Rinzai Did Nothing Wrong.

There is a song called “Most Girls” by the artist Hailee Steinfeld, and it’s honestly an awful song, because it is a toxic, spiteful answer to a common compliment. The compliment, in its generic form, is “you’re not like most girls”, to which the artist answers with the claim, “I want to be.” It’s like the sort of people who take issue with the thought that parents would, say, raise their children properly and lovingly by telling them that they are special. If I had to guess at why so many people fall for self-destructive tendencies, it’s not because they think they’re special but because they’re taught they’re “normal” and expendable “like everybody else”. Yet this is utter poison and the most depraved of narcissistic tendencies, since it implies not only that the child has absolutely nothing to contribute to an ailing populace, but also that *nobody* does and no one *ever has*. “Equality”, expressed in such a lifeless form, is death, since it is only “special” people who break out of...

I promised to abstain from talking about pickup artistry, however I must nonetheless address the implications of this Sartrean philosophy on *interpersonal relationships*, which are the part of his philosophy which seems most painfully self-evident:   Because there is no human nature, no authentic self, and nothing which is hidden “just beneath the surface”, there are just three words regarding all your hopes and dreams of finding love which best describe your situation: **“No one cares.”** It only takes a couple years of personal experience to learn this fact, though people may deny for decades. No one cares about your Soul, its beauty, your ideals and principles, your bleeding heart, your passion, your good will, your virtue, nor your goals and interests… *except for you*.   Yet this is why the existentialists are optimists. If you alone must champion the things that “truly matter” in your life, then no one but yourself can stop you. When you walk into a bar and see somebody...

I want to say that, without any irony, this Grimmi stream remains one of my favourites to date, no pun intended, and I aim to buy *Super Seducer* and to play it to completion, while before I only had the worst impression of it, given secondhand by someone whose opinion I have no cause to trust. I honestly believe that Richard is intelligent, a decent and inspired human being with a loving wife and plenty of experience in fields I've always wanted to explore but struggled to make sense of. While I feel a pang of sympathy for Grimmi's idealistic worldview, I am much too weary of the world to place much faith in such a rosy point of view, though I can only hope it works for her. There is, however, one thing I have left to say: it's time that we stop saying "talk to them like they are humans." We are living in the year of 2023. There is no "human nature". There is no "authentic self", no "higher self", and very little "inner beauty...

**Dear[est] Grimmi :** I was moved to hear you read about my Sun Sign. Maybe this will help you understand the basic mindset typical of it. The simplest summary of Pisces as perspective is the most self-evident: the interpenetration and interdependence of all beings. I am as responsible for those around me and for their well-being as I am for mine, and, so, “in turn”, the Other is responsible for my well-being every bit as much as I am. If the Other acts in such a way that harms me, I may bear the guilt and shame for that transgression, since I’d rather be inclined to feel the Other’s feelings of revulsion rather than to shut them out. Yet it is not the Truth that this is just, since I am only made to feel this same revulsion since the Other chooses me to be the scapegoat when I’ve been the victim, so as not to recognize his own transgression. This refusal to admit of one’s own moral failings is the source of that “philosophy” that says, “Take care of *your* self first.” It is delusio...

Let's return now to this boring question of the "function" of the "intellectual", as represented by an intellectual who seems to hate his fellows: " Those whose careers are built on the creation and dissemination of ideas — the intellectuals — have played a role in many societies out of all proportion to their numbers. Whether that role has, on balance, made those around them better off or worse off is  one of the key questions  of our times. The quick answer is that intellectuals have done both. But certainly, during the 20th century, it is hard to escape the conclusion that  intellectuals have on balance made the world a worse and more dangerous place.  Scarcely a mass-murdering dictator of the 20th century was without his supporters, admirers, or apologists among the leading intellectuals — not only within his own country, but in foreign democracies, where i ntellectuals were free to say whatever they wanted. ... intellectuals are people  whose end produ...

"I'll admit: I wanted to support this video . I wanted to support this channel. I have always liked your calm, collected feedback when you worked in groups with Gary, Drinker, AZ, etc. I should have noticed, though, that my approval of your commentary was proportional to just how many people you had shared a stage with. As a group, your Fellowship produces very moving content which inspires hope in people all over the globe. However, that is not your personal agenda, and I see that now.   Don't get me wrong: I too would love to find a critic who could formulate a system which would work for making Art effectively. Yet as I see this wish reflected in your rant, I cannot help but to consider, maybe to conclude, that it's a Faustian temptation. Lived experience within the World requires people to be practical, emotionally self-aware, and open to diverse perspectives. This is why a group or team is often quintessential to success in an artistic enterprise, including so...

My optimism takes a hit each time I try to browse the Internet in search of arguments regarding anything of transcendental value. If I want to know the Metacritic score for some generic horror game, then I can find it in mere minutes. Yet if I aspire to find anything regarding what is Beautiful or Good or True, then instantly I’m met with a barrage of falsehood. Two examples that stand out most clearly both regard the gap between “subjective” and “objective” thought. Such crucial aspects such as feeling and morality, which ordinarily one would refer to as an absolute reality, (in practice even more so than in “thought”) have been reduced to “subjectivity” by therapists… and people actually follow this prescription without any indication of remorse or indignation. (Note how it’s “prescription”, not “description”, which we ’ ll get to later.) That this trend explains some of the more ridiculous assertions made by otherwise soft-spoken, sober people on the Internet would offer comfort on...

“I am not the only one responsible for my well-being here. I trusted you, and you accepted the responsibility. If you had not accepted, then you wouldn’t have been capable of taking opportunities away from me. It was not my fault that I trusted you, since trust is not an evil thing, but rather yours that you betrayed that trust, since treachery is evil. So: don’t try to preach responsibility to me because I suffer. You’ve confessed that, had you acted otherwise, I would have benefited, and you can’t deny that, had I never trusted you, you never could have acted as you did. I suffered through the combination of my own goodwill and your betrayal of it. YOU are to atone, not I. You cannot separate responsibility from Justice.” [My own writing. Image unrelated.] Sadly, this is lost on narcissists who claim that we are not responsible for how we have affected Others. Yet the Truth is this: that all of us depend on Others for our own well-being, and responsibility requires the admission of t...

What at first appeared to be a genial and well-intentioned dialogue between two equals proved to have concealed a darker undercurrent of manipulation, flattery, deceit, and snide dismissal. It was hard to shake the creeping feeling that my interlocutor's polite acknowledgement of every point, his thin veneer of interest and pleasant invitation to continue down a path he'd chosen for us, coupled with his passive patience when I would not go there, barely holding back the impulse to direct us down another path, was nothing but a mask of gratitude behind which lay a calculating intellect that cherry-picked those arguments of mine which it could turn in its own favour, subtly ignoring all the rest, as if a single "thanks" sufficed to clear them from the table. All of these techniques, familiar to me from years of studying debate and rhetoric, are innocent enough when they are used in the pursuit of common goods, the symptom of this venture being the attainment of, if not ...