PHILOSOPHICAL LAMENT NO.4

  

The real question is, why would you assume that philosophers who philosophize at the end of the world would be aware of their extinction? Is their program not an attempt to avoid the feelings of this catastrophe? Philosophers are interested in abstract games that distract them from reality, they are not interested in reality! 

Few will walk with me into the darkness, into the sorrow of my cave. According to the automation and impulse of life thought is a mistake, it's the enemy of motion, but this is also why the wise love it. What is most dangerous? To step outside psychological categories, to step outside social categories, it seems that the unconscious puts these here for a reason, nevertheless be brave my discerning one, for the unconscious is but a reaction, it does not apply intelligence, like a child it simply tries to calm its fears, consciousness is not condemned by such automation. Thought has the power to rise above it.

You can do better. Do you understand what this means? All values are created. You did not hear it so I must say it again: all values are created! There is only one difference and that is the difference between automation, like the child, and consciousness, which amounts to a determination of intelligence. Values based on knowledge, who ever thought of such a thing? And yet these are the attributes man is lacking.

Where there is no future the philosopher must decide his fate, many give themselves over to hedonism because they believe this to be a counter to nihilism. It is most interesting that meaning is not contingent on longevity and yet it doesn't have to succumb to hedonism. The same is true of logic, it has never been eternal and yet it is not lacking in value. I do not think you comprehend this.

If you walk with me into the darkness I will not give you a candle, but I will tell you that all light comes from the diligence and resilience of thought. For thought is something you do not yet comprehend, you think of it as a phantom, something casual or inconsequential. But if you dare isolate it you will find the power of man, the tool par excellence unto all that is advanced, man's only hope in this dark universe.

I dare you to ask the question of value. I dare you to ask the question of relevance. As soon as you do all your forms will give way to substance, which means they will die, they will fall into the abyss of irrelevance to make room for real power. But Oh my beloved, this death is necessary for the birth of new forms! You do not yet understand, you are the replica of culture, until you learn to be critical, dialectical, you are midnight without a sun.

Any philosopher that speaks the truth is going to be unpopular. One of the unspoken lies of philosophy is that sophistication of form proves quality of content, but this is a violation of the technology of words. Stop trying to prove your intelligence with words and start using them intelligently!              

Poor child, you cannot understand why I weep in the moonlight; I am in mourning for the tragedy which is man, I am in mourning because man's intelligence is not intelligence, but a form of self-negation, and this is something he doesn't comprehend.

In order to walk with me you must be able to bear much sorrow. A good philosopher must travel to the end through the medium of the negative, only then does he bring back authentic hope. I give you the Nightmare, for this is what the philosopher must face if he wants to create a joyful dream! 

 

-

-

-    

Logical Dogmatism, Logical Superstition, Logical Irrationalism

 

[1] Logical Dogmatism is rooted in the ideology of identity. It's what happens when a mono-form pre-determines, pre-dictates, the nature of reality, slicing off plurality and contradiction from the total picture of being. This form has its genesis in the superstitious thought of Aristotle. 

 

[2] Logical Superstition consists of false, unconscious, foundational beliefs that are taken to be the authoritative and infallible axioms of logic. The assumption is made that their simplicity is "complete," and yet they contain presuppositions that expose the lie of their form.

 

[3] Where the dogmatic, superstitious form of Identity-Logic is taken as the foundational starting point, the "absolute authority," to which all logic must mindlessly conform (this form not being aware of its own presuppositions)... then logic itself becomes a form of irrationalism. Hence, the term, "Logical Irrationalism."

 

[4] Man's thought-life has been sabotaged by Aristotle's logical form, even though this form, at one point, represented an advance in thought, it now serves to restrict and limit the progress of thought. It does this by positing the conclusion of what reality is before it has even carried out an investigation, it then tries to force reality to conform to a monad, a Logical Idealism or Dogmatism. 

   

[5] The best that Identity-Logic can do is to obtain to the tyrannical consistency (consistent with its own dogmatism) of an instrumental rationality.  This "logic of efficiency" is a threat to the social world, it divides, severs and reduces the vitality of the Social, of human relations, to mere mechanistic calculations, to scheming forms that do violence against social quality and undermine the necessity of the Social. 

 

[6] To posit non-contradiction as a ruling premise, or axiom, is to begin with an assumption that does violence to nature; is to impose an idealism against reality, to which reality is superficially made to conform. The result is that one ends up, not only distorting the plural and non-static nature of reality, but one ultimately fails to comprehend reality, a Logical Idealism is posited in place of reality, against the plural and historical nature of being. Totality is forfeited and sacrificed to the lie of a presuppositionally, unconscious idealism, that assumes the finality of a superstitious Logical-Monism. This Logical-Monism, though undetected by man, has the form and function of religion. The values produced by it do not comprise values of social intelligence, but socially destructive superstitions that ultimately lead to the creation of a social tyranny over the species. All Intelligent Values, even if they are not conscious, embody the genius of a Dialectical Logic.

  

[7] The notion of non-contradiction, when analyzed by dialectical thought, is quickly found to collapse into hypocrisy and contradiction, into the negation of its own form. (This negation doesn't come from the outside but emerges from the unconscious hypocrisy of the form itself). Sitting at its base lies a plural foundation that is necessary for the form itself to exist. Wherever one finds the notion of "non-contradiction," there one is guaranteed, to find at its more primitive base, more authoritative, plural-concepts, that make the notion of non-contradiction intelligible, possible.

   

[8] One of the easier ways to collapse noncontradiction is to realize the historical, plural development of the notion itself. This concept didn't happen overnight, but took time and many minds, influencing each other through successive generations.

 

[9] Dialectic is not a mysticism or strain at abstraction, it is (among other things) Thought set free from the artificial boundaries of idealism, of immediacy, from the lie of immaterialism. 

            

[10] Humans cannot see these errors or dangers in the logical forms they have inherited because the seeing of them requires a more advanced logic, a logic that has the presuppositional capacity to deconstruct the superstition of the Aristotelian form, this ability, at present, is only found in the presuppositional thoroughness of dialectics.

 

-

-

-