But if we consider that in Job God is expressed (intensively) as Leviathan, we only need to think the name Spinoza or Pantheisms (so logical are its conclusion, when heaven falls to earth) to know how right it is to say, "God plays with his selves!"---That is Joyous, and sufficient reason to celebrate!
The last part of the "Conclusion" of Difference and Repetition, focuses on time, as tripartite, from whence comes a Deleuzean-Nietzschean concept, an apocalyptic of the third time. A time which is said to "re-form a strange loop which in no way resemble the earlier cycle [time as a circle, Hegel and the Absolute idea, his dialectical method, for example], but leads into the formless, and operates only for the third time and for that which belongs to it" (p. 296, Eng. Trans. by Patton). Now does this concerns simulacra, yes, affirming differences, nomadic and crowned anarchies, yes. We have no more questions as we have no less erased what was here before, as we are drops in the ocean, dissolved cognito, the one saying the uncountable multitudes. It is an announcement, that we have read to the point of no longer knowing, we come face to face with ignorance and knowledge, and hence we must think, we must write.
The beginning of the slaves’ revolt in morality occurs when ressentiment itself turns creative and gives birth to values: the ressentiment of those beings who, denied the proper response of action, compensate for it only with imaginary revenge. Whereas all noble morality grows out of a tri- umphant saying ‘yes’ to itself, slave morality says ‘no’ on principle to everything that is ‘outside’, ‘other’, ‘non-self ’: and this ‘no’ is its creative deed. This reversal of the evaluating glance – this essential orientation to the outside instead of back onto itself – is a feature of ressentiment: in order to come about, slave morality ﬁrst has to have an opposing, external world, it needs, physiologically speaking, external stimuli in order to act at all, – its action is basically a reaction. The opposite is the case with the noble method of valuation: this acts and grows spontaneously, seeking out its opposite only so that it can say ‘yes’ to itself even more thankfully and exultantly, – its negative concept ‘low’, ‘common’, ‘bad’ is only a pale con- trast created after the event compared to its positive basic concept, satu-rated with life and passion, ‘we the noble, the good, the beautiful and the happy!’ When the noble method of valuation makes a mistake and sins against reality, this happens in relation to the sphere with which it is not sufﬁciently familiar, a true knowledge of which, indeed, it rigidly resists: in some circumstances, it misjudges the sphere it despises, that of the common man, the rabble; on the other hand, we should bear in mind that the distortion which results from the feeling of contempt, disdain and superciliousness, always assuming that the image of the despised person is distorted, remains far behind the distortion with which the entrenched hatred and revenge of the powerless man attacks his opponent – in efﬁgy of course. Indeed, contempt has too much negligence, nonchalance, com-placency and impatience, even too much personal cheerfulness mixed into it, for it to be in a position to transform its object into a real carica-ture and monster. Nor should one fail to hear the almost kindly nuances which the Greek nobility, for example, places
in all words that it uses to distinguish itself from the rabble; a sort of sympathy, consideration and indulgence incessantly permeates and sugars them, with the result that nearly all words referring to the common man remain as expressions for‘unhappy’, ‘pitiable’ (compare deilo/v, dei/laiov, ponhro/v, moxqhro/v), the last two actually designating the common man as slave worker and beast of burden)–and on the other hand, ‘bad’, ‘low’ and ‘unhappy’ have never ceased to reverberate in the Greek ear in a tone in which ‘unhappy’ predominates: this is a legacy of the old, nobler, aristocratic method of valuation that does not deny itself even in contempt... The ‘well-born’ felt they were ‘the happy’; they did not need ﬁrst of all to construct their happiness artiﬁ-cially by looking at their enemies, or in some cases by talking themselves into it, lying themselves into it (as all men of ressentiment are wont to do); and also, as complete men bursting with strength and therefore necessar- ily active, they knew they must not separate happiness from action, – being active is by necessity counted as part of happiness (this is the ety- mological derivation of en’ pra/ttein)29 – all very much the opposite of‘happiness’ at the level of the powerless, the oppressed, and those rankled with poisonous and hostile feelings, for whom it manifests itself as essen-tially a narcotic, an anesthetic, rest, peace, ‘sabbath’, relaxation of the mind and stretching of the limbs, in short as something passive. While the noble man is conﬁdent and frank with himself (gennaiˆ ov, ‘of noble birth’, underlines the nuance ‘upright’ and probably ‘naïve’ as well), the man of ressentiment is neither upright nor naïve, nor honest and straight with himself. His soul squints; his mind loves dark corners, secret paths and back-doors, everything secretive appeals to him as being his world, his security, his comfort; he knows all about keeping quiet, not forgetting, waiting, temporarily humbling and abasing himself. A race of such men of ressentiment will inevitably end up cleverer than any noble race, and will respect cleverness to a quite different degree as well: namely, as a condi-tion of existence of the ﬁrst rank, whilst the cleverness of noble men can easily have a subtle aftertaste of luxury and reﬁnement about it: – pre-cisely because in this area, it is nowhere near as important as the complete certainty of function of the governing unconscious instincts, nor indeed as important as a certain lack of cleverness, such as a daring charge at danger or at the enemy, or those frenzied sudden ﬁts of anger, love, rev-erence, gratitude and revenge by which noble souls down the ages have recognized one another. When resentment does occur in the noble man himself, it is consumed and exhausted in an immediate reaction, and therefore it does not poison, on the other hand, it does not occur at all in countless cases where it is unavoidable for all who are weak and power- less. To be unable to take his enemies, his misfortunes and even his misressentiment – and here we have his deed, his creation: he has conceived of the ‘evil enemy’, ‘the evil one’ as a basic idea to which he now thinks up a copy and counterpart, the ‘good one’ – himself ! . . .
