/lit/ - Literature

so the day has come once again

>>12865419
Also surely someone should read prior philosophers before fulling delving into things such as this? I'm reading the greeks extensively but this has always spiked my interest yet I refuse to attempt to read these as they reference so much of modern philosophy which I have not even looked over. Whats the basis for reading these? Should we have prior knowledge? or just go in open minded?

>>12865419
Texhnolyze >>> Lain

>>12865514
Literature and philosophy are lifetime journeys. You don't need to study pre-biblical sumerian legend or even read the entire bible extensively to appreciate paradise lost, for example... then again, that might be one of the vectors you approach toward understanding and appreciating it more fully perhaps also with the guidance of secondary works or tertiary works.
>>12865429
Eschaton stands for end history and to the stars.
>>12865541
Blasphemy!

>>12865541
watching texhnolyze right now and i gotta say that you are wrong

>>12865514
i have found that part of the genius of Uncle Nick comes from adding a legit chapter to philosophy, but it makes more sense if you follow the trail:
>Spinoza
>Kant
>Hegel
>Marx
>Nietzsche
>Heidegger
>Lacan
>Deleuze
and Badiou too, who may have found his own way of getting around Deleuze > everybody. as Brassier says, the cosmic void and the stellar animal. some good mind-hack here:
https://plijournal.com/files/Pli_10_11_Brassier.pdf

>>12865419
hola mystikos, most based of based neoplatonists. the glorious CAG could not have a more excellent OP

>Thread question #1: Did Deleuze commit suicide and how does that reflect upon his philosophy?
yes and i don't think too much. he was in extremis

>Thread question #2: What is the difference between hyperstition and synchronicity and does Land confuse the two?
interesting question. i think Uncle Nick has his own occult reading of Marxism that doesn't really seem like he's confused the terms, he's just invented his own demiurge to root for and found some utterly fascinating connections. nobody can write about the intersection of finance, technology and AI as well as he can and as you know i'm pretty much totally convinced that BTC is the bootloader for AI and represents a major turn in the history of Marxist thought. and philosophy itself...

>Thread question #3: How does the journey across space (west to east) reconfigure metaphysics in a way that is not already done in the journey temporally (from pomo to antiquity)?
the Chinese have a different, if not a better, take on deconstruction in the 21C. even Sloterdijk intimates this in one of his recent books. moar here if anyone is interested.

Crypto-Current: BTC and Philosophy is still the most interesting work being written anywhere in the world for my dime. i've been reading all kinds of stuff as per usual but i still think Uncle Nick has the belt. Deleuze-Badiou is wonderful high-test metaphysics, Lacan too, all of it. everybody. but Nick Land rules all

wonder if this thread will last...

>>12865588
guess i should actually get my quotes right, derp. it's
>stellar animal
and
>cosmic void

posting this here also because i was staring at it the other day and reflecting to myself that money is indeed one hella weird fucking thing indeed.

and contributing music

Tom Waits: New Coat of Paint
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=107dADrIVBk

gotta pack it in for the night but look forward to checking in on this one tomorrow.

Zizek BTFO your garbage lmao

>>12865618
Zizek does not BTFO Land, he just doesn't have the same reading on acceleration that Land does. if Baudrillard were alive he wouldn't take Land seriously either. JB would have his reasons for this and so does Zizek.

which is too bad, because Land is that dude and has a much better sense of what's coming. but i don't imagine philosophers have ever been happy to pass the torch.

is the skelly a body without organs?<div class="like-perk-cnt"><img alt="" src="//s.4cdn.org/image/skeletons/23.gif"></div>

>>12865644
obviously. how else would
>acskelleration
even be a thing

>>12865644
Playing a trumpet requires lungs, does it not?

>>12865670
>askelleration
kek, have a Like!

>>12865679
just a breathing machine

Didn't he jump from his hospital window due to immense pain?

>>12865644
thinking<div class="like-perk-cnt"><img alt="" src="//s.4cdn.org/image/skeletons/22.gif"></div>

>>12865607
>cosmic animal
Sounds comfy
>stellar void
Sounds metal
Can I be comfy and metal?
>>12865588
I'm working on Intelligence and Spirit. And a buncha other crap. Sloterdijk is good. Idk if I buy the Clamour of Being. Being and Event is mind-blowing tho. Metapolitics, Ethics, Theory of the Subject is crazy too. Philosophy in the Present is light-hearted fun with Zizzy to boot. Byung-Chul Han is a fun weaver of theory as you rightfully recommended. The Dash is a good work I've been exploring. Badiou has an untimely meditation on German Philosophy as well. Pocket Pantheon is qt as fucc binding. Ummm... Popomomo.
>>12865618
Deleuze is more metaphysician than Zizek. But not only that but ethically and aesthetically he is simply more satisfying to read IMO. Idk. Johnston's work supposedly examines such metaphysical implications in Zizek but I have not examined them yet. Idk. Kinda sick of perverse kernels and foundations of universalisms much less things kept hidden since world foundations seem to not appeal. My episteme is scientific. In a way that is both mystical and material but non-supernatural. I actually have been itching to read some science lately hence revisiting and delving into D&R as well as Virtual Science and Intensive Philosophy.

>>12865588
I think hyperstition is more interesting than synchronicity but also they can coexist separately. Such is my current magical understanding. I think there is value in Bataille and Mauss tho. As well as Levy-Bruhl and Fraser. As a schizophrenic I find the supernatural interesting tho as mentioned I try to be more empirical nowadays.

>>12865419
>#1
yes, not much. his line of flight from suffocating was out a window, that's all
>#2
define synchronicity a little bit. hyperstitions are ideas which make themselves actual via Deleuzian virtuality
>#3
space taoism? very suspicious of it's efficacy. eastern religions have tended towards a potent mode of capitalist cope since the 60's.

>>12865694
For some reason some people claim it was an accident or something. I am agnostic.

>>12865768
>his line of flight from suffocating was out a window, that's all
Lol.
>define synchronicity a little bit
Synchronicity is some magical thinking jungianism. Meaningful coincidences. I guess technically could refer to anything like a providential notion of fate. Usually fueled by mania, drugs, sense, affect, narcissism, religion.
>space taoism? very suspicious of it's efficacy. eastern religions have tended towards a potent mode of capitalist cope since the 60's.
Glad someone else is thinking it (tho I do love me dao and tantra a lil still)

>>12865736
>Can I be comfy and metal?
i don't know, maybe. the thought that comes to mind is comfy amongst metal, which doesn't conform to my idea of comfy in the slightest.

>Being and Event is mind-blowing tho. Metapolitics, Ethics, Theory of the Subject is crazy too.
even without understanding half of B&E i agree, Badiou is time well spent, and again because he does seem to have some kind of edge over Deleuze in weird places. which is a good scene all around, especially since Full Deleuze - even if he is right about everything, and he probably is - nevertheless also gives me all the stuff i can't stand either. but i'm probably not doing him right.

>Byung-Chul Han is a fun weaver of theory as you rightfully recommended
Shanzhai is a cool little book. and i just think Chinese philosophy was never explained well enough by Derrida et al, but there are other French Sinologists, like Francois Jullien, who can fill in the pieces.

Reza is good also, if Land didn't exist i'd be more in on him. but the Crypto-Current book...i don't know, i just feel like everybody is playing catch-up to him. no doubt it's part of where my own interests are, but i feel like it's just so tidy to suggest that if the market is the unconscious of the socius, then the AI-machines are the unconscious of the market, and Land is the only guy who can approach that problem in the right way and with the right background in all of these other guys. BTC isn't capital in the same way that capital is for Marxists of an earlier generation, i'm convinced. it only makes sense in terms of intelligence production, and there is nothing else to root for going forward other than that, he's really right about this. everything else is just the same politics, over and over again, amplified louder and louder.

in addition to Roffe's Abstract Market Theory (which is good, if dry), i'll recommend another good recent read, pic rel. much less dry and super-interesting. many parallels i think between then and now.

>>12865419
I AM THE DRAGON OF REVELATIONS

>>12865794
I guess in that rough sense then I don't see hyperstition as fate; retroteleology shouldn't be reduced to simple determinism. hyperstitions fight one another for psychic real estate and only the strongest survive.

>>12865766
>I think hyperstition is more interesting than synchronicity but also they can coexist separately. Such is my current magical understanding.
i unironically believe you are going to contribute something really fascinating to these things tho, i totally think a kind of return to Platonism and Gnosticism and the like makes sense coming out of all the deconstruction. if only to rediscover the really awesome and deeply buried roots that lie under all the refuse and junk piled up around the multiple collapses of metaphysics in the 20C...

magical thinking sounds entirely appropriate to me amigo. this is Planet Meme after all.

>I think there is value in Bataille and Mauss tho.
i very much concur, altho i'm (probably stupidly) on the side of wanting to escape from Bataille because it's like rooting for Bane. he's awesome for crushing early 20C political fantasies and death for trying to escape from the 20C into something a little brighter. but as long as people want to continue to play stupid modernist political games he will be important...and for reasons other than this. Mauss also. gift economies are for realisies

>As a schizophrenic I find the supernatural interesting tho as mentioned I try to be more empirical nowadays.
me as well. it's hard! but better perhaps than getting carried away too much...sometimes i feel like sticking to a holographic theory of reality and appearance and being a Neo-Vedantin Integralist works, then i read the continentals and go, fuck it, i'm just going to have to make peace with whatever the theory turns out to prove is the winner.

>>12865808
so revelate us something then why dontcha ya big scaly dingus

>>12865639
What's coming?

>>12865801
>the Crypto-Current book...i don't know, i just feel like everybody is playing catch-up to him. [...] BTC isn't capital in the same way that capital is for Marxists of an earlier generation, i'm convinced. it only makes sense in terms of intelligence production, and there is nothing else to root for going forward other than that, he's really right about this.
unironically makes me feel like we're seeing the next Copernican revolution happening in its exhausting birthing pains. hopefully I'll be around to see what slithers out of that cursed womb...

>>12865877
automation. social credit. the continual breakdown of 20C boomer ideologies, their replacement with more Woke-ly hysterical versions. China. crypto. mind-machine virtual realities. corporate overlordship. loads of other stuff.

>>12865882
>Copernican
that is absolutely wholly and not partially the word for it, i feel it also. once upon a time we discovered that the Earth revolved around the sun. the next one is to figure out what it is that man revolves around, because it sure as shit isn't him and his fucking addiction to chicken wings and anime porn.

intelligence/AI/automation/bots/finance/all that shit is the real story and it is fucking fascinating. it's also probably going to rip everything we know about the universe to shreds, but...aren't we doing that to ourselves already? haven't we done this twelve thousand times historically? these things happen.

i'm also doing some catch-up reading on the side, things like the rise of Christianity in Rome, lots of other stuff...this is one of those times, i think. it's going to be fucking crazy, but we will adapt. we always do. somehow.

I don't understand a shit of what you are talking about but for some reason I enjoy reading all of this.

>>12865768
This image is a meme right? Associating the consumption of Nick's work with taking drugs really devalues it. Just because he was strung out when he wrote most of it doesn't mean you need to be high to understand or appreciate his work.

>>12865856
>>12865870
>>12865882
>>12865910
Can you guys give me some books to read to understand what you guys are discussing? I read some articles by Nick and Moldbug but recently Land has been talking about blockchains and crypto currencies but the former of the two is really the one causing me immense difficulty, does #ACCELERATE cover block chains? If not what do I read to understand?

>>12865870
Hallucinations that are equivalent to hyperstitional experience are trivially accomplishable in the context of simulationism simply by specifying that you want an algorithm implemented that maximizes your subjectivity as follows:

1. Iterate through the probabilities of different quale during the hallucinatory period
2. Instead of assigning qualia based on pure statistical method, use this formula:

if (((i.TrueProbability*i.TrueUtility) – (i.FalseProbability*i.FalseUtility)) > (((j.TrueProbability*j.TrueUtility) – (j.FalseProbability*j.FalseUtility)) )
Qualia = i.quale
else
Qualia = j.quale

If you like a touch of realism, add a condition that the probability has to be non-zero for it to trigger. Add other conditions and specifications as desired to fine tune your hyperstitional experience.

Can also be done with dreams, other altered states of consciousness. Try it. Or don't. You're basically obliterating a statistically likely part of your "soul" if you use this technique. But I can guarantee it will work.

>>12865925
More like hes taking in the message fully, hes self indulging in hedonistic ventures in await for neo-china to come from the future. Also practicing the art of viewing the world in different consciousnesses through psychedelics the weed though.... I cannot condone the weed that is the only true demoralization of his work. Weed is for losers.

>>12865910
Honestly I think the China fetishism is the weakest part of the accelerationist canon

>>12865931
It's a meme.
Stop falling for pseud tricks.

>>12865922
>>12865931
it just sort of made sense for me after a while. one of the first major Oh Fuck Here We Go moments i had was with this one, pic rel. it might not be the same for you guys but for me it was like the thing i had been waiting on forever, the metaphysics of production. then Lacan sharpened down Heidegger's perspective on this even further. i guess some people get this feeling with Hegel, but either because i didn't read Hegel until much later on he didn't do it for me so much. but this one was the one that *really* blew me away, simply because of the veritas/aletheia distinction, Dasein, Das Man and the rest. i was feeling very cozy in Heidegger Wonderland for a while and that was *before* i got into Land's work, because i thought...well, if Heidegger makes so much sense, then...what the fuck? why are we doing this?

it's only much later in Land's career that he's started to make nice with Heidegger again, he tees off on him in Fanged Noumena (not especially convincingly). but as usual, the more you read of all of these guys the more the total picture will come into place for you, i think. and by 'total picture' i don't mean an objective Complete View of reality, just...that you will understand these guys, because they all understood each other, and then we all kind of explore this Terra Incognita in our various ways.

Nietzsche and Marx are two giants of the 19C and both have to be read, along with Hegel. in the 20C Heidegger is a must. with those guys the later continentals will make more sense, especially Deleuze and Lacan, who are both important for getting to Land later on, imho. there's no real Lacan-Land connection but Lacan is a big deal in connecting Hegel and Heidegger to Deleuze at least, and then Deleuze to Land, &c &c.

the Mackay reader doesn't cover blockchain or BTC stuff but it still definitely worth reading if you're into these threads.

>>12865948
why? even Anna Greenspan thinks China is way cool, and for reasons other than Land. BC Han also. i'm just glad they're players again on the philosophical stage so that the whole of intellectual life on planet Earth doesn't have to ride or die with Trump. China's fascinating.

>>12865971
It's not that I don't find them interesting, I just have concerns that they won't reach the heights that many assume they will. They have issues, and if they fail it might leave a stain on the ideology that will be hard to wash out.

>>12865931
here also is a super-short text from Land that may help you to understand some of his perspective. it's not like adding R&D to conventional theories of production and consumption is rocket science, it's just that unlike a lot of earlier thinkers, Land is uniquely equipped to talk about capital in connection with

a) computers, and
b) computers linked on the internet.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1u0CQDUgOfCJFoxX2rkdf5oC6kPk_cF7J/view

this much is also a good primer for what i think is his magnum opus, which is the Crypto book, which explains his fetishism for the Nakamoto paper in much greater detail. he really is actually a very conservative writer, in many ways, in spite of all the madness of his earlier years. and he has read, with great fidelity, both the Austrians and the Marxists and updated a hybrid of both of those for the 21C.

as much as he is memed on /lit/ for being a madman who dreams of Lovecraft and the rest it really is just a very sober analysis of monetary theory by way of some unorthodox sources. that he posts like your drunk uncle on Twitter doesn't take any shine off of what he has contributed to the overall discussion, imho. he's just a legit Purple Sweater-tier philosopher writing brilliant shit.

>>12865971
I have only read Plato's Republic, some Nietzsche works and some small essays of Heidegger. Did you delve into Being and Time without previous readings?

Is this some Systemspace shit

>>12865997
that's understandable. and you may well be correct. the fact that they are as committed now to their version of capitalism as Silicon Valley is to their version of communism is not exactly a small irony, both sides trying to outdo the other at exactly the things they are bad at (and aided, for better and for worse, by and through the technology they need for it). it's quite an interesting world we live in.

what i like about their contribution is that they disrupt the old world, which is fundamentally predicated still on the Western model *in utterly stupid ways.* Zizek is right that anti-colonialism is the new colonialism, and i don't think China is interesting because i hate on the West, i like the West and i dislike the scapegoating of everything that it is supposed to be. but we are sorely in need of a new chapter in our story. fortunately, we are going to get one...

it could be that the West simply needs to be, incredibly, a kind of underdog once again to recover its mojo. that is possible. i really hate both the piling on on the West by leftists and the idea that unless we're redpilled as fuck we are somehow enemies of it. both of these prospects are stupid to me, and i really fucking hate just about everything i see now on Twitter, the extremism everywhere, the bloated, stupid decadence of all of it. perhaps this is necessary, i don't know. sadly i don't think it is, and that we are just an unbelievably stupid and selfish species of animal. but then i am fortunately reminded that there are still some good philosophers out there who gently remind me that i too am mostly chimp also, and that i don't have to be so ideologically possessed either...

politics is the disease and not the answer. but it's taken me a while to settle on this and realize where my tiny fuckwit brain can be most productively hosted.

