Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Mental politics

Expand Messages
  • shadowed_statue
    The nature of my insanity is not what I thought it was. This is only one area of cognition in which agnosticism now holds sway. The freedom from false
    Message 1 of 6 , Aug 29 3:58 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      The nature of my insanity is not what I thought it was. This is only one area of cognition in which agnosticism now holds sway. The freedom from false certainties which this recognition allows itself exerts a claim on me, to clarify the most recent of my misperceptions. I struggle, however, to articulate in philosophical form what sketchy ideas form and disappear in my mind. Enough for now. My will is true, at least. It is not a will to power, except in relation to the politics of normalcy. How intellectually dishonest is that!!

      Louise
    • tom
      Louise, Welcome back. Tom ... From: shadowed_statue To: existlist@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 5:58 PM Subject: [existlist] Mental politics
      Message 2 of 6 , Aug 29 4:54 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        Louise,

        Welcome back.
        Tom
        ----- Original Message -----
        From: shadowed_statue
        To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 5:58 PM
        Subject: [existlist] Mental politics


        The nature of my insanity is not what I thought it was. This is only one area of cognition in which agnosticism now holds sway. The freedom from false certainties which this recognition allows itself exerts a claim on me, to clarify the most recent of my misperceptions. I struggle, however, to articulate in philosophical form what sketchy ideas form and disappear in my mind. Enough for now. My will is true, at least. It is not a will to power, except in relation to the politics of normalcy. How intellectually dishonest is that!!

        Louise





        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • shadowed_statue
        ... Pondering the meaning of will to power, and wanting to make somewhat clearer the context of my statement about intellectual dishonesty, I find my first
        Message 3 of 6 , Aug 30 2:20 PM
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "shadowed_statue" <hecubatoher@...> wrote:
          >
          > The nature of my insanity is not what I thought it was. This is only one area of cognition in which agnosticism now holds sway. The freedom from false certainties which this recognition allows itself exerts a claim on me, to clarify the most recent of my misperceptions. I struggle, however, to articulate in philosophical form what sketchy ideas form and disappear in my mind. Enough for now. My will is true, at least. It is not a will to power, except in relation to the politics of normalcy. How intellectually dishonest is that!!

          Pondering the meaning of will to power, and wanting to make somewhat clearer the context of my statement about intellectual dishonesty, I find my first impulse is to go back to the text, to what Nietzsche actually wrote. This is the final paragraph of section 636, in Book Three, 'Principles of A New Evaluation':

          ~ Perspectivism is only a complex form of specificity. My idea is that every specific body strives to become master over all space and to extend its force (-its will to power:) and to thrust back all that resists its extension. But it continually encounters similar efforts on the part of other bodies and ends by coming to an arrangement ("union") with those of them that are sufficiently related to it: thus they then conspire together for power. And the process goes on-- ~

          So, for myself, the wish to exert force restricts itself to that which secures a true individuation, against the tyrannies of the self-defining mainstream. The fact that I am not 'normal' does not justify a classification of 'abnormal', except from the narrowness of a scientific reduction of what it is to be human. At the outset of the Third Book, Nietzsche comments (#466):

          ~ It is not the victory of science that distinguishes our nineteenth century, but the victory of scientific method over science. ~

          To a layman, at any rate, the process seems to have continued all through the twentieth century, and into a new millennium.

          So, to interrogate my own statement, why should a will to power in relation to the politics of normalcy, be an intellectual dishonesty? I am wondering if it is merely a self-accusation brought on by repeated experience of oppression at the hands of those who insist on standards of normality without recourse to peaceable questioning. In fact, questioning becomes impossible, when the brain is sufficiently overwhelmed by trauma. It could flow from the false guilt associated with the attempt to fight a battle from ground defined by the other. In escaping from a sense of division between the 'normal' and the 'abnormal', I return to humane values. This is the basis of spiritual and political equality. Essentially, it is quite simple: I do not wish to be 'cured' of my own nature. As my mind strives to return to discursive thought, it emerges with a few ideas, both familiar and changed. Now I am wondering if it was only 'the politics of normalcy' which I was describing as intellectually dishonest. That would take a good deal more exploration.

          >
          > Louise
          >
        • tom
          Louise, A question that sometimes drives me hazy: am I or are the others crazy? Albert Einstein Tom Good luck ... From: shadowed_statue To:
          Message 4 of 6 , Aug 30 3:01 PM
          • 0 Attachment
            Louise,

            A question that sometimes drives me hazy: am I or are the others crazy?
            Albert Einstein

            Tom

            Good luck
            ----- Original Message -----
            From: shadowed_statue
            To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
            Sent: Sunday, August 30, 2009 4:20 PM
            Subject: [existlist] Re: Mental politics


            --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "shadowed_statue" <hecubatoher@...> wrote:
            >
            > The nature of my insanity is not what I thought it was. This is only one area of cognition in which agnosticism now holds sway. The freedom from false certainties which this recognition allows itself exerts a claim on me, to clarify the most recent of my misperceptions. I struggle, however, to articulate in philosophical form what sketchy ideas form and disappear in my mind. Enough for now. My will is true, at least. It is not a will to power, except in relation to the politics of normalcy. How intellectually dishonest is that!!

