Oeaohoo

I meant more the source of a given religion, in other words the Revelation bestowed upon a particular mystic. This is one reason why, contrary to progressivism, Mohammed says: “Be patient, for an era will not come upon you but that what comes after is worse, until you meet your Lord.” Since this Revelation comes from a timeless place, though, if one managed to plunge the same depths oneself then I suppose it might be equivalent. However, it is unlikely that one would thereby become the source of a religion, especially nowadays… For example, whatever genuine mystical experiences the founder of this forum has had, there is never going to be a religion of Actualized.org.

The proof is in the pudding: if I started a religion on a whim, based on nothing, it would never catch on because it would lack depth and profundity; on the other hand, when somebody speaks from mystical (anagogic) insight, their words are susceptible of an indefinite development, and that is what a religion is. Naturally, the further one falls away from the source, the more distorted this insight becomes — hence the decrepitude of all organised religion in our time.

I’m sure you have heard a million explanations like this but I recently heard Shunyamurti say that thyroid problems often come from a disconnect between the mind and heart. I have a lot of neck pain and I think it comes from this.

I’ve been digging this guy recently:

Nietzsche said: “There is little manliness here, therefore the women make themselves manly. Only he who is sufficiently a man will redeem the woman in woman.” I think that rape fantasies are a degraded version of this: women who have been artificially masculinised will crave extreme forms of submission to compensate.

Interesting point.

I could tell you but I’d have to kill you! Isn’t this outside of the domain of ego-development?

I reject it in principle. In practice, it is just the world we live in, and postmodern philosophy is an accurate assessment of that world — though Nietzsche had already said most of it. Trite as it might be to quote Tolkien: “I wish it need not have happened in my time," said Frodo. "So do I," said Gandalf, "and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us.” I wonder how much these really contradict each other…

The difference is that New-Age Spirituality is intellectually woolly, communal, and passive, whereas your approach is intellectually rigorous, highly individualistic and active (“the work”, “personal development”). This can be jokingly summed up as autism…

Autism. Also, this needs a joke punchline…

He embodies a vulgar egotism which is anathema to the Left’s narcissism and self-righteousness. He is also a very symbolic figure.

Do you have any thoughts on how to avoid using spiritual work for self-deception?

They can’t, because history is a manifestation of metaphysical principles. The connection between history and metaphysics is much older than Hegel. It is found in every spiritual tradition. Hegel just secularised the Christian idea of providence. Like Nietzsche said, especially in Beyond Good and Evil, most of Western philosophy since Descartes is just secularised Christianity. Maybe it is just some irrational English ancestral memory, but I have always detested this pretentious French style, which says so little with so much. All of these writers just make the same point over and over: namely, that our concepts aren’t accurate because they imply a falsely fixed reality — a point which Nietzsche had already made in a much more exciting way. Why not just make that point and be done with it? Like Marxism, it is the kind of philosophy which is designed to be attractive to women. This makes sense since, as I understand it, philosophers in France are treated like celebrities. Tolstoy said: “For the French a woman comes before anything else. They are a weak, degraded people. Doctors say that all consumptives are sensual." I believe that women are rarely interested in the truth, in the spirit of this aphorism of Nietzsche:

This made me laugh. I expect it will be a psychosis of extreme, ant-like conformity. On that note, I saw a close up of an ant’s face recently. It was horrifying. Very devilish… I bet you he is a Trump voter!

Don’t we all? Hard drugs are required to survive through the Spenglerian, civilisational winter! This reminds me of the poem by Baudelaire:

Strange coincidence — you have a very similar energy to a friend of mine, who sent me the song “Holy, Holy” from this album the other day. Who could fail to love this beautiful version of I Know It’s Over?

Sadly, it’s true… Though I think there are other ways to get women — “think” being the key word there! How do they help? And what drugs? I have been considering trying 2C-B, since my friend has some.

“And when you’re tied to your mother’s apron, no one talks about castration…” — The Queen is Dead

Of course, he was. And so am I… “They’ve got a name for the winners in the world… I want a name when I lose!” At the same time, his lyrics are very humorous and his music speaks to a hopelessness which is quite common in English life, especially in the lower classes. It’s just the antithesis of American-style self-help or Nietzschean vitalism, in which one can never be a victim. Interesting point. The only Velvet Underground song I really like is Candy Says, since I have also come to hate my body and all that it requires in this world… What do you think I’d see, if I could walk away from me?

Oh, you handsome devil… ‘There’s more to life than books, you know, but not much more!’

Except that it’s a cyclical process of rise and fall rather than a linear and progressive trajectory. The subsiding of survival pressures creates decadence because it allows people to forget the harsher realities of life. This leads to societal collapse, out of which emerges a new, less “free” social order.

Exactly. That’s why they deserve to be ruled by him. Every country has the government it deserves.

Greed is GOOD! Sounds like my idea of hell. I like the bit in American Psycho where he is breaking up with his girlfriend. She says, “What about all of our friends?”, and he says, “You can have them.”

I’ve been thinking about this recently, nice answer.

That makes sense, I just can’t bring myself to play the bit… Maybe someday I’ll have to. What does it look like for you? The trouble with not playing the bit is that you end up in a weak and vulnerable position, more and more conditioned by the very system which you are trying to escape. This has basically happened to me. Well, I feel the same, only the other way around… Then again, I’m not in America! By the way, Trump’s rise reminds me of Spengler’s theory of Caesarism: