have you heard a female say she intimidates men?
She confuses fear of the institution that is protecting her for fear of her, because of her spirit, her mind etc.

Consider the arrogance of a simpleton who has memorized a few word, references, data, deferring to famous figures or obscure ones to imply a unique understanding, believing that this is philosophy.
This is like an art critique, an art historian, confusing his knowledge for artistry, and including himself amongst the artists he knows by name.
 

@

The importance of words for the nihilist is evident in his desperation to use them to insinuate what he cannot display.
He is quick to accuse the other of what he is most guilty of, he brags, and declares himself victor, trying to implant, with words, what he fears he cannot with deeds.

He never says anything clearly and honestly.
He is always insinuating, laying down an escape route as he slowly creeps forward with words.
He never takes a position. He is always flattering, fawning, implying this and that, at the same time, remaining aloof, and imprecise so that he can never be exposed without him having a plausible deniability.
It is why he talks through proxies.
He is always of two-minds, or more, uncertain sceptical to a cynical degree, insecure and desperate to not lose face.

Humour is how he evades the discomfort of his nature.
A quick, stress releasing, evasion.
He is always potentially joking, or is he being serious?
Depends on the reaction of the other.
He is always joking, or is he?
Nothing is direct and honest about him. He is a hypocrite and a lair, protecting a weak, fragile ego, from the devastating determinations of nature.

This he calls his complexity.
Nobody can know him can ever see him - he alludes the experts, he mesmerizer all.
He is a mystery wrapped in an enigma, sprinkled with fairy dust.
No category can define him.
Words are toys, and he plays.
The objective is childish escape from the real.
His entire life is a testament to the devastation of this adolescent method.

@

When the nihilist speaks he speaks about noumena, abstractions, that only exist in human minds, such as equality, justice, morality, fairness, similarity, one/nil, whole, God and so on.
For these concepts thee is no external reference.
They exist through sharing, memetic propagation, and are maintained through cultural rules, ideals, traditions, common value standards.

This is why he presumes that all talk about an objective world as outside and indifferent to these human constructs, that what is being discussed in another abstraction with no external reference.
It is because he bases his delusions on "I say so" then supported in "We say so" that he assumes that all perspectives are a declarative "I, or we, say so".
The difference between the two, in his mind, the only difference, is popularity. The quantitative difference in the "we" determines which "we" is validated, and all other standards, particularly those independent from quantitative standards, are to be discounted as evil, or authoritarian.
In such a case, the existence or not of Allah is entirely dependent no how many can be converted to Islam, and whether a child born with mental/physical dysfunctions is to be considered good or bad is a matter of popular support.
This is why he desperately seeks communal approval and he strives to impress the majority, thinking that this has an effect on what is real.

This is why connecting the abstractions that can be connected to phenomena, and ignoring those that only have a reference back to other noetic constructs, causes him distress.
He loses control over good/bad, and their manipulation using emotional techniques.

This is the Bottom-Up thinking which he contradicts with a Top-Down inversion, claiming that both are the same.
From the vantage point of one who is interested in approaching the objective, and avoiding the corruption of subjectivity, as much as possible, all words, symbolizing abstraction, have to be connected to a world independent from all interpretations of it, and those abstractions (noumena) which cannot find such a reference point should be exposed as being pure noetic metaphors, referring back to human abstractions.
Who and what is superior in nature is never in doubt, it is only within Nihilistic social systems protecting weakness, where things become confusing, and are open for debate and verbal acrobatics, including evasion.
The Nihilist can never and will never define his words, or try to connect them to perceived phenomena, because it is precisely that he does not, training them as vague dictionary references with no connection to the real, where he feels independent, strong, clever....safe.
He remains elusive, sceptical, cynical, never taking a stand on anything, never wanting to be clear and direct, always feigning and evading and changing his angles,keeping open as many escape routes as possible.

@

Organic hierarchies and relationships.
All is organic and all follows the rules the SuperOrganism enforces.
The only distinction within this paradigm is utility, as in more or less useful and more or less harmonious.

What the cell was before it was integrated no longer applies and in time is forgotten.
This is why past is always dismissed, forgotten, denied, and why all words can only refer to noetic artifices. There is no world outside the SuperOrganism within which the organism, the cell, finds power, comfort, utility, safety, meaning, purpose.
SuperOrganism is God, and if God is dead a new SuperOrganism must quickly replace Him.
The cell is unable to give itself meaning, purpose, direction - it entirely dependent, and can no longer function outside the SuperOrganic premises.
Defending the SuperOrganic rules, principles, order, is a matter of survival for it.

SuperOrganism = society, culture, socio-economic system - meme.
The genetic has been absorbed into the meme. It has surrendered will, identity, independence, for the sake of survival, and the advantages of synergy - power through association.
Notice that for the nihilist his well-being, his sense of self and his self-evaluation is always a product of other, as in majority, popularity, communal appreciation.

It's particular subjectivity is associated with the SuperSubjectivity.
The world outside, as in objective world independent from subjectivity altogether, is non-existent....and/or evil.

@

The Nihilist reduces the topic, the issue, philosophy in general, down to the absurd and then dismisses it as absurd, so as to hide his own intent and his own absurdity.

He creates decay and then uses it to justify his own decay.
To put it more bluntly, he indulges in simplicity and stupidity, and then accuses that which he has reduced to this level of being nothing more than absurd and stupid.
To put it in yet another way, the Modern reduces all to word-games, and then denounces it as only word-play, including all attempts to connect the words being used to what is independent from words.

The cynical motive of the pseudo-intellectual, hedonistic, Modern: by all means hide inferiority.
Find the lowest-common-denominator and build a castle upon it, inviting all to settle down.  

Because when all is levelled down to a uniform stupidity all that remains is masturbation.

@

Another example of Nihilistic inverted thinking...

The Modern variant of this mental dis-ease, confuses emoting, emotionally based reasoning, thinking infected with emotional appeals and considerations, with passion, and the passionate defence of objective reasoning.
In his pretentious psyche, to pretend you are aloof, and distant, and cynical, indicates a cold reasoning, which must, obviously, be accompanied with the benefit of the doubt towards every absurdity presented before him as deserving consideration, and respect.

This is almost as insane as their confusion of knowledge with understanding.
Most cannot tell the difference.
It is why they scavenge books and internet spaces for data to present as evidence of their intelligence and quality of mind.
It is also why amongst Modern education, or the correct kind of training, is synonymous with equalizing intelligence, and why credentials ans social status is so important when trying to impress them.
He has no other way of determining quality than quantity.
Without an external authority he is unable to say what is more reasonable and what is absurd.

Easily exploited sheeple.

@

For the Nihilist his theories are meant for an ideal creature, existing in an ideal world and an ideal universe.
His perspectives are applicable not in the real, but in the surreal, the supra-real, and not in the natural but in the realm of the super-natural.

Once disappointed, and having awakened to his own naivete, if he ever does, the only other solution is the opposite.

If not the ideal then nothing.
Either/Or.

If no absolute is possible then the nil is all he has.
No gradation.
Absolute 1 and 0.

What can be worse, for him, than a hierarchy where he finds himself at the bottom?
If all cannot find Utopia then all, we all, must be in Dystopia, or if not Paradise where he is also included, then all must be damned to hell.

@

For the nihilist math is not another language, using abstractions. the most abstract language of all is not to be doubted, mostly because it produces techniques and technologies it considers positive.
Yet, he cannot define what one or nil are, nor point to a one or a nil.

It has no ability to comprehend the relationship between an abstraction (noumenon) and the real (phenomenon), or how a static symbol can adequately represent a fluctuating world.

All it knows is that experts, his replacement priests, use these symbols to produce magic.

How science might be directed through funding, when dealing with the socially touchy subjects, is not to be taken into consideration.
All it knows is that 1+1=2, always....when 1 is taken for granted.

Binary brains exporting their dualism imitating organic processes.
Self-referential logic, based on biological methods, replicating biological organs
None of this registers.

@

On the lower end of the Nihilistic spectrum we have the absolutists, the either/or fundamentalists with their binary logic and their dualistic certainties.

On the upper end we have the terminally sceptical, the unable to decide between either/or, preferring the continuous state of undecided procrastination.

The first, being the more infantile, live in a black/white world and they conveniently have decided that the truth, as they define it, is on their side - the universe has them as the central theme.
The second are eternally cynical so as to never take a stand.
Everything has its positives and its negatives and they are reluctant to say which is more on the positive side and which is on the negative side.
The concepts of positive/negative fitting conveniently to the previous group's good/evil, with humanity being the core, the balancing point for the entire cosmos.

The first are fanatics, and they quickly fall back to reciting the code, as they have learned it.
They identify with WE.
They are always safe within the collective, the herd, the big SueprOrganic Other, the Divine Self.
They accept responsibility through other.

