Cȯsꭑọ ∴ ọꭑƨȯƆ @cosmiccitizen@schelling.pt

Part 3. Kant says that human ethical independence is so totalizing that not even the intrinsic grandeur and nobility of self-development can overcome moral duty. The human subjectivity must be accepted as capable of total moral accountability. This same subjectivity, just by chance, is also where Kant is going to stash all the phenomenal ooze, albeit in 12 discrete boxes. The universe is still mechanistic and objective, but your psychology is secretly holding it all together.

It's hard to explain a delightful little dance of concepts I discovered today.

Part 1. The Aufklärung sets up an idea of an atomistic, mechanistic, objectively meaningless universe with a scintilla of dualistic subjectivity left to catch all of the phenomenal ooze of reality.

Part 2. Herder wrecks this system, describing how language and art are innately expressive and allow humans to objectively create meaning even in such a universe. Self-development is the crowning glory of the universe.

You think you can solve this by recommitting to friendly civic & social engagement with each other? Those protocols were defined for healthy, non-internet-poisoned people. Good luck.

The stable caring attachments will continue to be degraded until the advertisers are satisfied with social media traffic. Your society-wide BPD experience of hollowness and abandonment is not a problem for the people selling Chips Ahoy.

This is what Star Wars, The Matrix, and Avatar all understand: for the full neuronal thrill of an FX blockbuster, filmmakers must introduce some new concept of proprioception. After Star Wars, people fantasize about swinging swords made of light. After the Matrix, people fantasize about bullet time. After Avatar, (IDK I want my thesis to be true so I'll act like) people fantasize about the neuralink stuff.

why do i post things like this

As Plato describes in the Timaeus, we can understand the dopaminerge by the patterns and forms of this world, but we can't understand the "form of Dopamine" (ἡ τοῦ dopamine ἰδέα) unless we were somehow outside of creation.

In time, you will know what it's like to be cringe. To feel so desperately that you're based. Yet to hear 'yikes' all the same. Dread it.
Run from it. Cringe arrives all the same.

cool
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eagle_Woman

"Hurr durr we can describe mal/adaptive conditions according to analytically sound categorization" -- Do you realize how crazy you sound, DSM?

The DSM is the latest victory by the deep state Kantian categoriologists on their long march through the institutions.

fuck it, alt-90s grunge-pop summer
fuck it we ball
FUCK IT WE BALL

"I feel in control of my life."
[17 remaining]
"I feel in control of my life!"
[16 remaining]
"I FEEL IN CONTROL OF MY LIFE!"
[15 remaining]

I'm socially distancing but for memes.

I like cultivating an air of "bug nutty" because it gives me the social distance necessary to adopt re/frames that I think keep me healthy apart from a pathological culture.

One of the nice things about semiotic synechism it's a kind of informational monadism. As a metaphysical frame is that you have no difficulty accounting for the compatibility of informational activities in self-perception, nerve-firing, or machine calculation. It's referent-vehicle-translatant all the way down.

Language is the infinite game in which culture floats. The people who make new sentences are like Columbus discovering new continents of coherence inside the Library of Babel.

In the world of corpus linguistics and LLMs, one of the most important things you can do as someone with a bespoke, hand-raised, open-range wetware language-processor is to use it to create new sentences.

You have rhematic hard-wired full-channel access to the tychic character of the universe. You're already narrating sentences about it anyway. You're narrating a sentence to yourself about this text right now.

So why not make those sentences stranger and more public?