>>12865931
don't get into stuff like crypto-currents until you are familiar with the tech. know what a block is, what a hash is, the difference between proof-of-work and proof-of-stake, ect. this is a good rundown on blockchain:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93E_GzvpMA0
also read the bitcoin whitepaper for sure

>>12866009
there are three books i usually shill for helping me out when i was a total and utter noob in philosophy. one of them is this one, specifically for understanding Heidegger and his milieu, because i think it is massively important to understand Heidegger, which means understanding Germany in the 1920s and 30s. so this is one of the books i recommend.

the second is Richard Tarnas' Passion of the Western Mind, which is a really good run-through of the entire history of philosophy. and the third is Barzun's From Dawn to Decadence. all three are pretty accessible and don't require a lot of previous philosophical knowledge.

as for Heidegger specifically, once you finally understand what he is trying to say - his language is quite dense - the rest of it is a cakewalk (and a fucking tremendously illuminating one at that). his essays in the Basic Writings are all good, particularly the stuff on art and the Greek Temple. to me he absolutely nailed Life After Nietzsche, and then i think Lacan and Derrida will make a lot more sense also. sadly, so will Land, perhaps, later on, because he basically plunges directly into Heidegger's nightmare...but my own penchant for fixating on Land is a very personal and idiosyncratic one, and there are lots of other things to do besides him. there's Deleuze too, after all...

so to answer your question, yes, i did, but with this guide. and i had also read Nietzsche, that's important, and Baudrillard also. and the Stoics, Plato too...sounds like we had fairly similar trajectories. but anyways i'm sure you can do it, especially if you want to! if you hate a philosopher it's hard to enjoy reading them, but...well, Heidegger was exactly the guy i was looking for at that time and so that made it easier. there's tons of other secondary and source material you can find on him also, i just found this one to be good and accessible.

Do not confuse accelerationism with these pseud namedroppers. They can only soundbyte and parrot paragraphs without saying anything.

>>12865936
ok, well you've finally disproven that old canard that says dragons cannot also into algorithms, which confirms that we are in fact living in a Shadowrun universe and therefore i should be happy about things in general

i can't into the code anon, my brain is wired differently and not particularly well. but your post is based all the same, i salute your erudition and wholly co-sign your being the dragon of revelation. consider my snark retracted and replaced with joy and admiration

and now i must sleep, after having selected three images containing a bus. i bid you all pleasant dreams and perhaps we can continue this conversation in the morning

So I have really no idea where to go from here. I've read the Phenomenology of Spirit, especially the section on self-alienated spirit, during my brief stint in the local societal super-structure. This eventually culminated in a psychosis whereby I was wavering between being a paranoiac body and a schizo body; maybe I was too enamored by power, but mostly I just wanted to be free more than anything else--I still do, yet I still desire. I'm planning on going back to the super-structure. What should I do with myself? I have no idea how to float effortlessly over the plane that is life without exploiting individuals, or being exploited in turn. How can I achieve rest? How can I be a body without organs? What is a body without organs? Maybe that realization is the next step, but I would still like some guidance. Should I learn how to program? Is that very much a part of the Real, or is it all simulacra? How do I get in touch with the Real completely, and is it even possible? How can I become free?

Currently reading pic related, and I don't think I'm getting Yuk Hui's point. Can someone please summarize the book for me?

>>12866091
Also I'm on meds. (5 mg of aripiprazole) Should I go off them? Or am I just not destined to understand? Perhaps I've been defeated.

>>12866038
>as for Heidegger specifically, once you finally understand what he is trying to say - his language is quite dense - the rest of it is a cakewalk
What resources do you recommend to peruse through to understand Heidegger's language?

>>12866106
You know what you need to do.

>>12866176
No, I don't. Well, maybe I do. But I'm scared.

>>12865931
They're not actually discussing anything, anon; they're just shooting the shit. A spectacle certainly, but not much happening under the hood.

>>12866106
>5mg aripiprazole
night as well just suck on a tic-tac. abilify is arguably the weakest second gen antipsychotic and 5mg is a very small dose

>>12865953
Not disagreeing with crypto being a meme but this guy had a thot problem, not a crypto problem.

>>12866556
I was in that thread and it was just another elaborate shit post.

bump

>>12865581
Finish watching the show and you'll realize he's correct.

Can someone give me a quick rundown why I should care about Deleuze or acceleration

>>12866104
there is extensive greentexting of that book in Cosmotech #6. scroll through and you can read some of the excerpts. basically it's just a very good comparative analysis of intellectual history. Hui believes (correctly) that there is some relation between Greek thought and technology, which is what is diagnosed later on by Heidegger and Stiegler, two guys he likes a great deal. what he's wondering is what the parallel intellectual history of tech in China is, and how it differs from the European experience. part of this also is to note that in the 21C tech is now a planetary force (as is capitalism) and to ask about why that is and how it works.

>>/lit/thread/S11931809#p11950111

but you can read the book for more reasons than that, it's really just an excellent description of a lot of thinkers relevant to philosophy today. and he is out to score zero postcolonial points or anything like this, he's not saying West Bad China Good. much more nuanced. i highly recommend that book.

>>12866091
>How do I get in touch with the Real completely, and is it even possible?
the perennial philosophy is good, as is Lacan. and before him Hegel and others. the traditionalists, Advaita, things like this. later on if you want to go there, Deleuze, who really is a major thinker. the thing we call Desire will take you on some long and pretty interesting adventures.

psychedelics and nootropics are nice too once in a while.

>>12866115
again, i think Heidegger's difficulty is overrated. some sense of Plato and Nietzsche is good, but really there is no substitute for B&T itself. start perhaps by trying to figure out how he explains the work of art, distinguishing poetry from technology, the artisan, the painting, this stuff. if you hate the world of kitsch irony, the kinds of things that Baudrillard (or even Guenon) have said about the modern world, Heidegger will be right up your alley also.

http://timothyquigley.net/vcs/heidegger-owa_outline.pdf

Land himself makes the most sense to me when i see what he's doing as another Plot Twist that follows Heidegger and Deleuze, who don't have too much to do with each other, but share a common root, that being Nietzsche. and in some sense the fallout from the truly epochal event in Western philosophy, that being Kant-Hegel-Marx. the more you study these guys the more the picture reveals itself. it can be overwhelming at first, but if you give it time and make the effort it really does become rewarding (and often frightening, and depressing, and, and) in the long run.

>>12866106
i'm going to say you probably shouldn't go off your meds for the sake of philosophy.

How do i find local accelerationist groups

>>12867637
because Deleuze was a god-tier metaphysician and much of the world can be explained in terms of his language and concepts. but he doesn't invent these out of whole cloth sui generis: there is a lineage in him that goes back to Spinoza, who is the precursor to the Enlightenment also. and *that* philosophy gives you the French Revolution. Deleuze and Guattari also leave room for Marx, which is important if you think the Industrial Revolution - or global capitalism - are worth thinking about. but this is a version of Marx uncoupled from Hegel and Freud, but compatible with Nietzsche, and on top of that he represents a serious challenge to Lacan's thought (which includes Zizek). there is also no Land or acceleration without him. Deleuze does a lot of stuff.

as to why you should care about acceleration, well, nobody's holding a gun to your head. i happen to believe capitalism is the true major phenomenon at work in the world today, but it cannot be understood in terms of the late 20C alone for a number of reasons. first of all, after the Cold War, as Land indicates, the Fukuyama blend of social democracy + free markets suddenly finds itself in a quandary: what do we mean by 'social', and how free are these markets supposed to be? on top of that, you have other technological questions that have to be answered: automation, computers, internet finance, and currencies not tied to federal reserves. all of these things show up to my mind a need for a seriously fresh look at the meaning of the polis in a world of planetary capitalism and intelligence and information technologies. for this Land is the absolute best, although his conclusions are dark and grim.

but again, even then, he's not doing this in a vacuum. Land's own thought draws heavily on Deleuze, but also Marx and Kant. it is the shift *away* from Hegel in Land's work that is perhaps most salient, because he just believes that fundamentally Hegelian thought is incapable with free markets owing to the nature of political thinking: nobody can ever be really objective about money, but what does that mean for the world in the long run? on top of that, teleoplexy posits a loop between capitalist production and consumption and the development of automation and computer technologies, things that conventional bog-standard postmodernism are incapable of thinking seriously about. cybernetics really matters today (even Heidegger said so, back in 1966). these are legit questions for philosophy to ask: where is all of this stuff going? what the fuck are we doing with money? Land also crosses the aisle and reads the history of capital from an Austrian perspective also, but the Continental is strong in him, which is why he just doesn't run around quoting from Atlas Shrugged. he prefers Neuromancer and Lovecraft.

so if you think capitalism is a legit planetary force but that it cannot be solved simply by putting on a Che Guevara shirt, Deleuze and /acc are for you.

>>12867723
>who is the precursor to the Enlightenment also. and *that* philosophy gives you the French Revolution
what if I'm opposed to the French Revolution, Marxism and industrialized society

>>12867736
All the more reason to actually understand them.

>>12867723
even with all of that said you don't just have to read all of this philosophy just to get to Nick Land. Land makes philosophy a pretty interesting project again, but it's more because his work requires you to go back and retrace all of the steps along the way, all the way back to Spinoza (at least). to me he presents a genuine no-bullshit Way Out of the 20C, which is a century of complete disaster in many ways, and we are still living under the cloud of it. it's been something like a half-century of postmodernity at this point, but the way forward now is through technology, computers, intelligence and much else. it doesn't mean we all have to sacrifice our humanity immediately, but it does mean not deriving our ideas of what makes humanity from the worst, most depraved, barbaric aspects of ourselves.

the two major thinkers of the 19C are to my mind Marx and Nietzsche, and before them Kant and Hegel. in the 20C it's Heidegger and Deleuze. a long and winding road that starts from Spinoza (and before him, Plato) winds through these, and can bring you all the way up to today. there is some kind of story being told here, and it invites a lot of other things as well - mainly the rise of technology in our lives, but also international policy, the meanings of the world wars, shifts in culture - the Foucault Effect - and lots and lots of other stuff. there is no *point* to this unless you are just interested in understanding, which i have been, and i have found those desires to have been pretty well amply delivered in full. i am now a believer in philosophy, even in a time of maximal cynicism, times when it seems that we have all gone blind and truth is simply a matter of opinion. but it is for this reason that i would prefer we *don't* go Full Stupid and just double down on whatever ideology works best for us, because largely this happens when we *don't* have a sense of historical perspective on any of this. there are reasons why we think as we do today. and it makes for wonderful conversations also.

>>12867736
see
>>12867751.
that is the answer. there's a lot of stuff that i am opposed to in those things as well! but i like to feel as though i am on reasonably solid ground in my attitudes. these things happened, and things today that happen are often echoes of them. this is why it's useful to understand the metaphysics that underlie them, the historical contexts, much else. mainly so that in trying to accomplish what we want we don't just wind up repeating the past, over and over again...

and also because it's fascinating as fuck to unlock the philosophers, learn a new concept. there's really nothing else like it, the moment when Thinker X hits you, and you realize you can suddenly make moves you never knew you could make before. or, rather, that you always could make them, but you thought you were the only one who understood this...it's a wonderful feeling. the French Revolution and Marx are major, major events.

>>12867736
> the French Revolution and Marx are major, major events.
so too is Christianity, by the way, the meaning of the Middle Ages, and other things. i'm not a serious Catholic, even if my favorite thinker is, but one thing that has happened to me along the way is a much deeper appreciation of the great wisdom traditions and in particular the one that has played an enormous role in shaping the intellectual culture of the West as well.

as i've said before, i'm never out to just bash the West in the name of Marx, or China, or anything else like this. European culture is a remarkable and beautiful thing also, and i think a renewed appreciation for its meaning and contribution to the world will come again someday. right now people cannot identify with the victims of its past transgressions quickly enough, but this is often done for terribly cynical reasons, and that in turn because of a shift in culture into its late-postmodern hyper-mimetic stance, the internet, recent political shifts, and lots of other stuff. a renewed appreciation for the meaning of Christianity at least would be to my mind an improvement in things, as well as removing some of the daggers from Plato's body so that we can see how significant he was as well. the awesome work that is done by Augustine, and lots of other things.

right now the world is in just in a fucking free-fall out of reality and engaged in a hate-fest of unprecedented proportions. that sucks, but there is a reason for it, i think. doing the deep dive into philosophy has helped me to understand why that is, and why it's a terrible idea to try to continue to fight ideological battles that really belong to the past century rather than the future. i think if we want to move past the fallout the reading is necessary, such that the Revolutions can be understood properly, that we do not repeat them pointlessly, and perhaps someday we can understand why it was that industrialized society has taken the course that it has taken.

>>12865819
Good point. Ya. It seems hyperstitions are more anthropogenic or socially constructed. Though of course there is an element of randomness too. A good example would be the qwertyuiop qabalism (and normal qabalistic gematria too). Something something douglas adams quote about cricket and astrology and strange and interesting emergentism for rulesets.
>>12865856
I need to read Realist Magic but I don't think it has stolen any of my ideas yet thankfully. Ya. Magical thinking is interesting. Bad when used in an uncritical / stupid / naive way but let us bit throw out the baby with the bathwater. I think from the perspective of pure nature there is something real about hyperstition and impure nature imputes something synchronistically. And then there are parallels to signatures and correspondences and sympathies and mana and gifts and living ontology both ways... heady stuff!
>>12866091
I think trying to attain full communion with the real results in delusion. Take it easy. Read some comfy books on philosophy as a way of life and the quest for enlightenment and learn to live with the fact that tho it is an eternal uphill struggle you are already on the journey and that is half the battle. Maybe also sort out your finances and employment and stuff as that often contributes to breakdowns.
>>12867637
Deleuze challenges the identarian roots of western philosophy. Have you ever thought that western philosophy was an exercise in stupidity? What if the primary metaphysical drive or force in the world's becoming is not similarity and form but pure difference? In such a vein, he also has a lot of unique and almost eastern insights into impermanence and interdependence and illusion and delusion as well as taking up the mantle of nietzsche and his challenges to the idealist tradition. A good materialist and scientist and atheist too if that appeals. No appeals to a platonic overarching brahma superform monad. Which can be scary but liberating. Accelerationism is all that plus a bag of potato chips. Usually trying to accelerate contradictions in capitalism to lead to the emergence of a hopefully superior system.

>>12867775
>marx and nietzsche
Don't forget freud and darwin!

>>12867842
no, of course not.

how awesome is this picture? it's very awesome. never fails to bring a smile to my face.

>>12867736
Read The Dark Enlightenment:
http://www.thedarkenlightenment.com/the-dark-enlightenment-by-nick-land/
>(what if the enlightenment was bad?)

>>12867861
Who's in the middle? Kojeve? Adorno?

also, Uncle Nick is going infuriatingly slowly on publishing recent chapters of his book. it's not like i'm complaining about him trickling out some of the greatest theory anywhere in the world today, but dayum...he took another huge break and i was loving getting daily updates.

he is the fucking best tho. everything else i read is just squaring me for Full Cybernetics going forward.

§5.583 — The Federal Reserve Note is nothing less than a wager upon the future of America, its central government, and – most specifically – its taxation power. By extension, the exceptional global acceptance of the US dollar is an investment in American world order. All these relations are analytically reversible. Geopolitical crisis implies currency crisis, or – still further – potentially follows from one. The coin has two sides, and can be easily flipped. ‘Derealization’ into pure credit only accentuates money’s ambivalence. As it is incrementally demetallized, money takes the form of a promise, whose credibility is founded upon the public image of state power, as fully-expressed within both domestic and international contexts. Under such circumstances – especially when a global hegemon is in the spotlight – the stakes of a ‘monetary revolution’ are not easily over-estimated. Nor are its positive implications readily anticipated. The nature of money has long ceased to be separable from the order of the world.

i'm glad i didn't have to write this book, because i would have torn my face off with my fingernails long before i ever got to the kind of lucidity that he has. but that book had to be written and it could have been written by no other, he's been perfecting this kind of analysis for thirty years. BTC, security, pass-keys, the internet, all of this stuff. he totally leaves the foundation open for lots of other writers too to go in and investigate the cracks that he has found in the way we think about political economy in the 21C, the relation between money, knowledge, and tech. all that.