The second are hypocrites, sometimes on this side, then on the other, never actually saying anything directly, clearly, succinctly, indubitably.
They are always on the side of ME, and being on that side, the easiest side to be on, they switch sides, they change their minds, they never expose themselves to the possibility of hurt, and ridicule, and shame.
They are always safe inside themselves.
They never accept responsibility for anything.
They are always unseen, able to escape detection, nobody has or can ever know them, unable to hold onto ideals not pertaining to their ego.
They consider themselves open-minded because they never decide, and are continuously open to suggestions, which they then de-construct to dismiss, in the event that things become too threatening.
They find pride in being liked by everyone, simply by agreeing with whatever they say.
This is clever, for them: to trick without detection, by telling the other exactly what he wants to hear.

@

The Nihilist exists in a reality that only exists as a hypothetical future world, or some hidden world, or a Utopian world populated by ideal humans and ideal creatures with psychologies and behaviors not of this world.

It is the syndrome of Christianity, and Communism, two of the many offspring Nihilism gave birth to.
The christian and communist fails, (is a sinner, has not been educated/trained sufficiently yet, is unenlightened, has not received the divine light) but the ideal is perfect, meant for perfect creatures constructing a perfect reality.

Philosophy becomes a defense of this perfect Utopia against the evil forces of reality that disrupt its development.
Instead of being the discipline that explores and describes the world as honestly and clearly as possible so that then THEN, a human can chart a course, philosophy has become a infantile exploration of the fantastic, the hypothetical, the "what if"and the hidden underneath this brutality this hated by them, world.
As I noted before, the deal is that you will not disturb the delusions of the other and he will not disturb yours, enabling all to exist in their own personal reality.
THIS is what is called subjectivity and why it is so popular among them. This is why perspectivism is a Holy Grail for them, and why an Objective world, other than the one authorized experts offer them, cleaned of anything that may be not politically-correct, and insulting, is attacked as a fabrication.

Only an authorized expert is to be respected as a proxy between them and reality, not only telling them what they sense but what it means.
And my authorized what is meant is that he has been vetted as offering the right kind of analysis.
Many examples of scientists who have not repeated the shared myths and faced personal consequences are available to all.
No man would risk his career, and his family's well-being by saying anything honest about the holy trinity of Modernity: homosexuality, women, and race.
The first has been taken of the list of psychological dysfunctions where it stood for decades.
In a few decades transsexuals, perhaps even pedophiles can hope for such generosity.

@

The Nihilist has inverted the relationship of symbol (word/number) and world.
This inversion is the central defining characteristic of Nihilism, in all its forms.  
It is an inversion of noumenon relating to phenomenon.
The symbol, the word, having been detached from its reference to the apparent, can be used in whatever manner suits the Nihilists motive: his desire to detach from reality and exist within his mind.
This is a movement away form the objective world, towards the subjective interpretation of world which, now, having been stripped of its original intent of representing a world independent from the interpreting mind, becomes a world in itself.
The word, from symbol referring to an abstraction of world, is converted to the world, or it is debased as no more than a plaything to be used in whatever way the mind desires, since, the individual, is protected from its own errors in judgement, or the severity of the consequences of errors are decreased by the collective, within which the word/symbol acquires a new utility other than symbolizing an abstraction of world.

The word (noumenon) no longer determined by world (phenomenon), but the world determined by the word.
As such purely human constructs like morality, meaning, one, God, 1/0 are taken as the starting point, to which the world, the apparent must adhere.    
And because the word comes first its place in the causal chain can be chosen at will, just as one chooses where in a sentence to place a word changing the meaning of what is being expressed.

The magical relationship of Nihilist and the words he uses manifests in the belief that if he repeats a sentence long enough, and if others begin to believe him, that this constitutes the realization of what the sentence is symbolizing, or that if he dismisses a phenomenon using only words, that the phenomenon ceases to apply to him, or ceases to exist.
If he is exposed as a hypocrite he will quickly denounce all words as meaningless, and equally disconnected from the world.
Again, if the absolute one, positive, is not to be attained the Nihilist prefers a uniformity of nil, so as to escape the personal implications.

@

For the modern civility is a psychological safety-net; a protection from memetic culling, corresponding to the Nihilistic system which provides protective assurances against genetic culling.
Reassured, the Modern can claim anything he wants, to anyone he wants, just as long as he remains civil and within social conventions, and he can expect, nay demand, to be treated with civility and respect no matter how absurd what he is saying is.
In this way the Modern remains immune to his own mental weaknesses, just as physical weaknesses are defended against the worst case scenario by a system of institutionalized protective measures.
Sheltering propagates unfit genes, constantly reintroducing them into the gene pool, so does civility propagate unfit minds, and ideals, constantly reintroducing them into the meme pool.
This constant reintroduction disrupts progress as the same delusions are dealt with repeatedly, when they re-emerge using different words, symbols, metaphors.
The same ideas are reborn using new words, and demand to be considered over and over again.
Civility permits mass participation, by leveling all down to an average where extremes are excluded but everyone mediocre is ensured an expression.
As a consequence the mediocre are permitted their pride, mistaking institutionalized protections for their own prowess, and all are permitted the illusion of dominance.

@

The Modern infected with the Nihilistic virus is not worth discussing anything with.
Having been sheltered, allowing him to formulate and exist within his own subjective reality, all discussions with him concerning the objectively real become centred on his own subjective, self-referential, world view.
Any contact with such a mind, concerning the world, is an exercise in futility.
There is, for him, no external to all subjective positions, objective world, and so you must enter his subjective reality to get through to him, if at all possible, and/or desirable.
The objectivist has, at least, settled on the starting position that both participants in a debate, in any (inter)action, coexist within a shared world, and then they challenge each other's interpretation of it, trying to decide who has the most lucid, most objective, interpretation of it.
No such agreement is possible with a Nihilist, using subjectivity as his shield.
For such a mind the conflict is not over who understands the objective world the best, but whose subjective world is most desirable: from conflict to seduction.

When he accuses others of declaring themselves gods, or gurus, or forcing their subjectivity upon all, he is exposing his own motive, and openly declaring how he thinks.
With no external to all subjective interpretation standard to evaluate which perspective is more objective, more accurate, more lucid, for him the debate is an "I say so" struggle to impose one's Will upon other, and his resistance to an other's "I say so" is considered evidence of spirit; of independent thinking.
Refusal to accept the other's interpretation of the world as superior to his own is, for him, a declaration of sovereignty from all interpretations of world other than his own.
He is his own standard of evaluating.
No God required, and no Objective world either – solipsism.
It is impossible for him to consider the option that an other's subjective interpretation of the objective world can ever be superior to his own, since the "all is subjective" means, for him, all is equally ignorant, weak, dependent, self-referential etc.
He refuses to acknowledge any standard outside subjectivity, and so all debates are a battle of wills.
He avoids defining the terms he uses, because this would demand the placing of the definition within a shared world – if not a shared objective reality then a shared culture, a shared meme.

Disengaging from such minds, as soon as they are identified, is the only option – one it will, undoubtedly, consider a victory, evaluating the other's frustration as the result of his formidable intellectual prowess, his force of will; flattering himself by mistaking the cause.

@

[Dæmon]

What the Modern refuses to do, on a consistent basis, is to define the words he is using.
He is either incapable of doing so, because the words he uses, referring to noumena, are adopted from another, which he parrots without fully understanding the concepts, or because he intuitively feels that doing so will expose the nature of his own thinking, which is no more than emoting, or connecting abstractions back to abstractions that only have meaning within human minds and no reference outside of them.

In the first case he is entirely dependent upon an external source, an authority to give it guidance concerning what it is seeing, thinking, believing.
In the second case, to define the words, symbolizing the abstractions in his mind, would take away the advantage of evasion.
For him words are to be sued as toys, or as methods of evading detachment; of causing confusion so as to not be seen for what you are; what you are within the world.
He will never anchor his words, his abstractions, to the phenomenal world which he feels insecure towards.
He is most insecure here, and here is where he avoids contact.
He prefers the noetic world of abstraction, and when he says world he means the human world of shared subjectivity – the memetic reality he is accustomed to and feels comfortable within.
He will never define a word by connecting it to phenomena not manufactured by human interventions, or which are not entirely noetic inventions with no meaning outside human brains.
If there is one central theme to Modernity, a defining core to Nihilism expressed in its multifarious forms, it is this detachment of abstractions from the world outside human artifices.
This is what they mean by "subjectivity", and why they refuse to accept an objective standard, if not relating to an external consciousness, a God, or the collective consciousness of what is a collective subjectivity, a Nihilistic meme which excludes the world and includes human artifices.
To define the word, which is the Nihilist's greatest weapon, is to cripple him, and his desire to escape, evade, the world as it is outside his needs.
To connect the word, symbolizing the abstraction (noumenmon), to a phenomenon independent from human interventions, is to disarm him of all his contrivances and lies.
His subjectivity would crumble without these noetic frames.
The world, as it is, would be too much for him to bear, outside the sheltering cave of words and symbols, the linguistic cocoon, the all-inclusive, forgiving, tent of Nihilism.

