Twizzy’s Silence

[Twizzy’s Silence @InfernalGuide]

ECO-THEOLOGY—. Oikos, dwelling + theo, god + logos, thought. “Haus-metaphysik” (Hegel, History of Philosophy v3). Meta-nature of the house.

Thought pertaining to transcendence of the un/homely. E.g., Socrates’ death against exile. E.g., Abraham’s abandonment of his homeland.

[Twizzy’s Silence @InfernalGuide]

@saturnine_grace @saracen_heath Why swag for truth and aura for beauty? My intuition would be that aura is gravity of the subject, ultra subjective radiance, without which truth is not an uncovering; and swag is beauty because beauty is sheer appearance, absolute surface, ‘disinterested interestedness’ etc

[Twizzy’s Silence @InfernalGuide]

The two ‘ethical’ questions of our 21st century:

1) how is it possible that people like good things for bad reasons?
2) why must we question our certainty in evil as much as we must question our certainty in good?

[Twizzy’s Silence @InfernalGuide]

@UndermineLove3 This is the essence of Christianity

[Twizzy’s Silence @InfernalGuide]

@saturnine_grace What does “sublimated” mean?

[Twizzy’s Silence @InfernalGuide]

The church never does anything but eat around a problem; the body you consume is not the problem but the solution. The problem is never addressed as such. Protestantism addressed it, then began hallucinating that the problem can speak back its own solution. The result: no church.

[Lewis 🇺🇸 @ctjlewis]

The Pope is wrong on all of these points except for a few, which are only temporarily true. The Church eats around the problem by denying it exists here.

[Twizzy’s Silence @InfernalGuide]

@NaturalMagic777 yes, lying that generates meaning ‘for itself’ is a possibility of the human essence. egoism is not as self-explanatory as all that. Or that’s exactly what it is, the explaining of a self to itself, which on the scale of value of that very ego its not only tautological but absurd

[Twizzy’s Silence @InfernalGuide]

You “know” you’ll “anger some.” Is your “angering some” a function of “discussion”? Or something else?
You “know” it’s something else, since you act like words are just words. Now, words are just that; they won’t break your bones; but no human bone was ever broken without a word.

[Hunter Ash @ArtemisConsort]

I know I’ll anger some followers with this, but I find this embarrassingly juvenile. Many of these claims are mere technical problems: embodiment, sensors, continual learning. The rest are just special pleading. These systems can already discuss love, friendship, responsibility etc more lucidly than most humans, so the claim must be some sort of totally unfalsifiable human chauvinism. There is no possible set of behaviors AIs could exhibit which would put a dent in his confidence in these assertions. An embodied AI (robot) could be raised (continually learning in context) among humans, exhibiting every conceivable sign of love, compassion, responsibility, and friendship, and the Pope would still say “doesn’t count because silicon instead of meat”.

It would be more respectable if he just said “I don’t care if they can exhibit these traits because humans are my tribe” but instead he makes a giant list of assertions that have either already been proven false, will be proven false soon, or are unfalsifiable.

[Twizzy’s Silence @InfernalGuide]

@TPatbat @saturnine_grace I also have a question, which is why you feel like making a point without making a point is worth even your time

[Twizzy’s Silence @InfernalGuide]

@AeonBaudrillard @91_starman67619 @saturnine_grace = “Not-everything is saved” = the separation between being and nothing is saved = the possibility of being and nothing is saved = … you can fill in the blanks. Every further distinction is simply rhetorical because nothing real constrains salvation.

[Twizzy’s Silence @InfernalGuide]

@AeonBaudrillard @91_starman67619 @saturnine_grace Well ‘actually does’ is a bit misleading considering the fact that whatever is in actuality has not been annihilated.

[Twizzy’s Silence @InfernalGuide]

Baudrillard’s limit is just that his world is child’s play. “The Gulf War didn’t happen” is amateur hour. Try: strikes during ceasefire imposed by the attacker, announced as “no cause for concern” by his enemy, for no one named but that power that constricts itself as it wins.

[Twizzy’s Silence @InfernalGuide]

No such thing as using the app ‘well’. there is wanting to go through an erotic ordeal or not wanting to. Sex isnt evil, but neither is it beautiful (but learn from
Diotima that what is not beautiful is NOT therefore ugly). Sex is castration. Anxiety is desire. You already know.

[Jorge of the Wired @saturnine_grace]

@Italofiend Why? I'm tempted to agree but I'm trying to be humble and admit that I either just generally suck as a person or am too dumb to use the app well

[Twizzy’s Silence @InfernalGuide]

Perversion is a form of containment, but not of fear. fear itself can also be read as a containment for an unbound libidinal attachment. It makes no sense either way, besides simply identifying the need to ‘contain’ desire, which is not a need but an articulation of desire itself

[Reuben Rodriguez @ReubenR80027912]

Fetishes are just the eroticism of fears. By turning fears into something perversely pleasurable they are manageable. 0.01% of the pop *actually* engages in cuckoldry irl but for ~200 yrs it has occupied the Western mind

B/c cuckoldry is the eroticization of dispossession (1/2)

[Twizzy’s Silence @InfernalGuide]

Nominalist return in the form of the parallelism of Absolute Aura (‘intrinsic socially empowered’) and Ordained Aura (‘circumstantially socially empowered’)

[𝕭𝖎𝖗𝖉𝖞 𝖛𝖘 𝕭𝖆𝖇𝖞𝖑𝖔𝖓 @mary_got_grace]

the most insane person you know is irrationally divinely favoured

[Twizzy’s Silence @InfernalGuide]

The Rameausnephewification of the ABG must be studied

[ℜ𝔞𝔢 @dystopiangf]

It’s very funny ending up on the same side politically as very low-openness, rigid traditionalists. I became RW because of my 99th percentile high openness + rebellious tendencies

[Twizzy’s Silence @InfernalGuide]

will take you far. but a question remains whether the self-theorizing experiment of thought automatically confesses its own valuative structure or is formed by reflection. And further: whether reflection is an endogenous dialectic of memory or an exogenous dialectic of program.

[Tyrique🍊 @tyorrique]

Hegel, Marx, Sartre, and Fanon each show that there is no “dialectical method.” Methods are themselves enveloped by a certain form of thinking. Immanent Critique is a method. Phenomenology is a method. Psychoanalysis is a method. Each of them expresses Dialectical Reason.

[Twizzy’s Silence @InfernalGuide]

The ontology of Nietzschean dialectic of performance is *sniff* precisely nothing else than the ontology of the first undergraduate year itself…

[sara (rebirth) @anonpriestess]

define ontological
define nietzschean
define dialectical
define performative
define every buzzword you learned in your first year of uni during your liberal arts degree that you never properly retained

[Twizzy’s Silence @InfernalGuide]

@saturnine_grace that’s why we are not Freudians, because we are searching after sinthomatic thriving—but not symptomatic ecstasis