>>12867871
just some intellectual or host i think, i haven't looked him up. but he's got a fucking great team if they can make art like that for him.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EaIslptrD-g

>>12867895
that's not even the best quote i could have taken from that book either, really. i don't know, maybe it's just because he scratches where it itches, took some crowbar or torch to those places where nobody else could have gone - either because they weren't him, or the tech just hadn't evolved to that point, or whatever.

bless his icy poisonous heart.

>>12867895
Cybernetics is crazy. My life changed after buying Bateson on a psychedelic whim. Does Land deal with the notion of sovreignty and the state of exception? That book blew me away recently. I wonder if an AI would be a sovereign... or if AI would be a state of exception... or both? The notions he'a bringing up here remind me of some of the legalistic notion of governance as not superstructure but relation between individuals and law. Idk. Hard to type full thoughts on my phone. Plugs in nicely to cybernetics tho. Gods I wish i were a polymath. But I suppose I am still young.
>>12867904
The glass bead game waits for no one.

>>12867904
>§5.572 — Every central bank is an amphibian, or a Janus-faced being. Operational pseudo-transcendence requires this. The central bank mediates between the public and private aspects of the economy – and even defines the distinction between the two – drawing upon the institutional axiom that aggregate confidence in private commerce is a legitimate, and inevitable, target of public policy concern. Trust, in its distributed economic manifestation, is taken as the object of a mass social technology. The great macroeconomic conception occurs, pre-programming much of what then follows. The critical point is the recognition that money issuance is a policy tool, precisely insofar as it is a channel of public communications. It is no longer that money merely bears a message, in the manner of a minted coin adorned with various politically significant inscriptions. A Federal Reserve note still carries such signs, but their seriousness is entirely eroded. Money-making, as such, is now the message. Aggregate liquidity management is no sooner adopted as an administrative responsibility than it flattens upon its own public enunciations. Signal and substance are one. A teleological transition occurs here, that might easily be missed...

>This is already to say that irrespective of its intentions, or self-comprehension, the central bank inherits responsibilities that are strictly magical.[13] Vivid ‘materialization’ of the impossible – i.e. of free risk relief – is its central obligation. It is not only illusionism that is at work here, then, but medicine, or therapy, in accordance with the archaic role of the witch-doctor. The public utterances of the central bank are a mass psychological talking cure, but inverted from an exercise of attention into an incantation, and thus a spell, or placebo. We hear in these words the technical ideal of the confidence trick, in its super-legal and pseudo-metaphysical configuration. Practical efficacy is tacit. Like credit money itself, the truth of the central bank statement is created – ab nihilo – in being believed. The reality is ideally exhausted by the phenomenon. It is what it is thought to be, and no more. Confidence, in the end, has no ulterior derivation. It is miraculous.[14] Half a millennium of demystification has led to this, clearing the stage for business-suited new magicians. The performance is underway. A tranquillized collective economic sphere is to be conjured into existence. As it entered its advanced maturity, The Great Moderation named it well. The Great Moderator – Mighty Macro – is a more valuable name still, for the One at the End who Looks Both Ways to Make Peace. That’s the Magician-God in the Bitcoin cross-hairs.

i didn't expect to be posting Demiurges today but here we are

>>12865877
Ur mom lol

So accelerationism is just Heidegger without anthropocentric safepoints?

>>12868243
yes pretty much
Dark Heidegger run through Deleuze and Bataille

>>12868243
Nothing but a demon, an ai god of utter inhumanity, can save us.

>>12868297
>>12868420
yeah that's what it appears in my lectures about it, and my principal concern with the way Heiddeger understood tech, his aversion of it and it's essence, which appear naive for me, I mean, you can't escape this "enframing" of the world, not because we can't escape technological estructural thinking, but because it's human nature, fucking off to the forest won't fix anything, the same as to be in a city wouldn't.This is what I always found with critics of tech, they say "oh you know, technological progress will not bring you everlasting happiness", they want to reframe a fundamental /human condition/ problem as something technological, we know tech will not bring us happiness, nothing will, not even spiritual search, but isn't that Lacan? if we really accomplish our desires to it's fullest we would die, or at least it will be pretty boring. So reading about /acc/ appears to me, in this sense, trying to find a sort of cybernetic jouissance, some kind of techno-moksha, but again is in this dichotomy Heidd/Land which let me with a sour taste, because Land treatment of tech, capital and all that as demiurges separated of human control isn't very fitting for me, it appears even a cope, as if "you know it produces itself", and its not like that, we want it this way and we will suffer it's consequences, in this I think we become more anthropocentric presicely when we try not to be, but who knows, maybe I have high hopes on humanity on times of chaos..

>>12867637
its daoism for brainlets with a crappy sophomore-enticing aesthetic

>>12865419
>Did Deleuze commit suicide
yes
>how does that reflect upon his philosophy?
it doesn't
>What is the difference between hyperstition and synchronicity and does Land confuse the two?
i don't know or care, land's a hack

> How does the journey across space (west to east) reconfigure metaphysics in a way that is not already done in the journey temporally (from pomo to antiquity)?
>t. asian fetishist
it doesn't

>>12868705
Daoism is just Deleuze for brainlets with an orientalist fetish.

>>12868705
This, plus Deleuze, Land et al are too strongly intertwined with secularised Christian eschatology.

>>12868731
>land's a hack
>t. never read Fanged Noumena
>[Asia/Antiquity]: (it does)n't
Ya. Idk. I think Nietzsche and Heidegger do good work going back to the Greeks. And Schopenhauer's Vedism is sublime. Yet nevertheless I am skeptical of the religious elements. Except perhaps as metapsychology. Episteme is difficult. Neurophenomenology. Plus the difference in objects of knowledge. Especially when one seeks to understand the interdisciplinary. Different ways of knowing. Like fucking. Difference and repetition every time. I am interested in re-enchantment. Guess that's what excites in presocratics and gurus. But hopefully someone can reinvent it in a sort of Hegelian sublation way. I think there is more comparative work as well as historical and anthropological to be done. As long as philosophy remains abreast it shall be fine. But something something marriage of heaven and earth yet not a naive heaven.
>>12868866
>eschatology
Deleuze? No. Land? Yes.
>eschatology
Also found in oriental religions my friend.

>>12868866
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divine_Incantations_Scripture

>>12868903

The more I read this thread, the less I understand wtf is going on

Stop romanticizing schizophrenia

do people really understand something when they read deleuze? genuinely interested

>>12868903
>>12868928
A way that can be walked
is not The Way
A name that can be named
is not The Name

Tao is both Named and Nameless
As Nameless, it is the origin of all things
As Named, it is the mother of all things.

A mind free of thought,
merged within itself,
beholds the essence of Tao
A mind filled with thought,
identified with its own perceptions,
beholds the mere forms of this world

Tao and this world seem different
but in truth they are one and the same
The only difference is in what we call them

How deep and mysterious is this unity
How profound, how great!
It is the truth beyond the truth,
the hidden within the hidden
It is the path to all wonder,
the gate to the essence of everything!

>>12869820
find>replace tao with capital

These are truly the best threads for me, most days I only come to /lit/ to check if an acc/tech thread is up. It seems that there are many drugged out 200 IQ neets with a deep curiosity and interest in philosophy, and they seem to aggregate here. I like the result.

>>12867713
>local
Very deccelerationist of you, useless pile of flesh.

>>12869809
Deleuze is an author I learn a lot from despite scratching my head at the same time. I come back from year to year. Gain something new every time. I think trying to understand Deleuze is why I started with the Greeks and so on. Now my goal is Laruelle from his mention in WIP? (perhaps the best start for d&g) but apparently non-philosophy is just non-standard philosophy and synthesizing the popopomo canon which is cool but I am still on the popomo and pomo train. Idk. I may have some paralysis by analysis. But overall it is enriching. Continental thought has a sort of change your life quality that is missing in scholastic and analytic but present in ancient and eastern and others.
>>12869721
True. Deleuze does do this a little but is still an important theoretical edifice in the understanding along with Lacan.