@

Because the modern's subjectivity is determined and sustained by the collective subjective, his only source of identification, of self-evaluation, is this collective otherness, we call humanity.
With no objective world to draw inspiration from, his only alternatives are what is most common, what the majority concerns itself with – the lowest-common-denominator.
This is most often sex, in our Modern secular times when God has been abandoned as dead.
Sex and the means to accentuate, increase its potency, and its recurrence.
The more sophisticated Modern Nihilist will filter out the vulgarity of the physical act and reduce the identifier to that of pleasure – hedonism.
Hedonism including all forms of self-gratification, free from all objective standards; pleasure idealized, abstracted into a noetic artifice.
To convince as many as possible of what is true for the subjective mind, is fundamental to reaffirm his "reality".
Quantity to substitute for the absence of substance, of quality.
The fewer reference points to reality the Modern’s opinions have, the more it strives to compensate by convincing as many others as possible of their validity.
With no objective standard outside all human subjectivity to base his evaluations upon all he is left with is this inter-subjective, interdependent solipsism.
It is why he is always civil, polite, flattering, willing to consider the absurd seriously, able to continuously offer the benefit of the doubt, forever occupying itself with the infantile, always emoting, forever indulging in the trivial, and the mundane.

Caught between a refusal of the objective world that would shatter his delusions and a dependence upon others, towards whom he harbours a secret resentment, his only option is for the one that costs him the smallest degree of anxiety, and threatens his untested ego the least.
Seducing as many other humans to his cause, or being included within theirs, is of the utmost importance to the Modern.
Words being grooming externalized, tools of seduction, makes words his artistic focus.
Manipulating words, to create the right effect in other, is the greatest source of pride, for him.
Words that calm, that offer hope, that cultivate positive feelings towards him, as the source of these word; words that comfort, include, trigger emotional responses, are the filaments of his spider's web; the fibres of his comfortable quilt.

@

The Modern is most proud of his self-referential logic, failing to understand how its law of non-contradiction is a reference to its internal consistency, once the starting proposition has been established as an absolute given.
For example 1+1=2 is “logical” in that it follows from the presumption of 1/0 binary code, and the law of non-contradiction is a reference to the conclusion being consistent with this presumed starting premise.
The mathematical formula is logical in that it remains true to its presumptions.

This is where the modern surrenders to symbolisms, replacing mythologies with metaphors, and representations.
The numerical value of one is only a symbol of a human abstraction that has no reference outside the human brain, yet for the Modern this abstraction of all abstractions, is taken literally, rather than figuratively.
All modern thinking is contained within this binary 1/0 logic, which is but a continuance of the dualistic good/evil moral code.
The artistic nature of language is lost on the Modern.
That the word, like the number, are but references to noetic models, representing a simplification/generalization of a fluctuating (inter)active world, can never be understood by such an inartistic mind.
The quality of Modern art reflecting this loss of artistic depth.

Immersing himself into the symbolic, he is literally engulfed by its Nihilistic premises, because both one and nil are expressions of an end of existence, when existence is understood as dynamic (inter)activity.
These are the binary boundaries, of the Nihilistic paradigm.
The modern surrenders to them, because he is witless, spared the stress to cultivate his mind, or perish because he is unable to do so, and because they offer an easy certainty of good/bad, negative/positive, noetic artifices.    

@

For the Modern the positive is an “ought”, a “thou shall”…a commandment, a mission given from above, given from without.
So, where there is only fluidity, he seeks singularities; where there is only diversity, he seeks sameness; where there is indifference, he seeks a will with a motive; where there is fluctuations he seeks the negative/positive.
In its absence of meaning, purpose, wholeness, morality… goodness, as he calls these human projections, he strives towards them in the unknown.
He manufactures them and then places them as noetic direction finders, guaranteeing his eventual attainment of all he desires and is lacking in the world.
And because these constructs are entirely human he is destined to fail, over and over again, only to blame others and not himself and his delusions.

@

The loss of God is a seminal point in a Modern’s psyche.
As traumatic as the loss of a parent is to a child, before it has had time to mature.
Maintained in a constant state of adolescence the Modern experiences the “death of god” as a traumatic event in his awakening to reality, if he ever reaches that stage of psychological development at all.
The natural progression from Judeo-Christianity towards secular humanism is a progression from God, as the mitigating will between Modern man and reality, the chaotic, uncertain, world of (inter)activity, towards the adolescent stage of clueless rebelliousness, cynicism, experimentation, careless abandonment, rejection of all external sources of determining power, which would include nature, as the sum of all nurturing, the endless search for identity, which settles on the convenient fashionable identity as self-creation.
Without a Creator God, the modern makes of himself his own Creator.

The loss of Divine protection, of man’s previous universal importance, is compensated for in different ways.
The magical power of words, once used in prayer to influence the chaotic unknown, is replaced with the magical power of numbers.
In both cases the utility remains that of mystical intervention upon reality.
Words/Symbols used not as tools but as incantations, offering an entry into the secret world of universal consciousness.
God is replaced by the concept Universe, and given no less a willful existence – numbers become insights into this God’s mind.
Numerical chants.

The loss of God also represents the loss of the go-between man and natural injustices; between man and the “cruel” indifference of reality.
To compensate, the Modern makes all injustice a product of social factors.
Despite the absence of a God the Modern insists on retaining a direct influence over himself, and the immutable, determining past.
For the Modern all unfair natural divergences are no more than by-products of society.
This is why rejection of the past/nature is the necessary path towards his salvation.
He retains the ability to correct these injustices, and return all to its uniform state, which is presupposed as the natural human condition.
Naturally occurring “injustice”, divergence, is correctable when it is reduced to a consequence of society, or human meddling.
Man has fallen into sin, as it were, and must find his way back to the divine path towards godliness – this is enlightenment for the Modern: the continuing eradication of all disparity, suffering, injustice, unfairness, which he himself created, presumably.
Everything from race to sex are placed upon the injustices of human social conventions, and in a remarkable ironic twist, the Modern imposes a social negation of what he has presupposed as being social constructs. He regains self-control, the ability to intervene upon nature by making it all a social construct, which he can then correct, heal.  
The social activist is a kind of holy man – a monk.
His mission is to return humanity back to its original sacred place: a state of uniform parity where divergence is but a dream, an illusion, and all is One = the Divine mind, in the Judeo-Christian paradigm.
The image of a Modern’s Utopia is no different than the image of a Christian Paradise.

Humanity becomes a stand-in for God.
Uniformity is the same as saying absolute order – the leveling of possibilities to a singular absolutely certain probability.
Loss of God’s order is replaced by a human one, where all humans find their place within this Divine concept of “humanity”.
Everything that stands in the way of this absolute harmony is the evil Satanic.  

@

The relationship the modern mind has to language is the decisive factor of his subsequent Nihilism; his disconnect from reality, the world, and his alienation from himself, his past, his nature is only possible through his application of language.
For the Modern language is not a reference to reality, it is not a tool, an artistic form representing the world.
For the Modern language is simply a way of connecting to an other Modern - a subjective to subjective merging to construct a shared Subjective within which both can find comfort.
This is why quantities of subjectivities are a form of strengthening of the shared Subjective, the inter-subjective, or communal memetic, "real".
All inclusion, governed by the rules of reciprocity (Golden Rule = you do not disturb my delusion and I shall do the same for you), is the herd psychology finding shelter, in the multiplicity which can then exclude the world.

Connecting the noumenon to the phenomenon has been replaced with the need to connect the noumenon with an other noumenon.
Representing the world is transformed into representing, presenting, self to otherness.
The art of depiction, representation, is transformed into seducing, selling self, impressing.
Engaging, connecting, to the world using the medium of metaphor, words, art, is transformed into an obsession with connecting self with other.

@

Social conventions, civility, morality, education, are all meant to preserve the sense of parity.
The confusion between knowing and understanding, and the easy access to data, and to narratives explaining their meaning, maintains the illusion of uniform potentials.
The Modern parrots information, most of the time unable to explain them, or offering a learned explanation, and believes he is part of a uniform humanity, having achieved the potential of an idealized, theoretical, human.
A shared knowledge base, interpreted by the experts who step in to conveniently translate any data which may prove socially disruptive, in socially acceptable ways, by covering up the essence of nature and diversity, also demands a common pool of acceptable ambitions.
The utility of the data is funnelled through socially acceptable applications.
What is not marketable to the masses is useless.

Civility and conventional modes of behaving is also meant to preserve the illusion of parity by restricting application of understanding to within what is called acceptable limits.
A shared behavioural standard harmonizes the superior with the inferior, since behaviour can be imitated, just as data can be regurgitated.
Training animals to behave human-like is no different than training/educating a Modern to limit his actions, his thinking his language use, his ambitions to within parameters that will include all as potential trainees.
Behavioural standards do more than inhibit the exposure of weakens to its own inferiority, it preserves and cultivates the illusion of genetic parity.
One is expected to treat the other with dignity, respect, no matter how absurd he might be.
One is also expected to contain his thinking, acting to within limits that will not hurt, insult, make someone else uncomfortable.
The weaker one begins to believe that this respect is due to his own qualities, and not because of this imposition of behavioural limits, which also include political-correctness.
In time the weaker ones demand to be taken seriously, to be heard, to be respected, and treated with dignity, believing he deserves this – the sense of entitlement.  
Having never experienced the viciousness of being exposed as a fool, as a weakling, as psychologically stunted, the Modern is captivated by arrogance founded on social conventions.  

