Our Standard is Death
September 15, 2017
Apprentice Jop Broski
Words are very unnecessary. they can only do harm.
All I ever wanted, all I ever needed is here ...
Depeche Mode
All I ever wanted, all I ever needed is here ...
Depeche Mode
Apprentice Jop Broski, of his own free will, is desirous to study under a Master of the Occult Arts and Sciences and, until that opportunity presents itself, he is content to Apprentice under Yours Truly.
I
Our initial commentary on John Galt’s speech was abandoned when we realized that the text was not confirming to our expectations and our long held opinions. A chance reading of an excerpt of “Ecce Homo” at the Fairbanks Memorial Library resulted in our abandonment of our second effort on John Galt’s speech. Without citing evidence, without any arguments, we will explicitly state that picking and choosing various elements and certain ideas from the classical philosophy, from Rousseau, from Nietzsche, and placing them under a novel title is to be correctly understood as the epitome of a “second hander”. Therefore, our essay will comment upon the phrase “standard of death”.
The “standard of death” is a strange expression that entices the thoughtful reader. We wonder why anyone would hold death as the standard of either their existence or as the standard of Nature. In Galt’s speech, death is equated with non existence and death is correctly understood as the non existence of a previously living entity. If we substitute “non living” for death, then we can offer that “non living” is the general nature of the universe- our world has exceptions to this standard, or to the expectation of encountering the “non living”.
The overwhelming evidence that non life is the majority of observable existence cannot be denied. However, we question if “non life” should be the standard when Nature obviously provides ample evidence of life. Once again, we encounter a strange expression whose subject is death: Phaedo
There seems to be a more than a causal connection between “the standard of death” and “ “. If one reaches the conclusion that non living is the correct standard of the cosmos, then this valuable insight can only be discovered through reasoning. Firstly, we can state the obvious: the end of man is death or becoming non living. Since we have not observed any resurrections, whether general or otherwise, we can state that death is permanent and in the context of the total amount of physical matter of our world, life is an anomaly and intelligent life is so rare as to be statistically insignificant.
We suggest that those select individuals who intentionally practice death realize that the “purpose of life is to die”. This natural and terrible truth is placed into the mouth of Agent Smith. It is a terrible and frightening truth because conventional wisdom is clear: death is bad. Of course, there is no objective reason why death should be bad, as contrasted with “good”. Clearly, if death were considered “good”, then death would be treated, and accepted, differently. In our opinion, death, being natural like birth should be treated, for the lack of a better word, naturally. However, conventional wisdom considers birth a “good”. In conclusion to this part, births are “good”, life is “suffering”, and death is “bad”. If misery loves company, at least we have a starting point to begin understanding the eagerness for children- sharing suffering and misery.
The “standard of death” is a strange expression that entices the thoughtful reader. We wonder why anyone would hold death as the standard of either their existence or as the standard of Nature. In Galt’s speech, death is equated with non existence and death is correctly understood as the non existence of a previously living entity. If we substitute “non living” for death, then we can offer that “non living” is the general nature of the universe- our world has exceptions to this standard, or to the expectation of encountering the “non living”.
The overwhelming evidence that non life is the majority of observable existence cannot be denied. However, we question if “non life” should be the standard when Nature obviously provides ample evidence of life. Once again, we encounter a strange expression whose subject is death: Phaedo
There seems to be a more than a causal connection between “the standard of death” and “ “. If one reaches the conclusion that non living is the correct standard of the cosmos, then this valuable insight can only be discovered through reasoning. Firstly, we can state the obvious: the end of man is death or becoming non living. Since we have not observed any resurrections, whether general or otherwise, we can state that death is permanent and in the context of the total amount of physical matter of our world, life is an anomaly and intelligent life is so rare as to be statistically insignificant.
We suggest that those select individuals who intentionally practice death realize that the “purpose of life is to die”. This natural and terrible truth is placed into the mouth of Agent Smith. It is a terrible and frightening truth because conventional wisdom is clear: death is bad. Of course, there is no objective reason why death should be bad, as contrasted with “good”. Clearly, if death were considered “good”, then death would be treated, and accepted, differently. In our opinion, death, being natural like birth should be treated, for the lack of a better word, naturally. However, conventional wisdom considers birth a “good”. In conclusion to this part, births are “good”, life is “suffering”, and death is “bad”. If misery loves company, at least we have a starting point to begin understanding the eagerness for children- sharing suffering and misery.
II
If philosophers face natural death without fear, but without hope, then they would seem to be “the most miserable of men”. Yet, in the context of Saint Paul, “misery” is written to the intellectual understanding of the majority who believe death is bad, and the living, who will eventually die, as miserable, if there is no life beyond our world. Modern Christians promote an afterlife, yet an eternity in their version of “Hell” is less desirable than “non existence”, or the ancient Egyptian hope of not experiencing the “second death”.
Whatever is unknown is magnified.
Publius Cornelius Tacitus
The quote is often referenced in the context of the flat earth model, specifically, where the unknown of space is expanded into the distance of billions of light years. The quote is also applicable to that great unknown that, unlike the heavens, is unseen: death.
What we know about death: non existence.
What opinions we heard about death: various judgements, various torments and tortures, demons, Paradise, eating, drunkenness, endless physical relations with virgins, and other speculations that we omit both for the lack of space and taste.
What we know about death: non existence.
What opinions we heard about death: various judgements, various torments and tortures, demons, Paradise, eating, drunkenness, endless physical relations with virgins, and other speculations that we omit both for the lack of space and taste.
Magnify: to make (something) appear larger than it is.
We may say that the opinion of the next world ranges from endless ejaculations for the carnally inclined to contemplating the divine essence for the more discerning believer. From the various opinions on the subject of the afterlife, we can confidently conclude that there is no objective standard by which we can judge either the likelihood or the desirability of the Netherworld.