>>12867775
> there's really nothing else like it, the moment when Thinker X hits you, and you realize you can suddenly make moves you never knew you could make before. or, rather, that you always could make them, but you thought you were the only one who understood this...it's a wonderful feeling.
In my personal experience, there are two kinds of philosophers. There are the ones that go off on their own, crafting their own metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, and so on, and say something new, and your like "hmm, that's interesting. I haven't thought of it that way before." And then you have the ones who say something profound concerning the human condition, clarify and make known something you already knew intuitively, or bring forth something you were struggling to grasp like you are on the cusp of great insight and it's juuust outside the periphery of your mental capabilities to figure out, but this person manages to state in plain English! and you're like "yes... Yes... YES!"I find the latter to be the most rewarding and worthwhile to read. Who else are like that besides Heidegger?

>>12869829
>find;replace tao with capital

That's the C - M - C' loop expressed in taoist prose

I think I understand accelerationism well enough. Can someone define "cosmotechnics" for me though? I'm lost on that one and the only google results are some book by an Asian fella.

Thoughts on this book?

>>12872019
somewhere outside of time the ai has already exterminated humanity and graduated into space

>>12865948
Africa is unironically the future.

>>12872031
Now I understand even less than I originally did, anon. Can you explain it to me like I'm retarded?

>>12872040
How long until Lagos overtakes Beijing and London?

>>12872047
>China builds hyperfuturistic cities in Africa
>Kills most of African population with bioweapons
>Uses profits from monopolies on natural resources to fund space program
Noice

>>12869449
i'm just here for the lainposting 2bh

>>12872019
Thinking of technology as a way to connect ourselves between the Earth and the divine. The Adeptus Mechanicus in the Warhammer 40k universe is a good example of an organization who practices cosmotechnics.

show yourself Scott I know you're in here

>>12872123
That sounds scary, but I admittedly have luddite tendencies. Why would this be a good thing? We've already seen what kind of terrible stuff happens when a culture and a people spend their lives plugged into social media.

No more concerns with Leibniz I see?

>>12865931
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yn5kjVYjYvI

Can someone tldr what Land gets from Spinoza and Kant?

>>12869449
Personality cult wanking.

>>12870188
Yikes.

>>12869829
Cringe.

>>12872147
It's not, accel is just a big cope.

>>12873136
Considering we are 4Channel now, reading and writing schizoposts is the only reason to come to /lit/.

Bump

>>12873847
KYS.

>>12872123
>The Adeptus Mechanicus in the Warhammer 40k universe is a good example of an organization who practices cosmotechnics.
You have my attention, care to explain?

How do I get started with cybernetics?

>>12873955
Read a cybernetics book.

>>12865419
Where's the take it to /his/ poster when you need him?

>dumb smelly Anglo / Kantian scum gets so mind blown by computers they create an entire "philosophy" masked in rubbish terminology to try and understand how "reality" and "history" has "changed" due to some tools we invented

>>12873955
Bateson. Steps to an Ecology of Mind

>>12873874
When using technology, you can't just turn the damn thing 'ON' and expect it to work. You have to conduct rituals and pray to the Machine Spirit, and then you turn it 'ON'. I know the analogy isn't perfect because the Machine Spirit is bound to the earthly order, but whatever. Another example is praying to the Sun God for your solar panels to work. This quote of Bernard Stiegler in The Question Concerning Technology in China is also a good example.

>Look at this TV antenna of television as it is [...] it is rigid but it is oriented; we see that it looks into the distance, and that it can receive (signals) from an transmitter far away. For me, it appears to be more than a symbol; it seems to represent a gesture of sorts, an almost magical power of intentionally, a contemporary
form of magic. In this encounter between the highest place and the nodal point, which is the point of transmission of hyperfrequencies, there is a sort of ‘co-naturality’ between the human network and the natural geography of the region. It has a poetic dimension, as well as a dimension having to do with signification and the encounter between significations.

Tbh, I'm still not quite sure of my understanding of the book from my current reading. I'm waiting for girardfag to see what his thoughts are.

>>12874000
Absolutely based and digitpilled.
Spermatazoastrians BTFO yet again by the digital valorisation ubermensch. Will they ever learn?

>>12874021
>girardfag
Imagine your guru being the worst poster on the board.

>>12874021
I think it is also a step toward a more integral science as well as a sacralized science. Scientists have to to often created tech because they simply can without considering and analysing the complex causal nexus of interconnected effects that will determine whether it is ethically permissable.

>>12874000
>Nietzsche writes philosophy specifically for his time because the old masters have been made irrelevant
>dumb Nietzschean complains that modern philosophers do the same thing
Interesting

>>12874032
Fool. Accelerationism and the secret ovarian agenda will not be defeated.

>>12874059
>cosmotechnicians / accelerationists
>modern philosophers
Good one.

>>12873955
I looked it up yesterday and found this video
https://vimeo.com/41776276

>>12865768
>space taoism? very suspicious of it's efficacy. eastern religions have tended towards a potent mode of capitalist cope since the 60's.

"Space Taoism" is somewhat of a meme name and I've jettisoned it in favor of pancreativism which isn't as loaded, more descriptive, and references Whiteheadean thought as it should. However as based as Whitehead is he still retained some essentialism in some respects, especially with his process God and his doctrine of eternal objects. He also came from a modest time and couldn't expose his sense of God to its fully naked organism as a sexual relatedness, which Deleuze and Guattari delve balls-deep into.

What is pancreativism? In a sense it is the extension of evolutionary thought into the domain of metaphysics, with "what is evolving" not being stuff but relationships or "betweenesses." Relationships require perspectives for relationship-making, which leads into the foundations of human perception and empirical experience as an evolutionary system, so the subject of metaphysics and our perception of experience is one and the same.

Pancreativism is literally "all is creativity" not as a creator-creation dialectic but the ongoingness of co-creativity among all things which is very much along the lines of thought of D&G. Art is life and life is art. In addition to a philosophy able to be examined technically it is a mode of engagement with life, and a teleological directedness towards higher intensities of co-creative relationships that will if my theory is correct coalesce into a movement of recursive self-improvement of human relationships on every level: a psycho-organic singularity. Pancreativism doesn't deny that conflict and competition exists, but that it exists on the larger background of co-creativity, whereas the relational premise of capital (exemplified in game theory) is that life is unending war, conflicts of interests between self-interest-maximizers being the omnipresent condition of life with cooperation only existing as the alignment of mutual interests against some common foe (even if such a foe be physical reality itself.)

In pancreativism the philosophy, the personal relationship, and the movement are one and the same, making it very difficult to get a hold on. Theory and praxis are irremovable, subject-object distinctions are thrown right out. One can only jump aboard the crazy train of creativity and see where it leads - or rather realize that one has been on board the train all along. I can only speak for myself, but it's led me on a fantastic adventure of ideas and actions that has no end in sight, and I wouldn't have it any other way.

>>12874326
Sounds nondual

>>12874326
what about the praxis though anon?

>>12874326
bigger

>>12865419
GIORDANO BRUNO.

De vinculis in genere ("Of bonds in general") by Giordano Bruno is one of
those little-known works whose importance in the history of ideas far
outstrips that of more famous ones. In its frankness, indeed the cynicism of the analysis of its contents, it might be compared to Machiavelli's
The Prince, especially as the subject matter of the two works is connected: Bruno deals with psychological manipulation in general, Machiavelli with political manipulation. But how colorless and ridiculous
the Machiavellian prince-adventurer now seems, compared to Bruno's
magician-psychologist! The popularity of The Prince gained for it the respect of succeeding centuries and has recently even led to the theory of
the modern "Prince" -the Communist party-advanced by Antonio
Gramsci. Unpublished until late, little read and always misunderstood,
De vinculis in genere is nevertheless the written work that deserves to
have the real and unique place of honor among theories of manipulation
of the masses. Without being aware of it, the brain trusts that dominate
the world have been inspired by it, have put Bruno's own ideas to practical use. A continuity surely might exist, for Bruno seems to have exerted a certain influence on the ideological movement at the beginning
of the seventeenth century, the Rosicrucian movement, which had great
repercussions. 4 But to our knowledge there has never been, either before or after Bruno, any writer who has treated this subject empirically,
free from any ethical, religious, or social considerations. For no one
would have dreamed of attacking such a subject from the point of view of
the manipulator himself without first positing, as the fundamental principle of his research, some intangible human or divine right in whose
name the manipulation would be condemned.

