|
|
|
|
|
| The impossible self re-imposed ( simulation Theory )
Posted: 10/27/2007 8:04:52 AM | After ceturies of distorted delusion and containment of the body, the overexposure of sexual identity has everything to keep from what it truly is. The last obscene joke.
Paleontological productions of hollywood mythology, polyps and homo sap transformations, after the failed revolutions, the existential drift and great lies of structuralism pornography, the enslavement of hegelian madness poly-morphed into empty by-products of a marxist age reduced to ashes, the entire history of ordinary life is wiped off the map. The modern form of the world as it is. Everyone effaces himself.
What is really happening ? In the practice of evil, the definition of man has been subtracted, the woman is barely a metaphor left over from the age of postmodern redundancy. Nuclear perpetrators say amen. There is a silence underfoot, ontology ripped like a flag where everything tends to disappear and implode by useless theory.
Philosophy leads to castration.
who is dead ? who is alive ? you can go from life to the sublime without leaving a trace. | |
|
Hoop
|
Joined: 5/1/2006
Msg: 2 | |
| The impossible self re-imposed ( simulation Theory )
Posted: 10/27/2007 8:48:29 AM | Good questions. At present, I am reading:
(sorry it's a pdf)
Innocence Lost
by Barry Dainton
http://www.simulation-argument.com/dainton.pdf
More discussion in print:
http://www.simulation-argument.com/ | |
|
| The impossible self re-imposed ( simulation Theory )
Posted: 10/28/2007 5:37:05 AM | | hello, Hoop, I will check out that sight. Have you by any chance read the books " Simulations " or " Simulations and Simulacrum " by Jean Baudrillard ? He was a leading philosopher in simulation theory and social criticism. | |
|
| The impossible self re-imposed ( simulation Theory )
Posted: 10/28/2007 6:59:08 AM | necro vine, I <3 you.
And I <3 the woman that I don't really <3...shes great... but I'm a cheater, liar, no good, and shes no good for me... only because of the way society says I should be and says what she should expect of me. But I've been a cheater a night before and she still looks at me with loving eyes, but today, I would hopefully see myself turn away from her and everything I love about her too as I know she wants more from me. But I'm not a two-faced cheater, I cheat and I tell within 24hrs. I'll be hollow inside with only memories painted on the walls.
In my deathly, breathing state she always perpetrated me into action, never ceasing, always instigating and I'm so grateful, but shes dirty, and leaves a trail and I'm dirty, soiled by her midst, and more by my own. I think both of these girls just like to date my penis anyway. | |
|
Hoop
|
Joined: 5/1/2006
Msg: 5 | |
| |
| The impossible self re-imposed ( simulation Theory )
Posted: 10/29/2007 7:03:00 AM | | attention: (AKnightrmor,) perhaps your penis just slipped inside a shoe, you know the metaphorical vagina, we might need to get Freud to anaylze this more, but it seems to me that your problem is quite common ( mundane ) and a bit oepipal, assuming you had a father that you secretly dreamed of killing, so that you could crawl into your mothers bed and suck on her breasts to find out who you were through her celestial nipple. In other words, I think we might need to get you into the after life clinic to consult with Dr. Carl Jung and Lacan, they, better than I, will be able to help you better understand why it is you wish to possess a vagina rather than a penis. Dont castrate yourself on my thread, please, the sheets just cant stand all that metaphorical blood. | |
|
| The impossible self re-imposed ( simulation Theory )
Posted: 10/29/2007 10:30:32 AM | Upon further anaylsis, Aknightrmor, I realize I have misdiagnosed you. First of all I used a Freudian system when I should have been using a pure Lacanian and Platonic one instead. Allow me to explain. According to Plato, ( Note: I could be mistaken on source ) man once existed as hermaphrodite, having four legs, four arms, and penis and vagina. The Gods saw that this being knew it's sexuality too much so they decided to split it in half, thus creating male and female. Through out eternity, men and women have come together, to try and ( momentarily ) reclaim the other half of themselves through sex.
Now pay attention AKnightarmor, here is where I must introduce Lacan, taken at his most extreme, in an anylisis that is called Lacuntian. This states that man's consciousness originates and resides from the female genitalia i.e., vagina. What you have tried to do, is quite Platonic towards a Lacanian permanent, which as far as we know cannot exist, but I will still break down your symbolic attempt for you.
Number 1: By cheating on a woman with another woman you sought to possess and devour two females in what you hoped would result in a permament state, bringing you past the platonic hermaphrodite, into pure womanhood. But you did not stop there. Which is why we can still use Freud in that you were suffering from the " repitition compulsion " anylasis of your ( symptom ) to acheive your illusive ends.
