SODOMIZE

THE

WEAK

AND

HAIL THE

GOAT

http://www.cvltnation.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/baphomet1-820x820.jpg

@diversity_is_racism the thing I take from quantum physics is that it reaches down into representations and exposes them as such; revealing the world as an incomprehensible dark void of impulses.

If the particle, matter, whatever, doesn't appear in the form we perceive it until it's "observed" but this is the stuff we are made of, than that certainly implies the existence of something outside of that frame which is responsible. More specifically that there is something non-human doing the observation.

A quantum physicist friend of mine said that the observer effect was a misnomer and proffered "perturbation" instead. His view was such that the mere interaction of waveforms was enough to collapse them.

It didn't hit me until now however that Schopenhauer had said about how we are only conscious of something when it resists our will. So if these representations happen regardless of other humans around, the implication is that there is some discrete, multitudinous *will* at this level which, when bumping shoulders, gives rise to this very basic grade of existence we try to make sense out of using physics.

Got off track a bit. There is no god.

So anyway that perturbation is what Schopenhauer was describing from a different lense

It's cool shit

I'm incapable of taking that deeper so don't probe me bb

I don't even know if this would be anything but junk science, to be honest. I don't know that there is something wrong with it, I don't suspect to the point that I would dismiss it but, there are trends in the scientific field that are way too humanist for their own good. Maybe observation does nothing and we just like to think it does?

The conclusion wouldn't be that you can sprout tentacles out of your arm

We definitely experience the effect

so it shouldn't be discarded

That does not mean that a phenomenon is dependent on observation. But I understand the point.

it just means that phenomena are the result of shoulders bumping, more or less. Without such "perturbations" the world is indeterminate potential I guess. That doesn't really matter though.

Since we can't know the answer

No. At least, not off of the models we have now. All of the uncertainty gives egg heads something to do.

We'll never get there

But once we stop trying, we are just going to atrophy. That is the tragedy of the workaholic. I guess we could breed temperaments that make do with uncertainty without stagnance and atrophy.

We could devote energy into how to live instead

ethics

Not to mention the other pillars.

Imagine all of the theorizing that we get today going into high art. Music, painting, sculpting: all of these ideas of how the more subtle world would look to our material eyes and sound to our ears. It would at least be more interesting to me.

It would hit an epistemological crisis all the same

Don't the artsy types thrive in crisis? They love it.

"well fuck, how do you write a good tune."

All of the musicians disagreeing though working at their very best could make an all new explosion of genres and enhance already existing ones. See, they would be creating something. That would fulfill them even with all of their doubts.

yeah but that's not usually the result of theorizing

Theorizing is deconstructive

rationality that is

It's not a creative force

I disagree. Look at Marilyn Manson. His theorizing on the occult led to many of his albums.

I don't know what you mean by his theorizing

I disagree that it can't be creative or lend itself to creativity, not that theorizing isn't deconstructive.

It's literally how the understanding works: it breaks down the "whole" into parts to reason about it. A la categorization

Sitting around and theorizing on how something is. What it is like. What it's properties are. These deep thoughts lead to impressions in the mind that lead to creativity.

How is quantum physics humanist

You know all that wank music out there? The stuff that relies heavily on rational faculties as opposed to our non-rational ones? It doesn't leave a strong impression does it

That's the sort of shit that is derived from artistic theories

I don't think marlyin Manson's aspirations of being the next Alice Cooper using his library card to read occult literature to shock mommy is really a strong example.

@profagonist It isn't. However, the immediate conclusion that a phenomenon must be experienced to have certain properties is. There have been a lot of physicists who rent seek from government grants jumping to these conclusions and others in the "string theory" line of thinking just to publish something. The assumption that humans hold a central role in the universe is humanist.

@༺པརབྱར།བསངཇ༻ I would assume that the wank music is there to entertain and to masquerade as art, obsessed with finding "unique" notes and being too self fascinated. When you have deep impressions of immaterial forces, it isn't very rational. When you want to capture an impression and relay it as deeply as possible through your medium, it could make for good music depending on the skill and investment of the artist.

I don't think that's a belief many physicists hold, actually I'd say most think the opposite

@༺པརབྱར།བསངཇ༻ Furthermore, we have a dearth of skill among the arts these days. Hopefully, the skilled will elbow the unskilled out of the way. Mediocrity really gets more attention than it deserves.

@profagonist I agree. But THOSE physicists have real jobs.