@

Emotion is how a Modern gauges his effect, his utility, his value within the community of like-minded - the herd.
Emotion is what he manipulates and tries to trigger, with every word he uses - words evoking imagery, or feelings, emotions, that have not yet been rationalized.

Emotion is what he builds upon, and always returns to when faced with conflict, or a world indifferent to his emotions.
Emotion is his greatest tool, his biggest weapon, and his greatest vulnerability.
Every resistance to his emoting is judged on emotional grounds, explored for emotional weakness to exploit.
Emotional effect is how he determines his own successes and failures.  

Emotion is where the noetic refers back to, as if it were some phenomenon out there, independent from human brains.
Emotion is how he is made malleable, and how he remains a manimal.

Emotion stimulated by sensations; sensational, impressive, primal triggering mechanisms.
His arguments are always emotive, just as his motives.  
He declares himself complex, enlightened, yet he can be summed up when the directing emotion is discovered.  

@

When a particularly obtuse type of nihilist speaks of reality, of pragmatism, he means emotional.
His every concept must be connected to an emotional circumstance, brought down to an emotive level.
He is unable to understand what God, morality, human means, without an emotional connection.
He must mystify the words, so as to connect them to his emotions.  
He uses the terms "moral/immoral" as universal good/bad concepts, referring back to God/Satan dualism.
He demands a universal application for a human construct, after having dismissed the survival function which depends on the objective, and has no meaning without an objective.
He assumes that an act is, in and of itself, good or evil, without any reference to anything earthly, like a motive, a goal.
The reference would reduce the concepts to a reality from where these abstractions remain detached.
The only acceptable connection being back to the mind, and to emotion.  

Without a God how else can he find a Universal application for good/bad, the polar ends of his stunted mind.
He is obsessed with the concepts.
They are simple, clear, and literal, in his stunted mind.
The concepts of good/bad are pure noetic construct, abstractions of the highest degree – able to be applied mathematically, like one applies one and nil.
All actions are intrinsically good or evil, in his Christian brain.
No objective required…sort of like God.  

Intellectual discourse with him is an acceptance of his nonsensical premises, of either/or absolutes, which is a concession to begin with, and then endless rambling over a ridiculous presupposition.
It would be like debating a child as to whether Santa Claus can deliver presents to every boy and girl on Christmas, or how Santa determines which boy and girl has been good and which bad in the course of the preceding year.
Refusal to engage him on that level is taken as a victory, evidence of his formidable mind.
He is avoided like the intellectual plague that he is by everyone, including other Moderns.

@

For the typical Modern nihilist, human nature is incomprehensible.
It is why he refuses to accept its existence, as a behavioural pattern.

He not only uses this rejection as a way of avoiding being seen as what he is, but he also uses it to explain why he is obtuse when it comes to other people, and why they surprise and baffle him on a consistent basis.
If there is no other purpose to promote universal behavioural standards then this single one would be enough for the Modern:
With a universal social behavioural norm his obtuseness need not concern itself with the inexplicable.
He expects a particular behaviour, calling it civility, goodness, healthy, normal, and what exceeds this expectation is considered ill.
In the past it was called demonic, or evil.

@

There are two, general, types of Modern:

1- The one so simpleminded that he becomes ensconced within linguistic abstractions.
Literally understanding the words being used, and unable to think outside the dualistic premises inherent in human linguistics, as a reflection of human thinking.
The words, symbols, metaphors, acquired a literal substance, which immediately results in paradoxes, when this simple mind is forced to come into contact with the real world.

2- The other is the one whom, after detaching the word, referring to the abstraction, from the real world (noumenon detached from phenomenon), returns it back, but this time within human environments.
The noumenon detached, and instead of reattaching it to the phenomenon, the Modern reattaches it to the shared Subjectivity, which is the Meme.
A noumenon reconnected to a shared noumenon, or an abstraction attached to a shared, communal, abstraction.
If this shared abstraction has no reference outside their shared minds, then it indicated a shared solipsism, the Nihilistic meme.
In this case the modern is certain that it is dealing with the real world, when it has simply replaced its own subjectivity with a shared subjectivity.

@

The Modern is so entrapped in linguistics; so mesmerized by abstractions, and their magical efficacy, that when he speaks of a famous figure, such as Nietzsche, he cannot connect him to a past, in Heraclitus, and he certainly cannot go further and connect both Nietzsche and Heraclitus to reality; when he thinks of Rand he cannot connect her to Aristotle, or further back to Parmenides and his monism.
These minds are his only reference point.
Noumenon referring to noumenon, with no exploration of phenomenon; abstracting abstraction with no engagement of world as that which is outside human abstractions.

The Modern’s shallowness is proportional to his reference points.
He chooses to tackle a figure he believes is on his intellectual level, but dares not engage the one who stands behind him, and he most certainly never considers the world directly, for he lacks both the courage and the talent to find any patterns in it, on his own, and he certainly has no courage to come to personal conclusions of his own.
He is entrapped in inter-Subjectivity.
Consider the intimate reference point of the typical Hedonist.
He cannot even go further than his own mind/body, and the sensations they produce, to engage the world outside of their distracting force.
His skin and skull represent the limit of his comprehension.

The others, the more typical ones, choose to enter the skin and skull of another, preferably a sufficiently infamous figure to cause intimidation in anyone who questions their understanding, or thinks of challenging their understanding.

@

The average Modern, desperately has to believe that he is so complex, so mysterious that nobody can ever fathom who and what he is, or why he does what he does, so that even when he makes a stupid error in judgment this can be used to insinuate a profound objective.

The Modern wishes to disappear, and still be appreciated, for his whimsical nature
He wants to erase the apparent which he has no way of hiding, not even surgery, so as to invent himself, as if from scratch, and then later reinvent himself anew.
So, of course he would deny the relevance of appearances and how this exposes your past.
And of course his simplicity of mind can be hidden, because he thinks, you cannot see into his skull as you can see his body, right?

But he fails to understand that you can peer into an other's mind.
Every choice made, every option taken, every ideal valued is an exposition of mind.
You cannot just declare yourself genius when everything you've done, said, admired, speaks against this declaration.
Changing your mind continuously, other then the feminine qualities it reveal;s, does not indicate open-mindedness and a willingness to accept error, it also indicates poor judgment, a simplistic reasoning, which when coupled with other choices exposes the individual to an other.
The Modern cannot hide behind words to convincing others like him of something it is not.
You cannot levitate just because you say so, you believe it with a passion, and you've convinced others that you can.

This is the "Might is Right"delusion.
The modern can believe something with all his might, the world does not give a shit.

Would you trust someone who has a history of making the most stupidest mistakes?
He might admit he has made many stupid mistakes and claim that he has changed but what does precedent (past) say about him?
He will claim that you cannot objectively judge him, but you can, and all do - some more accurately, some less so.

What, for example, does it say about someone if in his history, after adolescence, he was convinced of the most absurd ideal?
Does it expose a tendency to emote, to surrender to desire?
Does it expose a gullible mind, and a poor judgment?

What does it say about someone who has been stuck under another man's shadow for decades?
Normal when you are young and looking for mentors, and heroes, but after thirty?
What does it say about another's mind when it has been convinced by its own word-game, and does not feel the bittiest degree of shame to repeat the absurdities it does?
What does it say about it that it simply changes the sequence of time, represented by words, and then declares itself a philosopher?
What does it say about its mind that it has tricked itself with the most infantile words-games?
Would you not seek and find some other boyish aspect of its life, its psychology, through its actions, to solidify the judgment about such a mind?

@

Another delusion being taken as self-evident amongst Moderns is this idea that nothing general can be said about humans, as there is no human nature, and so a special branch of philosophy has to be invented for every individual, otherwise it is all nonsense.
No category applies to the Modern, according to him.  
So desperate the Modern is to not be seen, to not be judged, by a hypothetical more aware mind, that he must deny all human commonality if it is not based on the immediate, the social: meme.
This is why the concept “human” has become a mystical concept – pure abstraction.
Genes are simply irrelevant.
They determine nothing, making each individual a self-referential, unit, of unique complexity, which nobody can ever decipher.

The idea is comforting, and useful as an escape tool, an excuse, to such a degree that it has become a staple in Nihilistic delusions.  
To truly understand the individual, according to Moderns, you must ask them, and they will declare what they are and what they think and why they think it.
It is the "I am what I say I am", and without an absolute authority, there is nobody that can disprove it – a "prove a negative" taunt.
It is why they project words into the other's mouth, to lower the other down to their level.
Philosophy, psychology, become non-applicable to them, though they often use it for their own evaluations, and for display.  
They have imagined themselves outside the species, outside behaviour, and have become pure noumenon: each individual an idea(l), defining itself – the essence of Modern pseudo-individuality, and democracy.
"I am what I say I am" and nobody can tell me otherwise.