Number 2: Now, as the woman that you have become, possessing a vagina, you seek to couple, ( or cheat ) with two more woman, thereby, hoping that you could end up as ( pure vagina entity. ) In Lacanian terms, you sought to become and achieve pure consciousness, or ( Lacunt ). This has been most ambitious of you. And I must say, I almost sort of admire your attempts, except that I dont think you are fully aware of them. But That is where I have interceded, and hereby given you a proper and complete anaylisis, as regarding your above post on my thread. | |
|
| The impossible self re-imposed ( simulation Theory )
Posted: 10/29/2007 11:13:39 AM | As it used to say in the Peanuts comic strip,
"The Doctor is In" !
I don't "get" this thread, but if others do, I'm cool with it.
Still, it started out as poetry, became a books recommendation, and then morphed into the OP's practice of some sort of psychoanalysis.
Or is it still poetry? I'm flummoxed. | |
|
| The impossible self re-imposed ( simulation Theory )
Posted: 10/29/2007 12:51:46 PM | | Thanks for stopping in, NotTooFishy, and I'm glad you're cool with my thread, but I must disagree with you in that this thread has always been a philosophy thread. You see I am primarily a theorist and work in the realm of theoretical philosophy, strongly influnced and developed by the Frankfurt school, i.e. Adorno, Benjamin, Marcuse. As far as my psychoanylsis is concerned, you might want to take to the history books on this one, but psychology and psychoanaylisis come straight from philosophy and metaphysical inquiry. This is not a poetry thread, although I do have several in the poems and quotes category, feel free to check those out, though I must warn that they are very different from my work here. All in all, I appreciate your interpretation and thanks for reading. | |
|
| The impossible self re-imposed ( simulation Theory )
Posted: 10/29/2007 6:37:18 PM | To under go analysis, is the most sexual experience, but how has philosophy, a movement that is almost completly without sex, withholding 'Jouissance', poly-morphed it's way onto the doctors couch? Is Freud aware that he is playing a very dangerous game by admonishing philosophy? He might well believe that certain points of his thought do not need to be elaborated because he himself is not a philosopher, but this, in point of fact, is an act of 'bad faith' as Sartre would say.
Freud very much is indeed a philosopher, with his theorys of the unconscious, their drives and their desires, their deleriums. And yet tell a psychologist or psychoanylst that his is the work of philosophy, and he will gasp, almost in utter horror.
The realm of the americanized thearauputic is destroying European anaylsis. These are the days of the verbal extinct. | |
|
| The impossible self re-imposed ( simulation Theory )
Posted: 10/29/2007 7:12:23 PM |
(AKnightrmor,) perhaps your penis just slipped inside a shoe, you know the metaphorical vagina, we might need to get Freud to anaylze this more, but it seems to me that your problem is quite common ( mundane ) and a bit oepipal, assuming you had a father that you secretly dreamed of killing, so that you could crawl into your mothers bed and suck on her breasts to find out who you were through her celestial nipple. In other words, I think we might need to get you into the after life clinic to consult with Dr. Carl Jung and Lacan, they, better than I, will be able to help you better understand why it is you wish to possess a vagina rather than a penis. Dont castrate yourself on my thread, please, the sheets just cant stand all that metaphorical blood.
Actually, no... my parents divorced when I was four. My mom often abandoned me at crack houses. I had a girlfriend that I engaged in sexual pleasures with when I was 5. And then she lost custody of me when I was 8. | |
|
| |
| The impossible self re-imposed ( simulation Theory )
Posted: 10/29/2007 7:24:30 PM | | if you would have read my second analysis, I explained more appropriatly what I thought you were going through, however, in light of this new information, I might have to rearrange my diagnoses, but only slighlty, for dont you see, that that five year old friend of yours was the symbol of your mother as a child. | |
|
| The impossible self re-imposed ( simulation Theory )
Posted: 10/29/2007 7:26:36 PM | | Masochistic theorys apply as well to the attraction factor, you must remember though, that these are unconscious desires, meaning, there is no way for you to have a concrete relationship to their ontological origin. | |
|
| The impossible self re-imposed ( simulation Theory )
Posted: 10/29/2007 8:20:13 PM | | No, I cannot see into my childhood. And she was a sexy, dirty blond haired girl whereas my mom is brown haired. And through our humping of eachother, she brought me to experience my first orgasm and love for women. | |
|
| The impossible self re-imposed ( simulation Theory )
Posted: 10/30/2007 8:31:48 AM | Here we shall concern ourselves with the work of french philosopher Guy Debard and the Situationsts movement, that helped usher in radical change in light of the May 68 riots and protests of France.
