-Pythagoras, as quoted by Anonymous, an alchemist, in The Book of Aquarius

-Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness

How’s this?

-AK47 Bitch

-Henry David Thoreau, Walden

Basically, the post was going to talk about three things:

1) how the community has blotted out my existence (at least, my existence in these words I have been posting) in favor of the existence they want me to have (i.e., as the “old” Enox that suppressed his intellectual abilities in favor of community stability);

2) how I feel as though the community has projected their own alienation onto me, in order to avoid the anxiety of seeing it in themselves; and

3) how my last post (the mystical one, that wasn’t even responded to) was basically made to express my feelings toward the actual state of the community, in a way that nothing (yet, in the same breath, everything) could be understood.

So all that I am going to say now is that I give up in trying to conceptualize or mystically present to the community my ideas. Because I doubt either posts would truly be read. From now on, I’ll just post philosophical topics in general for the people who enjoy it (and possibly, new blog members).

I was trying to help those who I thought were friends, but it seems as though a large part of my personality has been passively rejected (which is the worst rejection:  if I were rejected violently, that would have meant that I was having some effect). Thus I am assuming that it would be impossible to help, because at the same time, it would be impossible to harm. The indifferent can’t be helped.

No sword would be strong enough to rattle the peace of indifference. Kick off the dust from your feet, as a testimony against them. Let the dead bury the dead.

Vanity of vanities, all is vanity.

——————————————————————————————–

Why do you think that your community will save you? That the tripartite god of the body, soul, and spirit of the community will make you worthy in the eyes of the self? If you truly believe that these things will bring your salvation, you believe in something other than the Thing, which is bad faith. True bad faith, indeed. For what is bad faith but the lie in which the truth is concealed in the subject? Necessarily I respond to your bad faith with this faithfully bad obscurantist analysis of your problems.

The body is the wounded, dismembered physicality, of which the soul of the body screams out in pain against. Yet this body is now inert, inflicting upon itself the pain of stagnation and decomposition. It toils not, yet it exerts the energy of a thousand oxen, pulling the yoke of a thousand weighty stones; the spirit never rests. Lifelessness of life, stillness of the eternal movement; the disabled body is vanity.

The soul screams out in pain, but never once does it decide to leave the body. The alienated soul, the lost control it once had over body and spirit, is lifeless because it is disconnected from life. Body now controls the soul through pricks and pins, spirit now enslaves the soul by keeping it alive. Lifelessness of life, stillness of the eternal movement; the torn soul is vanity.

The spirit revolves and centrifugally escapes from the dead body. The soul is lost in between the two poles, searching for an answer in vain, stuck in the ditch of an untenable position, yet the spirit continues on and leaves the soul behind. Spirit moves the soul to scream, spirit bids the body to stay; spirit continues to be what spirit is. The unending motivation from the spirit further kills the body by tearing apart the soul. Lifelessness of life, stillness of the eternal movement; the everlasting spirit is vanity.

Until the One comes along to smash apart the tripartite god, the community, then it will suffer forever. It will feel nothing but pain, scream nothing but silence, move nothing but its will to move. The One shall set free the soul that is burning in torment, in the liquid hot metal of the god’s wrath. He shall harvest the first-fruits when they are ripe, shall toil for the sake of them all. Though the soul, still stuck between the life and the death of the community, will protest, “Do not remove me from the vine!,” the One shall swiftly cut the plant down, and save the fruit before the harsh Winter arrives.

Liveliness of life, movement of the stillness of eternity; such is not vanity.

Or, the One shall leave them to hang on the vine, to be frozen and cut off forever from a community of leaves and buds by the incoming Winter storms, to be drowned in the magma during the remaking of the world, to be lost in the Old World when a New World is created, to roast in the boiling pit of inferno known only as:

OTHER PEOPLE

Basically I think we will be making some sort of story-line to follow but branch off of for creative purposes.

So it wouldn’t be impossible to add in characters throughout the comic, in fact that’s probably how your characters will be introduced.

Anyways, this isn’t official (yet), but I think it would definitely be a fun project for our continued unification, another “reunion” of sorts. A combination of elements from both sides of this deep rift of “indifference” so that we can connect somehow. A suggestion, hopefully one that will attract some sort of renewed relationship.

I call this the denial of philosophy for two reasons.

First of all, it denies the possibility of further research into anything. It takes the fact that what is perceived as reality (i.e., the opinion of the subject) as the ultimate truth, and thus, why else would we need to use our reason? We only have to use reason, according to the subjectivist, in order to get to this point in knowledge:  that our knowledge is already reality, the only reality. What would be the point of inquiring further into the world?

It also denies philosophy, secondly, by abandoning logic altogether. It escapes having to deal with fallacies because it denies any type of reasoning except for its own. Its own reason must be infallible else another reality exists in the knowing of another person, which is impossible in Solipsism.

In conclusion, Solipsism is baseless and assumes this baseless-ness at its own base.

So when we see red objects, we use these objects to grasp at the essence, Red.

And as an application, we can no longer say that an appearance is based on total falsity. All falsehood reveals some sort of essence. The least essence it could reveal is that of falsity (i.e., the general idea of falsity as untrue).

What does this mean in relation to the community? Each person reveals an aspect of the essence, but is not the essence itself. The essence is the being of the phenomenon; each person is merely the phenomenon of being. What does Sartre mean by these two terms? We have to know before we proceed.

Sartre means by “being of the phenomenon” the essence. This is not possessing being, nor is it having being, or any such relation:  it “is.” The “phenomenon of being” is what is existent, what is merely a manifestation of being. Thus essence is the revelation of being; existence is the being revealed.

So we have our persons, existent beings, who represent being itself. The existent human beings of a certain community are the aspects of the “essence” of humanity itself to the person within that community.

Thus, is it the individual who chooses to hate or love his community, or does the community itself determine such a choice in the individual? Unless the community consists of all living beings, the whole being cannot be realized within the mind of the individual. Thus all communities are necessarily incomplete and all communities will necessarily be defunct in some way.

And because of this defunct community the individual will be defunct as well.