This is what lies at the very heart of the noumenon/phenomenon detachment: the ideal/real divide – the word/world detachment.

It is why they brag, so easily, they declare, and then say no more, they deny, and offer no reasons, they display, using words, always using words to manipulate, as if success using words changes the real about them.
They do not realize that their actions betray them, making their words sound hollow, and them look ridiculous.
They do not realize that the data they are producing is not limited to what is coming from their mouth, and that, in fact, the words they use are the least relevant when judging them.
They do not realize that it is precisely this denial which makes them all the more transparent.
But even here, in the usage of word, the method, the quality, the structure of syntax; the meanings trying to be proposed, all participate in how the other evaluates them.
Not only what they say but every single detail of activity is part of how they reveal who they truly are.  
Not so complex and mysterious, after all.
Most of it happens on an intuitive level, and why women are masters at it.  

@

[Dæmon]

We begin from the phenomenon, the symptom, evaluating its appearance in all its variants separately and then connecting them, if possible, with a shared pattern.
We do the same in relation to being(s), as it relates to Being, beginning with the being of life, consciousness of Being, and then moving towards Being that precedes this emergence of consciousness, as self-consciousness proceeds from consciousness. and consciousness proceeds from existence, or Becoming, (inter)acting.

An evaluation of language must follow, as the logos, the reason explaining, understanding, how the symptom expresses a particular state of being, in relation to Being.

The symptom is apparent, it appears, in others.
It is accessible to all, in all its forms.
It appears as an opinion, a world-view, a presupposition in relation to Becoming.
It is an expression of mind in relation to world (noumenon relating to phenomena); a symptom requiring a diagnosis.
As all appearance sit is a manifestation of a past (nature) - the end result, the pinnacle, of a causal chain, just as nature is the word used to represent the sum of all preceding nurturing, or with regards to Becoming (Flux) outside being (life, self-ordering), the sum of all (inter)actions manifesting as presence.
Our work, out diagnosis, will be an uncovering, of this past, connecting the causal chain, finding patterns that lead to out understanding.

The diagnosis might be in error but the symptoms are apparent.
For the diagnosis to be accurate, or more probable, it must gather these symptoms under a common pattern and then connect it with other patterns not immediately relating to the apparent.

@

In this case, the symptoms have been connected to the pattern, the psychological disposition, expressed memetically, of Nihilism, the idea(l), and so are given the expression of "Signs & Symbols of Nihilism".  
To evaluate the probability of accuracy we must then proceed to define the Nihilism we speak of, before we analyze how the symptoms connect and are manifestations of this Idea(l).    
We have determined that the common usage of the conception "nihilism", its historical usage, is an inversion, and we've explained this inversion as rooted in the very essence of Nihilism which is to invert, to negate the real, the world.
The historical definition of nil, the negative, of world, is in relation to the human constructs of morality, meaning, purpose, which find no reference outside human brains.
This sets up the conflict between subjective (noumenon) and objective (phenomenon) which is the essence of Nihilism, as the negation of the real, and its description of ti as negative: lacking human morality, meaning, purpose.
We've described world as the positive, and its lacking human concepts being presented as necessary for this positive to be accepted as such is a symptom of the psychology of Nihilism.
World precedes life, and it lacks meaning, purpose, morality, but this lack results in the emergence of life that eventually creates these concepts as necessary to its continuance.
This implies a conflict between beings and Becoming, or between noumenon/phenomenon, or subjective/objective.
A conflict the Greeks called agon, and experience by an emergent consciousness as need/suffering.  
To use another metaphor, it is the conflict between a Fluctuating, entropic world, conflicting with an ordering, becoming organism, awakening to the world (consciousness) and to itself within the world (self-consciousness) - a conflict best reflected as the separation of ideal from real, or logos and existing, or intuition and counter-intuition resulting in mythology, mysticism, and Art, language (logos) being an art-form, a representational expression of nous in harmony with world or in conflict with it.

With Nihilism the fluidity, of phenomenon, is negated noetically with the symbol, the static representational form, acquiring its height in the abstracting language of numbers and geometric shapes.
The word, and its Religious constructs in Abrahamic religions, becomes the negating negative, the "positive" human concept, which was missing but now is found hidden or in the beyond, in the unreal.
God is the hidden word that gives meaning to what is meaningless and purpose to that with no telos, and morality to the amoral, the indifference of world.
This new definition, inverting the real with an ideal, is what continues to produce paradoxes, and these conflicting value-judgments with no reference point - pure noetic conflicts with no standard outside of them to decide.
The value of this conflict is to offer hope, as with the conflict, something becoming war and other times remaining on the level of dialogue, battle of words, over words, excludes the world lacking purpose, meaning, morality, and creates a noetic space, a Nihilistic paradigm with dueling dualistic poles, determined by the binary way the human brain works - a binary method based on simple cellular on/off processes - diastole/systole.
Some other expression of this binary paradigm are found in the scientific negative/positive, BigBang/BigCrunch, or in the religious God/Satan, Good/Evil, and the political Right/Left, Free/Unfree, Communism/Capitalism..

@

Inversion of nihilism: over-complicating the simple, and over-simplifying the complex.
When Nihilism morphed from its religious form to its Modern, secular, form, as any virus would, it retained many of its past structures, metaphors, methods, altering them only symbolically, changing the words they are expressed through.

For instance, when Marxism took over from Judeo-Christianity, it maintained the holy mysticism, the monistic hierarchy, and the propaganda, the linguistic imagery for passing on its message to the masses it infected.
Convoluting the simplicity of what is being proposed, with jargon, referring and deferring, to the point where if the participants lack the knowledge they can be dismissed as not worth listening to, the usage of flesh and blood idols, as if they had been sanctified by some god, turned into political saints whose mere naming would suffice to imply a point the speaker cannot clarify himself, obfuscation, avoiding clarification, trying to make what is being proposed appear so complex only the chosen, indoctrinated, and trained in the scripture, and part of the holy family tree, can dare to intrude upon.
The concepts are not complex, but trying to keep track of the noetic-strings connecting one definition, with another, a response to it; who said what about who, and what another responded, is the "complexity".
At its base this type of "philosophy" is gossip, remaining completely abstract, never connecting the noumena it is linking together into a webbing, to the real, not because it can and refuses to, but because it cannot, being involved in pure noetic discourse, pure Nihilistic word-games, with no reference to the world outside human contrivances.

If you listen to Communists speak it would seem like they were speaking about something profound, deep, intricate, when it has no more intricacy than Christian rituals, and chants.
Keeping track of the saintly interpretation of the shared Idea(l), it being nihilistic, is the only thing complex here.
You would have to study for a long period to grasp what each idol represented within the internet of Nihilism, and how each one participated within the noetic solar-system with the bright sun, in the middle, being the Nil, the life-negating energy of eros/thymos – the passion of construction/destruction.
The web of connections are exclusively noetic, never approaching the phenomenon directly.
An inter-subjective matrix of nouemna, words, definitions, redirecting back to other noumena, other abstractions, some stronger, hubs, from which more connections emerge, attaching to a nexus; the world itself skirted around, knitting a cover to enclose it and never touch it.
The inter-subjective cocoon is a shell hovering around the real, avoiding contact with it, because if it would come into contact with it the Nihilistic shell would shatter, like an empty rotting egg of idea(l)s with no substance, no appearance outside the human SuperOrganic world.

@

[Dæmon]

Faced with world order, given the name "nature", and the causal-chain of (inter)actions that determined its presence, its appearance, given the name "past", the Nihilist Modern opts for his own personal subjective order, coming from some mystical, secret source, inside of him, where nothing can confront, challenge or contradict it, or so he tells himself - he wills himself into believing - transfiguring faith into an act of supernatural authority.

God of Abraham becomes God as Self, expressed through the multiplicity of humanity, always retaining its nullification of world, but this time not coming from a Divine Will, but from a desire to overturn all that keeps him dependent.
Each subjectivity a different expression of the divine will, expressing itself through each individual, who has become a god himself - the God.
Secularization means surpassing other as the intermediate.
Scripture could be read directly from the source - the magical power of semiotics funneled through self.
Nothing restricting the mind from achieving unity with the oneness - God personalized, like a fashion trinket.
Each representing the individual's "unique" relationship with the absolute.
God speaking through all of them, at once. The talent to channel His Divine power something that can be learned.
 
All external order(ing) is denied. It is ridiculed, dismissed and forgotten.
No reality will stand in the way of the idea(l).
The esoteric is the experience of the personal god, or god of subjectivity.
It is the only kind of order accepted, and because order is automatically a product of consciousness, it is the only authority to be respected.
American individuality: I am my own God.
Affirmation occurs when this declaration is appreciated by as many others as possible.
There is no other standard to affirm a delusion than popularity, the phenomenal world already having been dismissed or selectively sampled.
One can live in his own mind, in isolation, but for a social organism like homo sapient, for how long, and if one considers the possibilities, for how long can living in your own mind escape the costs in a world that cares not for human idea(l)s, and theories?
Popularity validates and it creates a safety net, protecting the detaching subjective mind from a world it abandoned for the privilege of existing in its own world, guided by its own principles.  