III
Just as religion can be understood as philosophy for the masses, so the insistence of various opinions and beliefs of modern Christianity may be traced to philosophy. Since the majority cannot understand or appreciate the subtleties and nuisances of philosophy, we should not expect the modern religions to adhere to virtues, or to noble sentiments, but to embrace what all people can understand: sacrifice.
And if people do not understand, or more likely, misapply the tenets of the thinkers, then the fault cannot be assigned to the teachings of the lovers of wisdom, but to the natural inability of the students to grasp what, exactly, is being taught, not only what is taught, but the necessary implications of what philosophy clearly teaches, and suggests, for those who have the capacity to appreciate Wisdom, not as a statement of declarations and prohibitions, but as the sublime pinnacle of human achievement. The masses who moan and wail that it is not fair that they exist in a world they cannot fully explain should not be assigned the guilt of comprehension to the few, but justly condemn the fickle gifts of Nature.
And if people do not understand, or more likely, misapply the tenets of the thinkers, then the fault cannot be assigned to the teachings of the lovers of wisdom, but to the natural inability of the students to grasp what, exactly, is being taught, not only what is taught, but the necessary implications of what philosophy clearly teaches, and suggests, for those who have the capacity to appreciate Wisdom, not as a statement of declarations and prohibitions, but as the sublime pinnacle of human achievement. The masses who moan and wail that it is not fair that they exist in a world they cannot fully explain should not be assigned the guilt of comprehension to the few, but justly condemn the fickle gifts of Nature.
conclusion
Everyday, we experience people practicing their rudimentary understanding of various forms of “watered down” philosophy. and we are not surprised either by the ineffectual results or the endless frustrations- in plain English, “They have bitten off more than they can chew.”
Falsely holding that they are the mental, and moral, equals of philosophers, they refuse to entertain, let alone accept, the possibility that they are “in over their heads” and instead of reassessing their opinions and living conditions, continue their existence fraught with fear and guilt. Fear, because they correctly “feel” that death is the end, the constant assurances, often weekly, sometimes daily, notwithstanding. Guilt, because they attempt to moral, because they “feel” that morality is “right”. Lacking a hierarchy of values, they are not capable of distinguishing among the moral, the immoral, and the amoral.
Why this perpetual inability? Because they, by their nature, and through Nature, cannot question their premises and accept all that they are told, regardless whether or not the new information contradicts their experiences.
Tell the masses that God is all good, all knowing, and all powerful and they will accept these three suppositions. Since these statements sound “right” or seems “good”, most hearers are unable to realize that at least one of these statements are wrong: evil exists and people have experienced evil. The sham argument that man has “free will”, so called, or choice does nothing to alter the suppositions that human experience calls into question.
Of course, certain individuals, now mostly long forgotten, who imposed their will, are to be held accountable for the creation of cities and the modes and orders for its survival. The vast majority of people are not “cut out” to live, to benefit, from civil society, hence the continual promotion of “noble lies”. The “Noble Lies” exist to ensure the city’s continued existence, as a society based on reason, while not wholly unreasonable, is so demanding upon the minds of the masses, that it is highly improbable as to border upon fiction, the utopia of Galt’s Gulch notwithstanding. Fortunately, for the continued general welfare of the city, people do not question what they have been told, “noble lies” included.
In conclusion, we leave the Gentle Researcher with three thoughts.
Falsely holding that they are the mental, and moral, equals of philosophers, they refuse to entertain, let alone accept, the possibility that they are “in over their heads” and instead of reassessing their opinions and living conditions, continue their existence fraught with fear and guilt. Fear, because they correctly “feel” that death is the end, the constant assurances, often weekly, sometimes daily, notwithstanding. Guilt, because they attempt to moral, because they “feel” that morality is “right”. Lacking a hierarchy of values, they are not capable of distinguishing among the moral, the immoral, and the amoral.
Why this perpetual inability? Because they, by their nature, and through Nature, cannot question their premises and accept all that they are told, regardless whether or not the new information contradicts their experiences.
Tell the masses that God is all good, all knowing, and all powerful and they will accept these three suppositions. Since these statements sound “right” or seems “good”, most hearers are unable to realize that at least one of these statements are wrong: evil exists and people have experienced evil. The sham argument that man has “free will”, so called, or choice does nothing to alter the suppositions that human experience calls into question.
Of course, certain individuals, now mostly long forgotten, who imposed their will, are to be held accountable for the creation of cities and the modes and orders for its survival. The vast majority of people are not “cut out” to live, to benefit, from civil society, hence the continual promotion of “noble lies”. The “Noble Lies” exist to ensure the city’s continued existence, as a society based on reason, while not wholly unreasonable, is so demanding upon the minds of the masses, that it is highly improbable as to border upon fiction, the utopia of Galt’s Gulch notwithstanding. Fortunately, for the continued general welfare of the city, people do not question what they have been told, “noble lies” included.
In conclusion, we leave the Gentle Researcher with three thoughts.
Death is our [the philosophers] goal.
Death is their [the non philosophical] standard.
Price and Participation will vary.
Just what you want to be, you will be in the end.
The Moody Blues
By the plenitude of power authorized and granted by the Ancient and Esteemed Order of Hierophants, it is duly proclaimed, declared, and exclaimed that potential Apprentice Jop is hereby elevated to the exalted and sublime position of Apprentice and shall henceforth be recognized as Apprentice Jop Broski to a Master of the Occult Arts and Sciences.
All rights, privileges, and benefits associated with said position, current and future, are hereby solemnly bestowed and conferred upon Apprentice Jop Broski this fifteenth day of September in the year of our Lord and Master two thousand seventeen. So mote it be. G.D.O’Bradovich III |