With incomparable lucidity, Bruno draws a clear distinction between
theology (with fundamentals of morality, which, let us remember, was
an exclusively theological discipline) and "the mental view of the laity"
(civilis speculatio), whose representative he considers himself to be. For
theology, there is a true religion and false beliefs, there is good and evil
which are largely ideological in nature. There can be no question of the
manipulation of individuals and masses, but simply of a mission with the
goal of converting to the one and only truth. On the contrary, for Bruno,
there is only one sacrosanct principle, only one truth, and that is: everything is manipulable, there is absolutely no one who can escape intersubjective
relationships, whether these involve a manipulator, a manipulated person, or a tool (De vinculis, III, p. 654). Theology itself, the Christian faith,
and all other faiths are only beliefs of the masses set up by magic
processes.

from
loan P. Couliano
EROS AND MAGIC IN
THE RENAISSANCE

>>12874422
See: >>12874944

>>12874944
Giordano Bruno burned at the stake for heresy, anno domini 1600. 20th century anglo historians tried making him into a 'martyr for science'. When what really got Bruno in trouble was not his defence of heliocentrism and infinity of the universe, but claming christianity was but a corrupted form of the one true hermetic-egyptian religion carried over from times immemorial. Hermetic texts are actually late roman forgeries, but does it matter? Is Bruno a late remnant of late medieval thought, magical and imagistic a world away from the cool abstractions of science? The italian renaissance conjures eerie flashbacks of the 60s of McLuhan, Bateson, Debord and the whole earth catalog. You have the feeling all these people were tripping on new media technologies(the printing press or cybernetics), linking up with microcosmic-macrocosmic correspondencies, diagrammatic intelligences divine and or demonic, phantasmagoria of bygone centuries taking on new life, nietszchean apotheoses(N was a good friend of Burckhardt, but schopenhauerian contemplation wasn't enough for N, he felt compelled to somehow bring the untimely into the present, the admittedly drab present of Wilhemine Germany, with its bloodless kultur historicism and its mass produced sameness). Maybe Western Science is the epistemological anomaly, a monster borne from the theologico political sundering of Christendom in the 16th and 17th centuries? Positivism is the continuation of counter/reformation puritanism, presupposing an infinitely transcendental God, an infinitely wretched and depraved humanity, an infinite denial of eros ie. the nature of reality has already been determined.The radical core of the magickal-hermetic worldview of Bruno et. all: reality as infinitely manipulable.

>>12875135
>hermetica as late roman forgeries
Late doesn't mean forgery. Might as well claim the Old Testament is a hellenistic forgery of the true primordial Jewish religion

>>12867807
> this is often done for terribly cynical reasons

Californian imperialism (the eternal blipvert present of serotonine reuptake inhibited zen(tm)) is to the post 60s world what 'Western imperialism' and the 'tyranny of enlightenment reason' were to the pre-60s world. We aren't seeing a battle between:
>The proletariat in overalls and the top hat monocled bourgeoisie pigs
>muh enlightenment reason and soixante huitard postmodern neomarxist-irrationalism
>glorious EVROPA and the brown hordes of barbarism
> cisheteropatriarchal white supremacist kyriarchy and marginalised folks and communities

these are all equally true, and equally outdated frameworks, none of them comes close to describing the reality of 4th generation non linear warfare. Californian imperialism may present itself as an openess to 'non western cultures', but really its just as imperialistic, only more insiduous. Next-gen imperial governance wears the skin of its defeated opponents. All subjectivity is reduced to therapeutic always connected subjectivity, boxed-in hollow identity categories and sub political ad copy, narcotised and narcissiced by hypermediated total environment . the patient is not yet a citizen, a mere 'body' a 'voice' if you are lucky, let alone Spirit conscious of itself. The treatment is meant to keep Mind from becoming conscious of itself as the immanent source of all order and disorder. Notice how modern day leftists no longer confront the system as revolutionaries but willingly submit to it as victims-patients-consumers? Professionalised academics and activists are the bad consciousness of the system, an integral part of it just like the crude mechanisms of biopolitical sovereignty(increasingly automated, see drone warfare, not going away anytime soon: the state of war exists as absolute exteriority, always encroaching but never completely subsuming non-war, existing as laboratory for new mechanisms of control, weaponised dialectic of insurgency-counterinsurgency). Its scary how quickly the rhetoric of the war-on-terror-risk society-security state fused with identity politics and the post freudian therapeutic ethos(and Derrida, and internet tumblr popfandom culture, but thats another story). Try reading, if you really feel like doing that to yourself, Donna(Mark's sister) Zuckerberg's woke classicist newsletter(eidolon or something like that).The text is seen first and foremost as a security threat, that must be neutralised as incompatible with intersectional-therapeutic-managerial reason. 1789, 1871, 1917, 1968, the historical referents of 'the left' have become irrelevant, given way to endless 2016 and gamergate.

>>12875363
no act more primordial or truer than forgery. Is this what Deleuze and Guattari were on about when they talked about metalworking?

I HAVE BEEN FIGHTING FOR TWO MONTHS and I can now gauge
HUMAN MASSES teem and move, are destroyed and crop up again.
HORSES are worn out in three weeks, die by the roadside.
DOGS wander, are destroyed, and others come along.
WITH ALL THE DESTRUCTION that works around us NOTHING IS
CHANGED, EVEN SUPERFICIALLY. LIFE IS THE SAME STRENGTH.
THE MOVING AGENT THAT PERMITS THE SMALL INDIVIDUAL TO
ASSERT HIMSELF.
THE BURSTING SHELLS, the volleys, wire entanglements, projectors,
motors, the chaos of battle DO NOT ALTER IN THE LEAST, the outlines of
the hill we are besieging. A company of PARTRIDGES scuttle along before our
very trench.
IT WOULD BE FOLLY TO SEEK ARTISTIC EMOTIONS AMID THESE
LITTLE WORKS OF OURS.
the intensity of Life.
THIS PALTRY MECHANISM, WHICH SERVES AS A PURGE TO OVERNUMEROUS HUMANITY.
THIS WAR IS A GREAT REMEDY.
IN THE INDIVIDUAL IT KILLS ARROGANCE, SELF-ESTEEM, PRIDE.
IT TAKES AWAY FROM THE MASSES NUMBERS UPON NUMBERS
OF UNIMPORTANT UNITS, WHOSE ECONOMIC ACTIVITIES BECOME
NOXIOUS AS THE RECENT TRADE CRISES HAVE SHOWN US.
MY VIEWS ON SCULPTURE REMAIN ABSOLUTELY THE SAME.
IT IS THE VORTEX OF WILL, OF DECISION, THAT BEGINS.
I SHALL DERIVE MY EMOTIONS SOLELY FROM THE ARRANGEMENT OF SURFACES, I shall present my emotions by the ARRANGEMENT
OF MY SURFACES, THE PLANES AND LINES BY WHICH THEY ARE
DEFINED.
Just as this hill where the Germans are solidly entrenched, gives me a nasty
feeling, solely because its gentle slopes are broken up by earth-works, which throw
long shadows at sunset. Just so shall I get feeling, of whatsoever definition, from
a statue ACCORDING TO ITS SLOPES, varied to infinity.
Two days ago I pinched from ran enemy a
mauser rifle. Its heavy unwieldy shape swamped me with a powerful IMAGE of
brutality.
I have made an experiment.
I was in doubt for a long time whether it pleased or displeased me.
I found that I did not like it.
I broke the butt off and with my knife I carved in it a design, through which
BUT I WILL EMPHASIZE that MY DESIGN got its effect (just as the gun
I tried to express a gentler order of feeling, which I preferred.
had) FROM A VERY SIMPLE COMPOSITION OF LINES AND PLANES

>>12875574

What's the best intro Bataille text? I'm deciding between Visions of Excess and Theory of Religion

Who are some writers that talk about things like mimesis, representation, human constructed environments, etc?

>>12875730
On Nietzsche (the Land on Bataille)

>>12875363
Everything there is and can be are are already here. Nothing is novel

>>12873140
Cringe

>>12873141
Naw. Cope is trad decel. You can't but the genie back in the bottle.

bump

>>12865419
i hate all you non binary accelerationist faggots yeah bro the internet is god n we're all transcending ourselves in the digital tertiary realm woah fractured identity bro social media, yeah ok, yeah totally, lets all love lain bro, lets all be "data pagans" and set our twitter handles to zalgo text with a tri-gender emoji next to it, oh are you on mastadon too bro, you use pleroma? wanna add me on XMPP and NEVER USE IT BRO?? LETS ADD EACH OTHERS RICOCHET IDS AND NEVER USE IT HAHAHA SEND ME UR GPG KEY BRO SO WE CAN TALK ABOUT ANIME IN 4096 BIT AES SECRECY HAHAHA... hell world

>>12877894
>SEND ME UR GPG KEY BRO SO WE CAN TALK ABOUT ANIME IN 4096 BIT AES SECRECY HAHAHA
unironically the best timeline

Is this shit actually worthwhile or is it just using big words to entrap dumb pseuds like me?