            Pondering the meaning of will to power, and wanting to make somewhat clearer the context of my statement about intellectual dishonesty, I find my first impulse is to go back to the text, to what Nietzsche actually wrote. This is the final paragraph of section 636, in Book Three, 'Principles of A New Evaluation':

            ~ Perspectivism is only a complex form of specificity. My idea is that every specific body strives to become master over all space and to extend its force (-its will to power:) and to thrust back all that resists its extension. But it continually encounters similar efforts on the part of other bodies and ends by coming to an arrangement ("union") with those of them that are sufficiently related to it: thus they then conspire together for power. And the process goes on-- ~

            So, for myself, the wish to exert force restricts itself to that which secures a true individuation, against the tyrannies of the self-defining mainstream. The fact that I am not 'normal' does not justify a classification of 'abnormal', except from the narrowness of a scientific reduction of what it is to be human. At the outset of the Third Book, Nietzsche comments (#466):

            ~ It is not the victory of science that distinguishes our nineteenth century, but the victory of scientific method over science. ~

            To a layman, at any rate, the process seems to have continued all through the twentieth century, and into a new millennium.

            So, to interrogate my own statement, why should a will to power in relation to the politics of normalcy, be an intellectual dishonesty? I am wondering if it is merely a self-accusation brought on by repeated experience of oppression at the hands of those who insist on standards of normality without recourse to peaceable questioning. In fact, questioning becomes impossible, when the brain is sufficiently overwhelmed by trauma. It could flow from the false guilt associated with the attempt to fight a battle from ground defined by the other. In escaping from a sense of division between the 'normal' and the 'abnormal', I return to humane values. This is the basis of spiritual and political equality. Essentially, it is quite simple: I do not wish to be 'cured' of my own nature. As my mind strives to return to discursive thought, it emerges with a few ideas, both familiar and changed. Now I am wondering if it was only 'the politics of normalcy' which I was describing as intellectually dishonest. That would take a good deal more exploration.

            >
            > Louise
            >





            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • shadowed_statue
            Thank you, Tom. Quite a poetical question. One that rhymes, even :-). My haziness, though, is itself driving me crazy. I am not really disposed to think I
            Message 5 of 6 , Aug 30 3:46 PM
            • 0 Attachment
              Thank you, Tom.

              Quite a poetical question. One that rhymes, even :-). My haziness, though, is itself driving me crazy. I am not really disposed to think I am insane, and if only I can will resolutely and without violence to be sane, the experienced reality may follow.

              Louise

              --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "tom" <tsmith17_midsouth1@...> wrote:
              >
              > Louise,
              >
              > A question that sometimes drives me hazy: am I or are the others crazy?
              > Albert Einstein
              >
              > Tom
              >
              > Good luck
              > ----- Original Message -----
              > From: shadowed_statue
              > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
              > Sent: Sunday, August 30, 2009 4:20 PM
              > Subject: [existlist] Re: Mental politics
              >
              >
              > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "shadowed_statue" <hecubatoher@> wrote:
              > >
              > > The nature of my insanity is not what I thought it was. This is only one area of cognition in which agnosticism now holds sway. The freedom from false certainties which this recognition allows itself exerts a claim on me, to clarify the most recent of my misperceptions. I struggle, however, to articulate in philosophical form what sketchy ideas form and disappear in my mind. Enough for now. My will is true, at least. It is not a will to power, except in relation to the politics of normalcy. How intellectually dishonest is that!!
              >
              > Pondering the meaning of will to power, and wanting to make somewhat clearer the context of my statement about intellectual dishonesty, I find my first impulse is to go back to the text, to what Nietzsche actually wrote. This is the final paragraph of section 636, in Book Three, 'Principles of A New Evaluation':
              >
              > ~ Perspectivism is only a complex form of specificity. My idea is that every specific body strives to become master over all space and to extend its force (-its will to power:) and to thrust back all that resists its extension. But it continually encounters similar efforts on the part of other bodies and ends by coming to an arrangement ("union") with those of them that are sufficiently related to it: thus they then conspire together for power. And the process goes on-- ~
              >
              > So, for myself, the wish to exert force restricts itself to that which secures a true individuation, against the tyrannies of the self-defining mainstream. The fact that I am not 'normal' does not justify a classification of 'abnormal', except from the narrowness of a scientific reduction of what it is to be human. At the outset of the Third Book, Nietzsche comments (#466):
              >
              > ~ It is not the victory of science that distinguishes our nineteenth century, but the victory of scientific method over science. ~
              >
              > To a layman, at any rate, the process seems to have continued all through the twentieth century, and into a new millennium.
              >
              > So, to interrogate my own statement, why should a will to power in relation to the politics of normalcy, be an intellectual dishonesty? I am wondering if it is merely a self-accusation brought on by repeated experience of oppression at the hands of those who insist on standards of normality without recourse to peaceable questioning. In fact, questioning becomes impossible, when the brain is sufficiently overwhelmed by trauma. It could flow from the false guilt associated with the attempt to fight a battle from ground defined by the other. In escaping from a sense of division between the 'normal' and the 'abnormal', I return to humane values. This is the basis of spiritual and political equality. Essentially, it is quite simple: I do not wish to be 'cured' of my own nature. As my mind strives to return to discursive thought, it emerges with a few ideas, both familiar and changed. Now I am wondering if it was only 'the politics of normalcy' which I was describing as intellectually dishonest. That would take a good deal more exploration.
              >
              > >
              > > Louise
              > >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              >
            • shadowed_statue
              I assert that the theme is authenticity. Mercury
              Message 6 of 6 , Sep 4, 2009
              • 0 Attachment
                I assert that the theme is authenticity.

                Mercury
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.