You've not made a single argument other than you know very little about Nietzsche. And that you try to be edgy "the case against suicide" here's the case against it for you: you're still here cause you're what Nietzsche refers to as a last man...

I am defending a new version of substance dualism — MoK

Basically, more or less you think the mind exists free of the body.

read the rest then?

I mean, with all due respect, *hammer emoji* *nail emoji* *coffin emjoi* one could not imagine a grander thesis... how am I to argue such infinite wisdom? You win. :party: :clap:

Oh, tells us of that philosophy if you're so great at knowing Nietzsche's philosophy better than he himself...
What precisely didn't he live out?

I'm absolutely certain you've a lack luster knowledge of Nietzsche's philosophy to suggest that he himself would know it less than you.

Fine if you chose not too, but really all you've declared here is that you're too lazy to attempt to tackle Nietzsche. That your transfiguring mirror is sour.

"Everything is shit beneath me."

Certainly is with that reifying entry wedge into everything.

the mind is an emergent property within our flesh. That doesn't mean it's seperate. It grows out of... there's unconscious and consciousness. We can see there are gradations from the body of purely structural for Form...then it becomes more superfluous...through the CNS and unconscious, and then, thoughts arise from the unconscious body into the consciousness... consciousness is perhaps the internalization of our senses...

The mind exists within the flesh.

The man spent his life knowing he would die early due to his life long medical conditions that were similar to his fathers...and he even overcame serious physical injuries, while being crippled by some life long hereditary conditions most likely falling under the umbrella of CADASIL.

He overcame and became a world influencing philosopher who is still highly relevant to this day...

You just sound like the Narrator of the Aleph... a nihilist.

How can seeing something truamatize a person?

The wisdom of Silenus is real but find yourself a transfiguring mirror...

The same impulse which calls art into being, as the complement and consummation of existence, seducing to a continuation of life, caused also the Olympian world to arise, in which the Hellenic "will" held up before itself a transfiguring mirror. Thus do the gods justify the life of man, in that they themselves live it—the only satisfactory Theodicy! Existence under the bright sunshine of such gods is regarded as that which is desirable in itself, and the real grief of the Homeric men has reference to parting from it, especially to early parting: so that we might now say of them, with a reversion of the Silenian wisdom, that "to die early is worst of all for them, the second worst is—some day to die at all." — Nietzsche

So with that we come to what Nietzsche details in Beyond Good and Evil

The essential thing "in heaven and in earth" is, apparently (to repeat it once more), that there should be long OBEDIENCE in the same direction, there thereby results, and has always resulted in the long run, something which has made life worth living; for instance, virtue, art, music, dancing, reason, spirituality—anything whatever that is transfiguring, refined, foolish, or divine. — Nietzsche

So find something that transfigures your outlook...
It's subjective to you. But Nietzsche says most people don't even know their way into or out of that labyrinth in his day, I'd assume that holds true today also.

experience doesn't need to be a substance to alter us... lol wild assumption but okay...

"Experience alters us, as all nutrition, which does not aim merely to conserve, as all physiologist know..."

Experience alters neuroplasticity and neuroplasticity reinforces itself.

Emergence is when something emerges between dimensions...Emergence comes from thebidea of our extremely fractal biology... and we can show that the patterns of emergence of a fractal are between dimensions.

If you take a line and double it you have 2 copies ... 2¹ ... take a square and double the sides of it you end up with 4 copies ... 2² ... take a cube and double the sides of it and you end up with 8 copies or ... 2³ ...

The line is 1 dimension 2¹
The square is 2 dimensions 2²
The cube is 3 dimensions 2³

We see that when we double the sides of something we end up with number raised to some power depending on the dimensions of the object...

So we end up with 2^d = number of sides after the doubling process

where d is the dimension of the object

Take the Sierpenski's Gasket, a fractal. Every time you double the sides you get 3 copies... so we end up with an equation of:

2^d = 3

To solve for d utilize the property of logarithms ... ln of 3 divided by the ln of 2 = d
d = 1.5 something something...

Thus fractal emergence is something that occurs between dimensions... a 3d body with fractal biology with have emergent properties that exist nested between 2d and 3d... so it's a phenomenon that occurs nested within our fractal biology.

Emergence doesn't end up in Epiphenominalism

The problem here is you're unaware of reification. Since you don't know what Emergence is, you equate it to monism...

Fortunately for me there's not a big empty internal cavernous extra dimension space within the human body where the mind is. Thoughts don't exist in a vacuum. There's a physical object utilizing the laws of physics to create everything that occurs in your mind. Every thought you have is physically tradeable by an EKG... thought requires physics and biology to work because it's substantial. Doesn't mean thought is a lego block in my mind.

Thought isn't a thing that occurs freely.

I certainly did, you're asserting that the mind has no affect on the physical that's simply not true, from my position, as the mind incites physical production within the body.