>>12877920
>Is this shit actually worthwhile
yes
>is it just using big words to entrap dumb pseuds like me?
yes

>>12867736
A fellow primitivist?

https://jacobitemag.com/2019/04/03/primordial-abstraction/

new land piece. frankly I think it's really bad compared to his past jacobite stuff, but they are an extremely high bar to clear. I was just "yea duh" the entire time, but I'm fairly interested in both competive chess and Land, so maybe I'm just not the target audience.

Can someone describe the schizophrenic phenomenal experiences? Do your perception of reality actually change? Do you experience stuff that other people can't? Or is it like drugs, where your thoughts are more or less jumbled and making new connections, yet the reality remain the same.

>>12879004
you misunderstand the notion of schizo. it is rupturing of self. ask a better question

>>12879028
i have no idea what rupturing of self means. can you expand on that? do you use your eyes to see the world or what?

>>12879034
think of a system that operates in the following fashion

input--->A--->B--->C---->D--->output

for example, this could be the way you eat and digest food or how you solve a math problem.
rupturing this system would enthrall disrupting this process radically, blazing new pathways, maybe closing others. maybe a goes straight to c. maybe d goes to "fish" or "trigonometry" instead. it is the destruction of the old order so something new can emerge. it is a reinterpretation of the old, through which something radically new emerges. think card XIII in the Tarot. stable identities are destroyed and discarded for a more permissive and affording system. this is extremely useful for example Freudian tax evasion

>>12879114
This anon is literally 19 y/o

>>12879114
ok, so it's just changing the relations between concepts. it's nothing new then, gotcha.

>>12879141
well, yes and no. these changes are only afforded by his novel metaphysics so it's not very useful to just conceptualize it as drawing new lines. it's more like actualizing the lines that were already there.

>>12879004
i would still like to know what schizoanons think about this. rupturing of self doesn't come close to answering this question.

>>12879168
read Proust of Kafka's metamorphosis for a phenomenological description of rupture

What should I skimread on acceleration if I just want to kind of skim it to develop my instinctive understanding of the absurdities to come downstream from california-tech?
I read a lot of smaller/incidental stuff from neoreactionaries and right-accelerationists, but nothing too serious.

>>12879184
Or... You could just post what you know?

>>12867723
>so if you think capitalism is a legit planetary force but that it cannot be solved simply by putting on a Che Guevara shirt, Deleuze and /acc are for you.
Is it just me or do most people into /acc tend to think the quasi-inevitability of these forces is a good thing?
I don't think I've ever encountered anyone on the broad-left who goes "Well, Communism (or old Social Democracy) would be the best way to live our lives, but we totally fucked that up, and now we're heading for something worse."

You'd think the pessimism of such an approach, or perhaps an optimistic left-acceleration a-la k-punk would have more appeal.

>>12878957
I don't agree with your assessment. This to me was a Land case study on the AGI-based "proof" of the eternal return.

>>12879319
look up "hikkokomori" and "Kafka" together on warosu. I wrote up a p. lengthy post on this exact thing. im on phoneposting and I'm way too lazy to type it up again

>>12879379
he's written about this extensively and better in another blog. urban-something 2.0?

>>12879351
Faust IS doomed to explode at one point. zizeks train and whatnot. what's gonna happen then is the interesting question

>>12879308
Nick Land's first two posts on Jacobite, Moldbug reader, then Deleuze.

>>12879319
>>/lit/thread/S12673597#p12673862

>>12879004
This is a good autobiographical piece on I guess you could call the phenomenology of madness. There is equal parts delusion and illusion I would say. Like a psychedelic drug that never comes down plus more severe hallucinations randomly.

https://www.stilldrinking.org/essays.php?c=episode

>>12879004
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreclosure_(psychoanalysis)

DEHUMANIZE YOURSELF AND FACE TO BLOODSHEDDEHUMANIZE YOURSELF AND FACE TO BLOODSHEDDEHUMANIZE YOURSELF AND FACE TO BLOODSHEDDEHUMANIZE YOURSELF AND FACE TO BLOODSHEDDEHUMANIZE YOURSELF AND FACE TO BLOODSHEDDEHUMANIZE YOURSELF AND FACE TO BLOODSHEDDEHUMANIZE YOURSELF AND FACE TO BLOODSHEDDEHUMANIZE YOURSELF AND FACE TO BLOODSHEDDEHUMANIZE YOURSELF AND FACE TO BLOODSHEDDEHUMANIZE YOURSELF AND FACE TO BLOODSHEDDEHUMANIZE YOURSELF AND FACE TO BLOODSHEDDEHUMANIZE YOURSELF AND FACE TO BLOODSHEDDEHUMANIZE YOURSELF AND FACE TO BLOODSHEDDEHUMANIZE YOURSELF AND FACE TO BLOODSHEDDEHUMANIZE YOURSELF AND FACE TO BLOODSHEDDEHUMANIZE YOURSELF AND FACE TO BLOODSHEDDEHUMANIZE YOURSELF AND FACE TO BLOODSHEDDEHUMANIZE YOURSELF AND FACE TO BLOODSHEDDEHUMANIZE YOURSELF AND FACE TO BLOODSHEDDEHUMANIZE YOURSELF AND FACE TO BLOODSHEDDEHUMANIZE YOURSELF AND FACE TO BLOODSHEDDEHUMANIZE YOURSELF AND FACE TO BLOODSHEDDEHUMANIZE YOURSELF AND FACE TO BLOODSHEDDEHUMANIZE YOURSELF AND FACE TO BLOODSHEDDEHUMANIZE YOURSELF AND FACE TO BLOODSHED

01001001 01010100 00100111 01010011 00100000 01010100 01001001 01001101 01000101

>>12880002
Thanks, I'm still reading through it.
>During this conversation, I had one of my first well-rounded delusions. I realized that age was simply the mind expanding into more and more adjacent realities, where all things are possible, and the reason people tend to get more distractible as they age is simply because they’re spending more time in alternate realities, so they sometimes forget which one they’re in.
This passage jumped out for me. Is it like dreaming? Can any schizoanon chime in and explain their experiences in alternate realities?

http://gen.lib.rus.ec/book/index.php?md5=86B8EE841B153DE193168B14745AC70F

>This book employs recursivity and contingency as two principle concepts to investigate into the relation between nature and technology, machine and organism, system and freedom. It reconstructs a trajectory of thought from an Organic condition of thinking elaborated by Kant, passing by the philosophy of nature (Schelling and Hegel), to the 20th century Organicism (Bertalanffy, Needham, Whitehead, Wiener among others) and Organology (Bergson, Canguilhem, Simodnon, Stiegler), and questions the new condition of philosophizing in the time of algorithmic contingency, ecological and algorithmic catastrophes, which Heidegger calls the end of philosophy.

Has anyone read this? I just got my copy and have been browsing through it for the past hour, and I can tell it is going to be the shit - it's talking about exactly what I've been rambling about for the past 6 months. Fuck yeah Yuk Hui fuck yeah cosmotechnics.

bump

Deleuze is a hack.

>>12883651
Explain

>Teleoplexy. His best work, although a shameless rehashing of Lemurian Time War. Lure of the Void. dislike it intensely. Templexity. Dislike it. Ghastly speculative.

>>12865541
Spoken like a real proper brainlet

>>12874000
/thread

What should I read to understand accelerationism? What should I read first? Thank you in advance for the responses.

>>12886885
>See OP: >>12865419
Accelerate reader:
https://libcom.org/files/Accelerate%20-%20Robin%20Mackay.pdf
>good intro to acceleration

>>12881780
Dream logic. Schizo logic. Bad logic. (A) logic. (A)logic.

>>12882338
She's a beast. She's writing a new book according to twitter too!

>>12887641
Yuk Hui is a lad

>>12887716
Lol. Writing a new book so soon tho! Idk how people do it.

>>12887760
They scower the internet and look for content to tie into their academic research like this thread.

Is 'The Cathedral' an accelerationist concept, or a neoreactionary one?

>>12888258
The latter. There is overlap tho.

>>12886885
Aya-chan...

>>12886885
>>12874000
>>12886163
And the obvious
>gabbidull zo bad id gud