Nihilism's God in the beyond, is now converted to a secular God of hidden internal order, and this is why mathematics and linguistics are so prominent in the judgment of Moderns.
Their "logic" affirming the power of human symbols; their harmony (αρμονια = αρ - connect μονασ - one...to connect into one); their utility and malleability evidence of the mind's power to change world by thinking it, by willing it.
Symbol not as metaphor, as the focusing of aggregate energies available to organism (will) directing actions, but word/symbol as magical talisman.  
Scripture is converted to word/number.  
The priest is accepted as a simple proxy, or altogether denied, secularized into "specialist", as with Protestantism, opting for a direct reading of God's mind, or a direct reading of internal order, only finding in world a challenge, or the metaphors to give it substance.

With no external references to support this internal abstracted order, this noetic abstraction, the believer uses other minds as supportive reaffirmations of its own constructs, or, lacking the courage and the creativity it may simply buy into one already constructed for it, affirming and in turned being affirmed within the shared noumena.
Their contributions are "positive" or they are denied relevance.
Each and every "positive" perspective a reaffirmation of man's "godliness" though the external contradicts, or fails to support and reaffirm.    

@

Modern narcissism can only produced arrogance before world.
Humility towards their "fellow man" is considered a prerequisite for remaining convinced of your own surpassing of the real, and your power to negate the real with your own personal idea(l).
Humility, feigned or true, is also a way of preserving the web of inter-subjectivity, protecting the particular "individual private reality" from the corrective indifference of actual world and its unyielding to symbols reality.

Underneath all that "humility" hides an arrogance refusing to be tested against what it most fears.

Being "nice" is how reciprocity is maintained, as a possibility to shelter the individual form its own detachment.  

Christian pretentious humbleness before ones fellow man, building an arrogant monument to his "special" place in world, and his deserving of eternity.

From where does this certainty and arrogance come from?
From a deep anxiety and an overcompensating insecurity.
The believer repeats the "positive" words like a prayer, and hearing them echo back to him, from another source, fills him with a sensation of power, multiplying his own, as if he were inflated beyond his limits.

@

[Dæmon]

Re-Turning Nihilism

Modern Judeo-Christian/Islamic definition, coming from the Orthodox Russians

Degraded remnants of the once proud Rus Nordic tribe.

World void of meaning, purpose, God, uni-versal morality...or any "positive" absolute
The Modern, Nihilist, projects into world his own abstractions, hoping to validate them with phenomena.
Upon discovering that he cannot because his constructs are noetic and lack all reference to anything outside mind, he declares world nil...describing it as an "illusion", a "transitory" state, a veil covering a more "real" reality.
The longer he fails to substantiate his Nihilistic theories, the more desperate he becomes- more disillusioned, anxious willing to go to extremes, such as, rejecting world altogether, in order to immerse himself in his own fabricated "realities".

A conundrum emerges.
To cocoon one's self away form reality, one first needs to engage and understand reality.
Politics is born.
Church/State institutions, burdened with the job of knowing and understanding what its followers can never know.
Duplicity of Nihilism...to preach the opposite of what you practice.
Schizophrenia to preserve narcissism.
The Idea(l) and the Real being contradictions must be compartmentalized or selectively applied.
Religion is born...the Abrahamic triad in the west, Buddhism in the east.
Ideal and Real being at odds, demands a sheltering environment - population protected form their detachment - or extreme asceticism - the individual punishing himself for his existence, on a daily, weekly or yearly basis; the Nihilist punishing himself for the necessary contradiction of his own principles, or needing to medicate himself to tolerate his own internal strife.        

Indo-European Correction

It is this absence of absolute, negative and/or positive, in relation to human needs/desires, which makes existence the world "good".
That which makes life, and consciousness of it, possible, is neither good or bad, but from a standpoint of life, it is a positive, the specific manifestations of life and consciousness, notwithstanding.  

@

Pure/Authentic Nihilist
Feminine

Perceives absence of absolute and deems the world negative and life not worth living.
Goal: to return to the Flux.
Underlying Motive: to prevent all others from enjoying life, and existence consciously.  

Duplicitous Nihilist
Masculine

Perceives absent absolute and projects into it, attempting to deal with the absence, abstractions (noumena) that negate the experience, the presence the apparent using a symbol (word, number), or some metaphor.
Goal: To full-fill the absence by evoking some abstraction with no reference to the real, or that negates it, or by declaring the existence of an alternate existence.
Underlying Motive: To distract himself from the disturbing absence by inebriation, numbing, pleasuring self using others.
Such Nihilists compete over the seduction of as many of their kind as possible - pure Nihilists are especially vulnerable to their "positivity".
Others become a bulwark between self and world, to forget one's self within the masses.
Alternate methods is chemical numbing, or any form of hedonism.
If we understand pleasure as the temporary reduction of the sensation of need/suffering, which is the experience of existing, then it is a way of avoiding the experience of existence.  

@

Having replaced the phenomenal world as the source of all guiding criterion for evaluating a noumenon's validity, with an emotional criterion, defined by popularity, or the "positive", seductive promise of an abstraction, the Nihilist released himself from the limiting presence of the apparent, and from the restricting 'burden' of precedent, and became a game of political appeal to the masses of mediocre minds.
Democracy established the rule of popularity, or quantities, as the foundation of human "truth", replacing God as the populist god of the meek and weak.
Thus released, every mind could believe in anything it wanted, the cost/benefits regulated by a buffering mas of humanity, each caring to protect weakness so as to receive protection in turn - anything and everything became possible, or as possible as anything else, when it had no immediate consequence, or the repercussions could be absorbed as communal cost bearing.

Subjectivity became an idea(l) no objective world could threaten, if the individual abides by he Golden Rule of reciprocity, was willing to take-on the burden of another's mistakes, as part of the social contract, and one offered respect, fake or not, to all perspectives, based no the absence of absolute - argument from the negative: with no absolute Truth, all truths were equally possible, leveling down all probabilities, as representations of order(ing) into uniform chaos, within which humans huddled together, like a herd, a school of fish, a flock of birds, confronted by a indifferent harsh world.
All abstractions, all idea(l)s need not refer or be constructed by collecting patterns directly from reality.
Now, in this Brave New World, abstractions (noumena) could be amalgamations of patterns that have no reference outside the mind, or they could be inversions of the perceived, in a direct expression of dissatisfaction negating world.
Abrahamic definition of God is a perfect example of this direct annulling of the phenomenal world with an abstraction, given a name, a symbol, and then expected to appear in world, or given a vague presence, like omnipresence, permeating all, in place of energy, dynamism, but this time with the added component of consciousness, life.
Here, the specific appearance of life was reduced down to an (inter)activity, so that everything that exists (inter)active, is by definition alive and conscious.
Life was stripped of its particularities and reduced to its dynamism, converting all of existence into a living Being.
All difference reduced down to the slightest similarity - the emergence of life and consciousness from Flux reduced down to the Flux itself; Flux, or (inter)activity minus randomness (chaos), releasing order(ing) to become part of a Divine process.
The Divine retaining its "positivity", as the eternal ORDER, the whole, the one; all mere manifestations of this singularity.
Abrahamic Religion was secularized as a numerical value = 1, complete with its evil antithesis = 0, representing that fluctuating state in between noetic absolutes - the systolic pause in between diastolic inflation, overflowing with energies.

@

[Dæmon]

Nihilism proper, is straightforward with its judgment. Demanding, of the world, to provide him with the abstractions he needs to remain sane, or to cope with existence, with he declares world undesirable when he discovers them missing.
His idea(l) is to negate (destroy) world, or to negate his awareness of world.

"Positive" Nihilist, is indirect with his annulment of world and of life.
The absence of the idea(l)s he has constructed and expected from the world inspires him to construct them, projecting them as "yet to be", or as hidden.
His method consists of sampling phenomena (patterns), combining them in ways that he has never experienced and then, taking them literally, convincing himself that they already exist outside his mind.
An example would be the unicorn.
He essentially negates the continuum of space/time by injecting into it a fantastic phenomenon, he has fabricated in his mind (pure noumenon); he rejects life, as it appears, opting for his own constructs, showing a dissatisfaction with past/nature, and the causal chain that is manifesting in presence.
He takes the experienced and inverts it, declaring the inversion "more real" than the real.
An example of this would be the Abrahamic God, defined in ways that are contrary to the experienced world.
Another example would be the concept of absolutes, which takes the experience of Flux (ceaseless interactivity), and inverts it into a static immutable 'thing'.
The noumenon is converted into a substitution for the phenomenon, essentially inverting the process of cognition where noumenon (abstraction) interprets phenomenon, by generalizing/simplifying it into an abstraction, which represents the phenomenon but does not replace or negate it.
For the "positive" Nihilist, the noumenon, the abstraction, now externalized as symbol (word/number), buries the phenomenon (dynamic apparent, presence), instead of clarifying it, bringing it up to the light of consciousness, un-covering it.  