Mind and Body are parallel heterogeneous productions born of the same cause: the CNS. That doesn't equate to monism.

Patterns of neural activity occur when the brain processes input/information, whatever we wanna call it, from the mind and or the external world. Patterns of neural activity are specific arrangements and sequences of electrochemical signals that occur within the brain's network.

Experience is encoded and processed by the brain through a complex biological network.

A person can physically sense a phantom limb... like say you pretend to shock the phantom arm of where a person believes their phantom limb is currently at (a limb that exists due to the dynamic model created by processing experience) it will register on an EKG as if they were shocked. In otherwords it is completely immaterial and causes a physiological stimulus.

But you cannot deny its existence and the fact that it affects the physical such as the brain. My question is how experience can affect the brain? — MoK

Not trying to deny it's existence. Experience affects the brain through things like neuroplasticity. Which is pretty much a self referential and self affirming as experience even reinforces it's own self through the genesis of neuroplasticity, which makes it more and more likely something will be utilized.

That is very ambiguous to me. To me, that is a definition of knowledge. Do you mind elaborating? — MoK

Something isn't known until it's in the muscle memory...

For example, you don't know 5x5=25 if you have to solve 5x5 every time...

Knowing 5x5 = 25 automatically, without conscious thought, is the result of muscle memory.

I don't understand what you mean by that and how that could be relevant to the discussion. — MoK

What it is saying is that what we experience in the external world affects even our internal world. But also that what we experience in our internal world affects our external world also. As in, it's a two-way street. Experience isn't just a "physical" phenomenon...

Sorry, made a late edit:

That's why I quoted:
"Quidquid luce fuit, tenebris agit [What occurred in the light, goes on in the dark]: but the other way around, too."

Experience is something we can gain from both our internal and external world. It doesn't "work on it's own" it is a dynamic model created from inputs (and outputs, which are injections, and thus inputs too...in this case) from our internal and external world.

Software is nothing but an arrangement of bytes of memory in a hardware. So it is not a thing by itself. — MoK

Exactly the point... the mind doesn't exist as a thing by itself.

What is an experience to you — MoK

That's why I quoted:
"Quidquid luce fuit, tenebris agit [What occurred in the light, goes on in the dark]: but the other way around, too."

Experience is something we can gain from both our internal and external world.

We can think of it like this: the software and hardware of the body both grow out of the FIRMWARE of the body.

Hardware being muscles, bones, organs innervated by the CNS.

Firmware is the Central Nervous System and Autonomic/Peripheral Nervous System

Mind is emergent cognition (software) that arises out of the CNS (firmware), shaped by body (hardware) and experience.

The brain creates it's own dynamic model of the body which can persist irrespective of reality. Cut off your arm, and you'll experience a phantom limb, because the mind and body are so deeply intereconnected.

To suggest they are seperate from each other, is due to one holding steadfastly adamant to Cartesian Dualism. Which is fine, but that manner of thought is not compatible with this manner is all.

Deleuze has some interesting things to say about differentiating eggs...

Accepting that the brain and the mind are the same one commits monism. — MoK

Not quite

If they are the same thing then why use different words? — MoK

Because the two have generally been perceived as existing through the antithesis of values rather than growing out of the body through fractal emergence.

Healthy body, aids in a healthy mind, and a healthy mind aids in a healthy body. The two opposites are intertwined together, they exist in a "hybrid" state. A coming together of two opposites along a gradational spectrum with bimodal extremes represented in language by "body and mind."

Just like everyone's genetic material is made up of male and female DNA, although our terms are defined "male" and "female" for example. However, in reality it's much more complex than that biologically, we know, for example a man can be living with inert female reproductive organs inside, regardless of there being the scientific definition at the SRY gene. There are still multiple gradations on either side which show statistical dominance towards a certain pole. Not that everyone is either 100% Man or 100% Woman...

In fractal emergence, one shouldn't consider the mind as something that isnt fundamentally "the body." They are in essence one and the same.

They are bijected, and inject and surject into and out of each other.

I'm of the mind that one wouldn't classify experience as emergent just because the mind is?

Glad humans chose to repurpose all those compasses they made to throw at people for Navigation instead... pretty cool we made compasses without being aware of or perceiving magnetism...

Damn, how do cells divide again? We cannot perceive such notions cause you know we can't perceive magnetism... yet some how we did... must me magic.

"We can't perceive something we can literally sense in action."

Are you familiar with Emergent Properties? For example, it's possible to show things exist between dimensions like 2d and 3d...

Our most current models suggest Consciousness is an emergent property of our fractally nested biology.

Currently ruminating through:

Quine's Pursuit of Truth

Wittgenstein's Tractatus and Philosophical Discussions

Bernays' Propaganda

Nietzsche's Genealogy of Morals and Birth of Tragedy

Foucault's Madness and Civilization

And an MITx Philosophy course on "Paradoxes and Infinities."