I shall work off of three main point's of Debard's, followed by my commentary.
# 3: the spectacle presents itself simultaneously as all of society, as part of society, and as instrument of unification. Due to the very fact that this sector is seperate, it is the common ground of the deceived gaze and of false consciousness, and the unifacation it achieves is nothing but an official language of generalized speration.
# 4: The spectacle is not a collection of images, but a social relation among people, mediated by images.
# 12: The spectacle presents itself as something enormously positive, indisputable and inaccessible. It says nothing more that " that which appears is good, that which is good appears " the attitude which it demands in principle is passive acceptance which in fact it already obatined by its manner of appearing without reply, by it's monopoly of appearence.
First of all, it should be most obvious to all what the " Spectacle " is that Debard is referring to, a general current list would be as follows:
Television
Cd's
DVD's
the theater
VCR's or DVD players
I-pods
Stereos
gadgets within the automoblie
commercials
fashion industry
advertisements
billboards
sale displays
sports, including arenas, football stadiums, baseball fields, the tennis court, ect.
and yes, computers, most of all.
The list is endless, especially since Debard's death and the maniacal rise of capitalisim.
So what is society's complicit approval of it's very own slavery, as Marx had predicted, and Freud deeply annaylized within the private sector? Radical french theory surely hasn't freed us from any of this. Not to mention in France itself, where most philosophical resistance's reside, booms the largest fashion industry of the psychoses of models and designers.
But beyond all this what remains. Here in Corporate America you cant go anywhere that has not already been, itself, completly fetishized, and whored out. The spectacle has won. So is the ' revolution ' only the idea of young NYU and Columbia students who sooner forget the idea just as they had finished formulating it. Much pessimistic speculation will arise. However, if there is a sermon left, it is has most certainly been left behind with the riots of May 68. To be remebered but not to be practised. | |
|
| The impossible self re-imposed ( simulation Theory )
Posted: 10/30/2007 1:34:23 PM | This spectacle is now the prosthesis of the human body. Mataphysics stops here, this is the realm of the techno ontology. Debard condemned modern man, but flew from his responsiblity to fight aginst the condemnation he had put upon us.
Now are there any loose ends where one might still be able to struggle out from underneath this spectacular fetish cell, this is quite a redundant question. Take for example the very fact that I am asking this question on a computer, one of the ultimate aspects of this enemy, the spectacle, is this not the epitomy of the absurd, as Camu would say? Certainly. So why this contradiction? well, must we not reach the blind in the very store house of their commodity, or veil of Maya so to speak?
An evil for an evil with the ultimate aim of good. Except that the messenger might end up being seduced by this spectacle to stay a little longer. | |
|
| The impossible self re-imposed ( simulation Theory )
Posted: 10/30/2007 5:10:01 PM | Guy Debard lived alot of years in seclusion, reading alot and writing little. He ended up shooting himself in the heart. This is what saddens me most, as suicide among philosophers, ( and suicide among everyman, though Seneca would have us believe that only the refined and most intellegent of men are destined for it ) is not often discussed, or at least not in the realm of the real emotional crises that occured at the core of these men, Walter Benjamin included, although now it has been aleged that Benjamin was murdered, of course suicide among society is most often discussed, thankfully, though with no real answers to reveal or lessons to teach, Debard, more than anyone during the may 68 period of France really revealed what was at the heart of society, not just within capitalisim, but every sector, infected by the spectacle.
I can't imagine what ran through his head throught all the years of his seclusion, did he feel like a failure, a prophet speaking to the primetime pundants and synchophants of the globalized market, besides which who else will hear, for don't we listen best only when our interests are in threat?
I will interpret some more of Debard, and try to lead this into theory's of simulation, not simulation as in Nick Bostrom's hypothesis, which just having read, disturbs me, but based upon some of the theory's of Baudrillard. | |
|
| The impossible self re-imposed ( simulation Theory )
Posted: 10/30/2007 5:24:20 PM | "but how has philosophy, a movement that is almost completly without sex, withholding 'Jouissance', poly-morphed it's way onto the doctors couch?"
Non withstanding what "Jouissance" means (I insist that using philosoph-tech terms does not help philosophy's existence at all), philosophy and sexual/carnal hedonism went hand-in-hand in Ancient Greece.
Using philosophy to claim the sexual decadence of humankind is an oxymoron because traditionally philosophers were considered dedandent (and envied) by the rest. IMO the MVP of applied philosophers, Diogenis, who lived in a barrel, used the favor offered to him by the mighty Alexander the Great during his visit to Athens to tell hom to move because he was blocking the sun.