Physics is basically about arguing against that anthropocentrism

I agree, again, but that does not mean that everyone with the piece of paper sticks to studying physical laws.

I feel like you're describing more Deepak Chopra than a scientist

The Tao of Physics and all that. But that is the subject that gets the most reads though.

@༺པརབྱར།བསངཇ༻ I SEE IT MORE AS A FUNCTIONAL SYSTEM

THE OBSERVER DOES NOT HAVE TO BE HUMAN

THUS THE ACT OF OBSERVATION LINKS OBSERVER AND OBSERVED

Have you considered that needing to find novelty is driven by the collapse of that particular medium? They try to find something unique because they came in at a point at which everything which could be said has been said, in terms of diminishing returns? Also that the intellectualizing has removed all the mystery of the genre itself and with that, anything to explore.

So you mean the vestments of science on humanist philosophy @-A?

THIS IN TURN IMPLIES IDEALISM: INTERACTION IS A RESULT OF PRESENCE/RESPONSE TO SOMETHING, NOT MATERIALITY PER SE

I object to that popular science propaganda shit too

wait dearth of skill? Dude, plenty of people who can't play for shit made good music

@diversity_is_racism yeah that's what I was saying minus idealism

@profagonist It at the very least seems to give the impression that it is more widespread that it should be. Maybe it isn't.

But I took out observation

https://www.reddit.com/r/askaconservative/comments/5v7eg3/is_deep_ecology_a_conservative_philosophy/

@༺པརབྱར།བསངཇ༻ ALSO SKILL CAN MEAN LISTENING

SOME ARE SKILLED MUSICIANS BY OUTLOOK, NOT ACTUAL MECHANICS

THE IDEALISM IS ESSENTIAL

IF INTERACTION LINKS THINGS, THERE IS NO DECONSTRUCTION

AND

@diversity_is_racism Why does there HAVE to be an observer at all? I don't understand because it seems like it is a conclusion that is just leapt to for no reason other than to uphold the idea that obervation leads to event.

ALL OF THE UNIVERSE ACTS AS A LARGE CALCULATION

I'm still coming across good rap and electronic releases but it's easy to see that it takes more and more effort for only marginal returns.

@-A THAT IS HOW MOST UNDERSTAND IT: "OBSERVATION LEADS TO EVENT" TRANS. TO "INTENT => EVENT"

@diversity_is_racism Okay, that observation must lead to occurence?

intentionality

not really observation

Hence the perturbation

Being the clash of intentions

@༺པརབྱར།བསངཇ༻ They can at least understand what good music is. That is a skill in and of itself apparently. With the collapse of a medium because all has been said, the beauty of music is that you don't need words (such as the electronica you keep coming by, which I also like) so sure, the words have been said but has the sound been made? Maybe, maybe not. When there is this impression you want to express, it encourages creativity. Maybe it will be nothing new save for the order or how long ago it was done? Maybe it will be completely new. One's inner model leads to creativity.

I disagree that there is anything to understand about "good" music.

Since what we experience is aesthetic

I think you underestimate the degree to which your inner model is dependent upon the cultural model you were born into

Meh. Maybe. I just think theorizing leads to impression and impression leads to expression and that this could at least make for new creation. Some will be good, some will not.

It's almost always the other way around and that's as true of music as it is of broader cultural trends. They always start out more visceral, irrational and maybe a bit simplistic and end up abstract, rational, ornate.

But

The key here

Is that the second "phase" is derived from the first

Look what people did in response to death metal? They went primitive as hell with black metal

What happened in rock after prog

punk came out

Where does this visceral quality come from? One of those things that can't be known?

immediate experience

Therefore, the emotions that these experiences make? A reflection of these experiences?

it's more than emotion isn't it

Could we have the flairs from /r/askaconservative/ on /r/new_right plus a few additional ones e.g NRX TRP MRA MGTOW DE etc?

@༺པརབྱར།བསངཇ༻ Sure. But emotion and intellect are the core of art. The desire to create and to reflect on nature or even their own ideas.

@redpillavatar in art? Or on the chat?

on Reddit

Nah the intellect is responsible for abstract concepts

An important feature of early artistic movements is that those who were around routinely attest to "not knowing what to call it, in those days"

So they lack anything grounded in abstract concepts like "black metal" or "punk"

Ergo, not intellectual

The intuition more than the intellect. The intuition makes for a great modelling mechanism and internal impressions.

The intuition isn't a modeler