Might pick up some Godel.

I know that's weird, but I go through sections, stop move to another person and allow my thoughts to ruminate upon what I've read. After I get enough handling and understanding of the sections I'm on, I then revisit where I left off.

It's kinda like grade school, but with philosophy subjects as each topic.

perhaps I may be confused by the way it's worded, but are you suggesting that experience is due to physicality with an event?

But I'm saying experience can be completely non physical. The quote I present is an older one that brings up this very notion, we can gain experience in dreams....

Unless you mean like we can only experience things because we have a body? But I would say then that the mind is caused by the body in that model.

Experience is due to the existence of physical and the change in the state of physical is due to the existence of an experience — MoK

Huh...

"Quidquid luce fuit, tenebris agit [What occurred in the light, goes on in the dark]: but the other way around, too."

I did say the lack of information left many possibilities. So if you want to delve into what you meant, feel free to do so.

Edit: Yeah, I didn't think you'd have the ability to back your criticism of Nietzsche with substance. Most cannot.

"Just like a car crash, just like a knife, my favorite weapon is the look in your eyes..."

I mean, at least we Bridge over our mutual dislike at "Ministry."

Russell was a pretty poor analyst of Nietzsche though. Very easy to overturn his poor understanding of Nietzsche's work.

Except that ressentiment has such a central place in N's criticism of Christianity - so it seems fitting to treat his philosophy as reverse ressentiment... — Banno

Except it wasn't.

MAN is the rope that binds the two opposites of animal and the Superman together... man doesn't achieve the "Ubermensch" type any more than man can revert back to being wholly animal... except maybe wolfman.

For Nietzsche, the highest presentment of man is that type who continually overcomes themselves in their opposites. The Judaeo-Christian morality system seeks to kill off the opposition. Rather than becoming greater thereby.

Not even sure what that's saying, I suppose you'll have to elaborate cause I can see it being an attempt at saying many things... not quite certain which option to pick... If you could guide me down your thoughts a little further, that would be appreciated. It's okay if you cannot though, at that point it just feels like you wanted to use a common, albeit poor, counter to Nietzsche's own philosophy and psychology, which has little to do with what I've said here.

"Ah hah! Nietzsche read books he was an ascetic!" is like "Nietzsche says theres a "God" behind his book Birth of Tragedy so I guess God's not dead, Gotcha Nietzsche!"

Kinda comical if anything.

Reading certainly can be an ascetic practice, but it's generally not for most.

Nietzsche is kinda silly, though, in part, I believe it's just part of his mischievousness...

In Beyond Good and Evil Nietzsche says that Truth and Deception are essentially (boiled down to the essence) the same thing, in this case they're both narratives. Generally speaking, truth is seen as Good, and Lies as bad, but there are times when the reverse of this valuation holds true...

And thus the best narratives tend to hold some deception to them... (When lying and truth are both aligned for what's good)

Verily, I beseech you: take your leave of me and arm yourselves against Zarathustra! And better still, be ashamed of him! Maybe he hath deceived you. — Nietzsche in Ecce Homo

You don't listen to Zarathustra because he's "right" you read it to experience the effects of the dithyramb, which affects the self-abnegated reader. And incites their will to power.

pretty logical to assume since I said we can observe it Im attacking AE1... dork.

...a child sliding down a plastic slide often has their hair stand on end... pretty sure it's detectable? You're basically playing "peek-a-boo" with magnetism and saying "empiricism doesn't exist" when you're not directly observing magnetism...

Allow me to then get into that a little further as to what I mean by literary music, we can delve into Ecce Homo and Birth of Tragedy:

The whole of Zarathustra might perhaps be classified under the rubric music.... Before Zarathustra there was no wisdom, no probing of the soul, no art of speech: in his book, the most familiar and most vulgar thing utters unheard-of words. The sentence quivers with passion. Eloquence has become music. Forks of lightning are hurled towards futures of which no one has ever dreamed before. The most powerful use of parables that has yet existed is poor beside it, and mere child's-play compared with this return of language to the nature of imagery. — Nietzsche

By self abnegated I mean, getting immersed into the story, rather than critically thinking about something such as "time is a circle" and then being like "what that's not how reality works?!" and then you break immersion and miss the whole purpose of the story as a thought experiment. Cause the Apollonian consciousness often hides the Dionsysian world from their view. Self abnegation allows for one to see beyond their "Mayan Veil."

And for Nietzsche, music animates the body, via a sort of ontological instinct, and furthermore Nietzsche considers Thoughts as arising out of our Insincts ...

What Nietzsche means by throwing lightning is that Thus Spake Zarathustra is a book that ontologically activates "Will to Power."