How can we continue our existence beyond our lifetime-lifeline-death? We cannot. That is why we need the illusion of religious beliefs. Hedonism is life's ultimate philosophy. We also think, therefore we are. As per Plato, we are not clear as to what portion of his Socrates writings were his and what Plato's. Temporal existence is better than no esistance at all. We think therefore we are. And we feel, therefore we think. Hedonism is thus the source of thinking and thus (temporal) existence, IMO. | |
|
| The impossible self re-imposed ( simulation Theory )
Posted: 10/30/2007 5:38:48 PM | | yes, and Diogenes also masturbated in the square, which is well for him, and I might have lent a hand, hell a mouth for that matter, so as to better speak with a philosophers tongue, pun intended. As they didn't have tongue rings at the time, I think perhaps Diogenes would have conceded, it is all on the couch. | |
|
| The impossible self re-imposed ( simulation Theory )
Posted: 10/30/2007 9:02:22 PM | After the hugo animal machine, or the schizoid machine, comes this utter fascination with returnable forms. Namely: the machine can become more intelligent. To soften the blow of this powerful cosmetic hi-speed spectacle, ( commodity ), the business sectors have done their ends in pleasing a system without reason. Their return is exchangable data, an endless feild of data. What is the face of society? In other words what can we tell by merely looking at it? Andy Warhol declared: " if you want to know about Andy Warhol, just look at the surface of my paintings, there's nothing behind it. " In other words, theres nothing missing. What does this tell us? Has Andy Warhol described society as a machine, as this machinic coming to be out of an utter fascination with itself? Andy is commodity. Andy is pure exchangable form; nothing for nothing, society sees itself, and it is a blank circle.
Any good revolution is doomed to fail. Philosophy has seen that it can no more do it's part as truth teller, than can Warhol tell that what he is actually selling is commoditty wrapped up in sexuality, a blanket end depth form.
Besides, the philospher never really gets his hands dirty, does he? Debard got his hands dirty, as did many other future and present philosophers in the may 68 revolution, though from the machinic point of view, this is only the may 68 incident.
Where are those who have plunged their hands into the dirt of existence? Where are those who sacrificed themselves, for the bullet through Guy Debards heart, was the one meant for us. He took that bullet unto himself. He left us the revolution of the society of the spectacle, he saved us a little more time.
How is this time spent? What are the agenda's of our thinkers? These great treasure houses of intellectual surplas? Again we return to Warhol. " Theres nothing behind it ",
theres nothing missing. Lacan is dead. Derrida is dead. Foucault is dead. Baudrillard is dead. Debard is dead.
Death encroaches upon Paul Virilio and Slavoj Zizek, old age is coming. It will leave us with no philosophical surplas. The dream is dreaming us tonight.
Philosophy rest in peice. | |
|
| The impossible self re-imposed ( simulation Theory )
Posted: 10/31/2007 8:46:10 AM | Beneath all this development is the perpetual non development. Storage units wait to empty their certain brand of spectacle, even if it's a person, ( say models ) waiting to be released so as to seduce through a lack of seduction, because when the pornagraphic is more pornagraphic than porn, it is intregal reality, intregal sexuality, intregal meaning, sold into permanent display.
Science cannot seperate truth from fiction. The lives we lead are novels, and no bizarre concept is more plausible than an inverted remainder, signifying sexual cause, the repressed element, so to speak.
Freaud didn't tell us everything about sexuality. Which is why we needed Lacan. But even Lacan cannot encapsulate the whole scope of what drives this repression or this overabundance. And anyway, a porn star or stripper or prostitue might be able to tell you more. The best psychoanalyist would be a reformed street girl with a doctorate. Then the debates could really begin.
But is Psychoanalysis part of this spectacle? Hasn't it revealed to us some of the perverse reasons why we are grateful to our captors and the spectacle they supply us with. Surely there can be no easy way to answer this. But in the realm of fictional philosophy all things stand on uncertain ground. | |
|
| |
| The impossible self re-imposed ( simulation Theory )
Posted: 10/31/2007 5:07:10 PM | | So, sexuality is a confined element, I meant that perhaps the repressed stodgy non-sexical, so to speak, aspect of patient x, the consumer, or signifier, would best be brought to light under the guise of someone who has gathered the war wounds of their repressed sexical elements, and through their doctorate and hopefully orgasmic thesis, this can be achieved, the same applies for male hustlers, so your statement, either way is quite useless, the only repressive sighn in the individual ego that can be detailed is the one that pinpoints the locus of jouissance at the suture point of said individual. I am glad however that given all the ideas I am addressing and putting out there you choose to grasp for straws, where quite clearly your own signifying elements have been crossed. | |
|
| |
|
|
Home
login 