For the "positive" Nihilist the idea(l) is subjective, because there is no controlling standard to inhibit the 'free" association of patterns, and their creative combination, which may dismiss the causal chain, reflecting linear time, so as to place concepts in any sequence.
Example...how consciousness is placed as preceding life, or the noumenon is placed outside the space/time continuum of (inter)activity manifesting as phenomena - existence.
Detached from the limiting presence of world, the "positive" Nihilist is able to be creative with his combinations - subjectivity.  


In stark contrast to the Nihilistic psychological duo, a Realist harvests patterns, directly from reality, selecting which ones to cultivate, to aspire towards, or inflating them to make them lucid.
He combines patterns in ways not found in nature, not to then take them literally, but as aggregates of patterns he metaphorically represents - transferring their patterns to a shared symbol, image.
Example: pagan gods, where experienced natural patterns (forces of nature), are combined and represented by a fabricated symbol.
Unlike the Abrahamic mono-God, the gods do not contradict nature and its processes but accentuate them, bringing them into light.
The symbol acts as a representation to bring forth, and not to bury beneath, or to replace experience.
For the realist words are tools of engaging world, not of replacing, or escaping it.
He draws inspiration from patterns he perceives in world, projecting idea(l)s he constructs using them, to aid his movement within the Flux.
Abstractions are, for him, interpretation of the real, and symbols are used to orient and redirect the will towards a desired outcome which is in-keeping with natural processes and past/precedent.  

@

[Dæmon]

Modernity is a Nihilism tsunami, sweeping away all structures, destroying manmade and natural constructs, leaving behind uniform devastation and chaos.
There is no stopping it.
All you can do is find a crevice to hide, as it passes over, or learn to swim its currents, and hopefully rise to the surface, surfing its waves.

In the meantime learn to predict its internal turmoil, and how to find the eye of the storm.

@

[Dæmon]

Semitic Semantics

- Judaism and Semitism are not synonyms.
The adoption of Judaism as a nihilistic coping mechanism, was not a fact for all Semitic tribes.
Judaism was a meme that evolved within a small number of Semitic tribes.
When it became viral, mixing with elements in Hellenism that could be integrated into a more cosmopolitan strain, mother Judaism closed the door, denying salvation to her offspring – a source of subsequent resentment.
Anti-Semitism purposefully confuses the tribe (gene) for the idea(l) (meme).
Some Semites chose Islam to express their disdain for their lot in life, going to the eastern side of Aryanism, in Zoroastrianism to harvest the memes required to build their Nihilistic outlook – in Zoroastrianism the anthropomorphic dualism of God/Satan was discovered and adopted.

- Indo-European dominance produced the circumstances within which this memetic virus could be born and spread.
In the east it took the form of Buddhism negation of Hinduism and tis hierarches.
In the west, the disease was invigorated with Hellenic ingenuity, producing the dis-ease of Christianity.
Accepting responsibility for our own illness is a first step towards recovery.

- Semites are tribes belonging to the Indo-European family.
The ingenuity they, or some of them (12-13 tribes), display in fabricating a solution to a condition they could not tolerate is unmatched in the east – in the east nihilism took the form of the personal, whereas in the west it became communal, political.
This fact made the memetic virus more communicable to tribes belonging to the Indo-European family.

- Judaism identifies with being victimized.
It must create hatred for itself, to maintain its virility. It thrives when it recreates the conditions that birthed it.  
To hate Judaism is to feed into the psychosis it was born out of.
Victimhood was passed on to Judaism’s offspring: Christianity and Islam, later birthing their own children, Marxism being a notable one.

- Judaism greatest innovation is its linguistic inversions, and its gradual abandonment of the ancient Indo-European values that would inhibit the exploitation of weakness – building pride upon the shaming of others; building strength on the weakness of others. World rejected using symbols (words, numbers, symbols, metaphors).
Where Indo-European tradition thrives in confronting the superior, Judaism settles for the easy task of manipulating and exploiting what is beneath it – finding and cultivating weakness is part of its methodology (feminine tactics); it does not attack the virile but the sickly parts in all peoples.
Historical factors, beginning with the tribe’s experiences under the ancient Egyptian yoke, seeded resentment that would be supplemented over the ages, to become a complete overcoming, based on linguistic overturning: seductive to the weakest elements in all Indo-European tribes. A seductiveness it had to deal with, preserving its basic tenant of being “chosen”, God’s people, the king of all king’s earthly representatives, given the moral “right” to exploit those outside this privileged position. Christianity was the usurping of this choseness, making it a “uni-versal” “right”, or rite of passage from this undesirable life to a more real reality – salvation through submission.
Armageddon was subverted when the annihilation of world became a self-sacrifice – an internal eradication of past/nature: purification of self.
- There are three strains of Judaism.
Orthodox, Social, and Political, each vying for dominance within the tribes already indoctrinated into Judaism. Conflicts between the three is passionate each one advocating a different reaction to the current environmental circumstances, but all preserving the basic principles that differentiate them form all other memes – preserving identity.
What they preach and what they do, exhibits the fundamental duplicity in all nihilistic memes: words contradicted by deeds; to sell what you would never purchase. To hide this paradox all types of methods have been developed, each displaying the same contradiction between internal and external application: to survive in a world you reject necessitates compartmentalization and/or a complete psychological breech (schizophrenia) – to tell yourself what you contradict with actions.
Jews have externalized this schizophrenia, by adopting what they found in cultures they were, at times, a part of.
Christianity/Islam more clearly reveals this externalization of an internal schism, by inventing a reality hidden within, or beyond, or above the perceived one.

 

[Dæmon]

A common trait among moderns, or the most current manifestation of Nihilism, is their romantic idealism concerning themselves, which they hide using the abstraction of Humanity.
Some may be talented in abstractions, suing numbers and words, and are good at theorizing, but their inability to fully grasp the human condition, forcing them to seek guidance in "experts" or to submit to the self-flattering, makes their talents and mental abilities useless.
Their impact is on a ambiguous, conceptual realm, governs by abstract theories, none of which refer to anything observable, often being contradicted by the observable, which they then they to explain accusing society, or some evil other force, to evade the possibility that it is their own theoretical psychological understanding of life, and humanity, in particular, which is to blame.
The blame game can be postponed because they are surrounded by naive, clueless Moderns like themselves completely dominated by Nihilistic concepts that detach, disregard or contradict life and the experience of existence.
From this the psychosis of victimhood, now a political force that has become a memetic standard emerges to blame all others, except self so as to explain why their subjectivity consistently fails and is surprised by world, which they then label "evil' or "ill", absolving themselves of all responsibility.

The romantic idealist is constantly contradicted by a world they cannot cope with, which is why they seeker comfort is Nihilism to begin with.
Instead of accepting responsibility before one seeks it in others, he modern finds blame in others for its own consistent errors in judgment, enabling the continuance of the romantic idealism he needs to cope with reality.
Romantic idealism is simply code for "positive Nihilism".

Naivete, bordering on childishness, concerning humanity, is a foundational ideal of Christianity, Marxism, and Modernity in all its many forms of detaching, linguistically, from reality that manifests actively, and indifferently.
Remaining naive, meaning ignorant, of human nature and of nature altogether, is a necessary prerequisite of being a modern imbecile.
Denying the "disturbing" in other, is a way of denying it in yourself, and this is why nature is applied to all organisms except to those belonging to the species homo sapient - denying it there is denying it in self; rejecting past/nature in other who is similar, is a way of denying it in self.         

@

[Dæmon]

“Diversity” is code for “change”, the purifying, detaching from past/nature, magical word Modern Nihilists worship.
In theory it implies that all change is “good”, when it actually means that all “desirable/acceptable” change is “God”.
Beneath it all there is “reason”.
Flux worshiped as an all-knowing, benevolent, omnipotent, omniscient, divine one, leading all towards goodness. Even in its harshness a hidden “good” guides it all, or so the moderns wish to believe is true.
When the apparent, the present, the existing, is undesired, is hurtful, then mix the pot, give it a shake, and hope/pray for the best.
With no objective reality to determine the outcome, settling it back to a different version of what has been shaken and stirred, the Modern dreams of world as infinite possibilities – chaos.
With each new thing, the old is corrected and replaced with the “better”.
It’s what keeps anarchists humming, and all Nihilists hopeful.
The “evil” culprit is manmade, conserving “badness” and not allowing change to take its course towards the “good”.
Hope is for the Modern a version of faith.
With no understanding of human nature, or of nature, they place their faith/hope upon the Divinity of Flux, which is, in their minds, nothing more than God creating.
Change, therefore, is God’s uni-versal Will, laying waste to human vile conspiracies.
Change is God destroying human vanity. His sacred chaos reducing manmade order to ruins, and from the dust something better is born, in contradiction to everything that has come before.