24 ‘Oi’ is an interjection expressive of pain. A person whose life gives ample occasion for the
use of this interjection is ‘oizuros’.
25 ‘not prosperous, unfortunate’.
26 ‘tle¯nai’ = to bear, endure, suffer. A person who must endure things is ‘tlemon’.
27 ‘to have bad luck’.
28 ‘accident, misfortune’.
29 This expression (eu prattein) has something like the ambiguity of the English ‘do well’ =
‘engage in some activity successfully’ or ‘fare well’. There is no expression in common use in
What if you could interact with the ancient Greek philosopher, Socrates?
Opposite Appendages, connected by an invisible body, duality:
choice of the Good and Bad; bodies we are mixtures
With virtual reality, in its present state, this is possible. I have been thinking about this for a long time, and because I want to see this come to fruition, I have decided to take the risk and put my idea out there. But if someone does think this is a good idea, and can help, I hope that they would involve me in the project. So if you are seriously interested leave a comment, but not that you have to be seriously interested to leave a comment, no not at all.
The idea is simple a virtual reality version of Socrates, but this, to my mind, immediately brings to mind the question of version, which Socrates? And by that I mean, what rating version? Not that there are not alternatate and competing versions, brought together to form a realistic Socrates. All of which is culled from fragments, that is various anceint sources, who speak of Socrates, for Socrates, as Socrates, with Socrates... but I am moreover thinking of the fact that Socrates taught boys many things, including sexuality. That is right, do you have you child or student learn about the real, that is actual Socrates, the Socrates that practiced pederasty (for a good article, see a text called Fuck You Socrates, which is a text from a peer review journal).
So do we stay faithful to tradition, to history, to the total educational experienced, or do we edit reality, as we already do with our history (which have no choice but to be selective, but often it is a matter of not degrees, but of Good verse Bad history, and what history should be, that is ought be, which is alway a choice, a choice which is never completely free, as it is forced to obey the dominate logic of the discipline (and yet resistance is possible, necessarily so). But back to the basic question, and I would of course given the opportunity, be interested in building the immoral or amoral or differently moral version of the "real" Socrates, which in turn would mostly be forced by standards and practices, concerned moms, and the media that instills fear in them, and all other institutions that play their parts/roles, as they act as mechanism of control, to be Socrates-lite, PG-13 or even G.
Now, is that how we raise adults to be mature beings, with lies that cover the nasties of reality? The same attempt was committed by the King who sired Siddhārtha Gautama, who became Buddha, brought about by this dichotomy of the Good life, verses the life of Suffering. And on that note, Virtual Nietzsche, would also be vastly interesting, as his reevaluation of all moral calls also for a hierarchal society, not unlike the Brahman Caste System, and as such, Buddha stands opposed to Nietzsche, as suffering is for the later the way to vitality, to suffer to the point of joy, as Buddha too suffer to the point of revaluation, of a Hegel unity of opposites in ecstasy, to the point right before (pure annihilation) Nirvana, and returns to the Hindu idea that from Kali Yuga we will all ascend together to the next age of time (God), Sayta Yuga.
I will end there with more brought up than discussed. And anyone interested in putting together a virtual reality version of any philosopher, let me know. I have some computer programming skills (and computer skills), a decent understanding of philosophy and literature (I have the equivalent of a Master's degree in Philosophy, which I will be awarded after I finish my Doctoral Work in Comparative Literature (only a few short years left, thank Bog)), and would welcome anyone who will take this seriously.
As always, let us here on the corner know that you where here, leave a comment... for a good beginning on the type of research in area of artificial intelligence programs please review this link: computer programing and the Socratic method.
Isn't it about time America turned its eyes towards Christian end of days groups as terrorist? For example, Scientology, do a key term search "Scientology and terrorism". Interesting results don't you agree. How about Latter Day's Saints (or Mormon's). Try searching about them, satellites, end of days, and agribusiness. Look for information about how they are preparing for the apocalypse, because the US of A is the place of the New Jerusalem. Even William Blake, with his Vision of America, thought the Americas would be have a pretty special destiny. This follows right along with Hegel, and a long tradition of American Exceptionalism. The seeds of the old are planted in the new to bloom. Yes, we are a bloom. Perhaps its already happening. Where does the freedom of Religion, of active thought, end? What about Christian groups that look forward, and materially aid, the coming of Jesus Christ, "preparing" for the end of the world, speeding up kairos? Aren't these groups creating problems, causing wars to end all wars? There is much to be said about groups that control, or are supported by such large numbers. Any thoughts?
Had I as many souls as there be stars, I'd give them all for Mephistopheles!"
*Please read the Frequently Asked Questions at the bottom of the page.
What happens when I make a formal commitment to Satan?
Satan looks out for his own. Satan gives us an inner strength and we become very strong in spirit. Unlike right hand path religions, where adherents are forever praying and searching for their god, Satan comes to us on his own. Many times, we can feel him. He comes to guide us when we get down, worried, or are experiencing problems.
He snaps us into line and directs us as to what we need to do to be focused and happy.
The foundation of Spiritual Satanism is in our finishing Satan's work upon humanity. This is the goal of the godhead, and is accomplished through power meditation. Humanity is currently at a very low level spiritually. When we begin to meditate, we experience profound positive changes within our lives. Satan and his Demons (The Original Gods) protect us and look out for us as we transform and achieve personal power. With Satan, we have protection that outsiders do not have. We can advance in the powers of the mind and soul as far as we wish. For outsiders, this can prove dangerous.