[Dæmon]

So encased in modernity, we are, that even we, who acknowledge past/nature, must wade through the murk of centuries of Judeo-Christian/Islamic stagnation.
We approach our own mentors, using the eyes and ears of  those "humanitarians", who have devised a new schemes to keep us entwined in their verbal traps.
Do we not see reality, through proxies, and from these proxies do we not choose those that interpret the world before us, according to our modernistic mythologies?
Have we not read and understood our own inheritance through the intervening words of those who are alien to them, or even contrary to them?

The virus has infiltrated the pharmakon that can help us poison the dis-ease.
 

[Dæmon]

Sentence Assimilation
To solidify and validate a nihilistic delusion, a word, not associated with a phenomenon, is forced into a sentence where both the word representing the phenomenon and the word with no connection to the phenomenon are part of a unity.
If not challenged, the sentence is then repeated, and with each repetition the unity of words is entrenched, until, in time, most people cannot think of one without the other, as if the two words belong together, and so the concepts they represent are part of a real unity, held to be self-evident.
The unity of the sentence assimilates words referring to noumena with and without a reference to phenomena, until the association is established and validated by this usage.
     

[Dæmon]

The terminally positive (nihilist) Modern can only tolerate a win-win scenario or, at least, one where the potential/possible costs, in the cost/benefit duality, are minimal and/or not exceeding the potential/possible benefits.
Feminization is perceived from the optimistic perspective, allowing for the decline of masculinity to indicate no cost other than a decrease in “violence” and authoritarianism, but if we consider the challenging essence of the masculine, as part of the testosterone driven desire to usurp and replace power, then in science as in art, we can predict a loss of insight and that creative genius required to contradict the forces of nature – thinking of nature in her feminine essence.
If we doubt such a cost all we have to do is see it unfold among the orientals – billions strong and not a hint of creativity equal to that found in the Europeans.
They can, as emasculated minds, accept, tolerate, and perfect what is given to them, but they cannot revolutionize, contradict, uncover.
Their art speaks of a masculine past that is stagnating in glory lost, finding inspiration in western popular culture.
With the Africans and their testosterone excess, producing hyper-masculinity, we see the other side of the coin – testosterone as mindless frenzy, lost in its own challenging instincts, unable to find balance and the control required to focus.
We can predict and await the repercussions of feminization, and by the time they become noticeable, so obvious even a modern cannot deny, or ignore them, and all excuses have been drained of substance, it would be too late.  

[Dæmon]

If there is one succinct way to describe a Modern, as the current, and perhaps last version of Nihilism, without convoluting the issue with metaphors and labels, it is as a mind that must lie to itself and to others, to validate this lie, in order to survive within a reality he has ignored and dismissed as illusory, because he fears, with good reason, that he could not survive in it, and survival is his highest motive.
His version of the idea(l), one of many in the multiplicity of Nihilistic liberation from reality, is one that is founded on words completely disconnected from their original function to a degree that in order to compensate for this detachment he must find supportive sycophants, with no shame, or deluded imbeciles with no wit but with plenty of desire.
When the only way to validate the sentences you use, with their purposefully jumbled arrangement, meant only to inspire emotion in others, then what you are saying has no other source of justification than popular appeal, and dominance over the masses of morons participating in all human groups.
In Modern times philosophy has become the human practice of inter-social seduction, we call politics – war by other means and the enemy is the world beyond the human family that threatens them all, forcing them into tighter and tighter embraces, using increasingly seductive romantic lies, as all lovers do, to keep the embrace nice and tight.
A modern’s only source of identity are words.
Take those away, by reconnecting them to their original meaning, and you strip him of his exoskeleton, leaving him naked and cold in the world; lost, because he forgot from where he came from when he discovered the magical power of words.

[Dæmon]

A linguistic distinction should be made between a "unity" and a "congruence: whether either can be used as a metaphor to describe the same phenomenon, one from the vantage point of an external conscious observer and the other from the vantage point of an internal conscious (projection) experiencer.

The unity, if it is non-living, has no internal motive to remain as such, but only is perceived by an external observer as a singular thing. The unification occurs in the mind of the observer, simplifying/generalizing (abstracting) an (inter)action of patterns (processes) by cutting them away from the background - which is part of the simplification/generalization process: dimensional cutting away, leaving a "unity" the mind can process.
From the internal direction the mind projects itself within the (inter)acting patterns, making himself a part of the relationships, to observe congruity in the making.
Congruity is not intentional, there is no goal, no end, no motive. It emerges out of the pastern's own essence, and how each (inter)acts with other patterns.
No appreciation or evaluation or self required. The usage of such words intends to reinsert an Abrahamic component into unconscious processes, so as to associate the concepts linguistically, because in reality they contradict each other, or they have no reference to reality. They are a simple sentence structure detached from experience so as to construct a linguistic caricature.
Words, representing abstractions, can be arranged in any fanciable way possible, because they are not bound by reality to remain disciplined, restricted to what is experienced. They become artistic vehicles often contrary to the experienced.
The inclusion of "self" and "value" when referring to a stone, for example is not a philosophical attempt to compensate for language limitations, but an insidious attempt to insert a Nihilistic idea(l) within a realistic empirical concept.
It would be laughable if many did not take it and themselves, for inventing such a strategy, so seriously.

The concept of "self" can only apply to a living organization, no matter how simple it is, that can purposefully directs its congruence, towards patterns it (re)cognizes by using itself as a standard - some innate appreciation/judgment must be present. The now properly named unity must be able to differentiate, discriminate, which is what consciousness is, between diverse patterns, directing its energies accordingly.
This direction is what we call will.
using words to masturbate is a common practice, but then using linguistic limitations to justify an absurdity, indicates a lack of integrity . It is part of the usual Judeo-Christian or Nihilistic practice of using a negative to prove a positive.
in this case linguistic limitations used to justify an absurdity that contradicts experience - empiricism.
This seesaw strategy of seeking refuge in the mystical and then coming out to claim the rational, is part of the duplicity of the modern Nihilist.
It has become so common, with varying degrees of sophistication, that Moderns now claim linguistic limits as the reason they cannot explain their absurdities, explaining why so much crap is now passing itself off as intellectual, or spiritual, by wannabe "philosophers" and ambitious "gurus".
If not for reality placing an order upon how words can be sued, language would become a free-for-all method of evading reality, and constructing subjective kingdoms where each one is right, form his own perspective, ruling over all others, excluded from his special universe.

Words, as the Bible says, come first, and it with words that moderns build their subjective hyper-realities, within which they are the idea(l), indifferent to any external standard that might knock them off their perch.
Language with its representation of the simplified/generalized is now being applied as a method of integrating contradictory world-views, as Jesus once attempted.
New messiahs come to out of the woodwork, unashamed in times of shameless decay.
The majority seek an escape form the determinism of past/nature, investing all sorts of linguistic paradoxes to remain skeptical, unsure, procrastinating between options, evading the superior-inferior hierarchy, indefinitely...so they hope.
Then there are those few, more pseudo-intellectual types, who have read one book too many, trying to combine water with oil, in a a magical alchemy based no words detached from reality, and used in any inventive way suits their self-aggrandizing goals.
For them the ambiguity and weakness of representational language, is a reason to use emotional triggers to manipulate imbeciles and weaklings the world round - hoping to construct a Kingdom of God on earth, with them as the high priest.
How could you combine water and oil, Judaism and Hellenism, and be the next Jesus, in reality?
The two positions on life are irreconcilable, antithetical, more than water and oil they are fire and gasoline.
The magical force of alchemy is part of language.
with words everything can be combined into sentence structures and then grander pseudo-intellectual brilliance, promising so much delivering less than little.
These language magi are "philosophers" in the political sense.
Their intent is to manipulate masses of idiots, even if they will not admit it.

With no real world application their 'power" is human, in the sense that it is confined, like their words are, to the limits of the human mind.
Why do you think they desperately want to inflate this limit to cosmic proportions?
Their ambitious is human, and humanism is their preferred state of affairs.
Memes can only travel through kinds, when they have no reference to reality - a memetic infection.

In the making of such delusions the clown finds a loyal ally in the coward. One eternally guided by a need to replace the icon, the other eternally bound by it. The first presents himself to the second as the icon's reincarnation, delving deeply into father-son dynamics and incomplete rites of passage.

The desire to merge east and west, is a desire to be the new Messiah: bridge between incompatible world-views, the Judaic and the Hellenic, the Buddhist and then Hindu...the Nihilistic and the Realistic.
An ambition to seduce as many followers as possible, to validate an absurdity, by offering linguistic hope and equality and freedom from past/nature to all; an ambition totally reliant on others, because ti has no external reference point other than these others.
A political ambition, a humanist ambition, a Nihilistic idea(l).
In its fervour such ambitions find allies in contrarians - half-wits half-understanding so as to linguistically merge conflicting concepts, and ideals.

Saul invented Christianity to "harmonize" Athens with Jerusalem, and on our time of identity crisis new Messiahs will emerge trying to merge Rome and Washington, and who will be the current vehicle of word integration but a another Jew.

[Sponsored content]