MADNESS!

[henry quirk]

Define it.

Example it.

Argue about it.

Go!

[Impenitent]

one step beyond...

-Imp

[Nick_A]

Dam wrote to VA

Does the idea of madness have any control over my life? ... Nah, of course not, only DAM gets to decide what sticks or controls this mind called DAM..there is nothing outside of DAM's mind that can enter without her permission. Usually, I'm quite unconditional about what hangs around with me, so yeah, madness is welcome too, I'm saying a big yes, but if this madness thingy ever starts to disturb, or rudely interupt my love for freedom and peace, and my love for clear empty headedness, I'm going to kick it's sorry ass raw, and it will never be allowed back in ever again...ok madness, you do hear that? ...hahahaha!!

VA replied:

It is so evident, your madness is controlling what you are writing above.

Seriously, I'll repeat again,

The above reflect your madness - really, that is why I suggest you consult a psychiatrist and bring along the above post and similar writings to show the consultant.

I'll suggest further, you also consult a few psychiatrists just to be more sure of your current state.

This immediately raises two questions. Defining madness first requires defining intelligence. Is it really passive acceptance of psychological prison to appease the educated elite? Simone Weil wrote:

"The difference between more or less intelligent men is like the difference between criminals condemned to life imprisonment in smaller or larger cells. The intelligent man who is proud of his intelligence is like a condemned man who is proud of his large cell.

"... All that matters is that he has come to the end of its intelligence, such as it was, and has passed beyond it. A village idiot is as close to truth as a child prodigy. ..."
- Human Personality

Plato refers to the idea in the cave analogy. Before I was banned at I love philosophy for making too much sense I began a thread called Simone, Plato, and the Cave. If I wanted to I could express all the nastiness and ad homs and it would be fine. Just don’t try to make too much sense since there will be hell to pay. Anyhow,I wrote:

[Socrates] This entire allegory, I said, you may now append, dear Glaucon, to the previous argument; the prison-house is the world of sight, the light of the fire is the sun, and you will not misapprehend me if you interpret the journey upwards to be the ascent of the soul into the intellectual world according to my poor belief, which, at your desire, I have expressed whether rightly or wrongly God knows. But, whether true or false, my opinion is that in the world of knowledge the idea of good appears last of all, and is seen only with an effort; and, when seen, is also inferred to be the universal author of all things beautiful and right, parent of light and of the lord of light in this visible world, and the immediate source of reason and truth in the intellectual; and that this is the power upon which he who would act rationally, either in public or private life must have his eye fixed.

Now, coming out of the sun and not fully accustomed again to living in darkness, a person having experienced the light wants to share even though unsteady but is confronted with experts that at best only confuse everything and at worst kill him.

[Socrates] And if there were a contest, and he had to compete in measuring the shadows with the prisoners who had never moved out of the cave, while his sight was still weak, and before his eyes had become steady (and the time which would be needed to acquire this new habit of sight might be very considerable) would he not be ridiculous? Men would say of him that up he went and down he came without his eyes; and that it was better not even to think of ascending; and if any one tried to loose another and lead him up to the light, let them only catch the offender, and they would put him to death.

The question now becomes the value of the intellect in this matter of awakened sight. What knowledge can a sleeping man have? Yet unaware of our condition we create experts by the boatload who, while sound asleep, claim to explain everything with this "reason"of theirs.

This person who has experienced the light has the unenviable task of trying to relate the common sense of it to all these experts and their followers. You think Sisyphus had it tough? Not even boulders can offer resistance like an expert with his heels dug in.

So for the sake of non-experts with an inner knowing that there is something more than shadows, how are they helped by the one who now knows? Of course there is education but of what kind?

I don’t agree with Dam but she is expressing ideas and if they serve her aim, there is no problem. A seeker of truth could never tolerate escapism since it opposes their aim to leave themselves vulnerable to the experience of truth and risk the satisfaction from denial

So who is mad? Is it the person experiencing the light recorded in the cave analogy? Maybe the mad are the people ridiculing this man’s experience of the light? Maybe what we normally define as intelligence is really the passive acceptance of madness as a norm while really glorifying as Simone suggests, psychological prison?

But I do warn you. Be veeerrry careful questioning the educated elite. Do not underestimate the intensity and nastiness of their denial. They will defend their self justification at your expense.

So questioning what madness is and who is mad can easily destroy a thread as a disturbance.

I remember once reading when a reporter asked a grandmaster why he tolerated Bobby Fisher. After all he was a rude anti-semite. The GM said this is true but where else can I read such beautiful chess? Yes, madness is double edged. Perhaps the mad ones are capable of producing what the educated elite possessed by what Nietzsche called “wretched contentment” are incapable of

However, if I am considered mad and must visit a psychologist who turns out to be a cute blond female and practices couch technique, the experience may not be a total loss. I’ll dazzle her with my madness and pay her fee..

[Veritas Aequitas]

Mad
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/mad

Madness;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_disorder

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diagnosti ... _Disorders

[Nick_A]

Mad
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/mad

Madness;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_disorder

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diagnosti ... _Disorders

Many i know would be considered mad because they are not satisfied with wretched contentment as described by Nietzsche. I admire their dedication to esoteric truth though they will be condemned by the educated elite when they receive some noteriety.

[Walker]

Define it.

Example it.

Argue about it.

Go!

Sane thought recognizes appropriate action.
Sane action is appropriate action.
Conditions determine appropriate action.
Action determines madness.
Madness is action inappropriate to conditions.
Human psychology is an aspect of every known condition.

Example:
- Under the proper conditions, every action is appropriate.
- Every appropriate action is made inappropriate by conditions.
- Interpreting past sane actions through the lens of imagined, ideologically-shaped conditions often results in a madness-verdict from the history revisionists, however the sane man in an insane world (e.g. Lincoln* or Trump**), with a clear apprehension of conditions, yields to appropriateness. A delusional apprehension of conditions results in inappropriate action (e.g., crashing the car.)

* The world of sanctioned slavery.
** The media world of narrative-driven reporting.

Example: Under most conditions, yodeling is inappropriate. Under other conditions, which we can only imagine, or if somewhat mad experience, it is appropriate.

[jayjacobus]

- Interpreting past sane actions through the lens of imagined, ideologically-shaped conditions often results in a madness-verdict from the history revisionists, however the sane man in an insane world (e.g. Lincoln* or Trump**), with a clear apprehension of conditions, yields to appropriateness. A delusional apprehension of conditions results in inappropriate action (e.g., crashing the car.)

* The world of sanctioned slavery.
** The media world of narrative-driven reporting.

Example: Under most conditions, yodeling is inappropriate. Under other conditions, which we can only imagine, or if somewhat mad experience, it is appropriate.

Sanctioned slavery had an economic justification which was opposed by a moral justification. The media world has a moral justification. What rational justification did Lincoln have and what rational justification does Trump have?

If Trump saves the country from the media, is that not a personal justification designed to limit opposition? It may be sane but Trump's purpose is to keep the country in the dark when the dark serves his purposes. A sane Trump is a deceitful Trump. A sane Lincoln is a moral Lincoln. Sane does not mean beneficial which Trump is not. He seeks to decrease the power of people who would oppose him and increase his own power as aresult.

He has way too much power and will not restrain his quest for more.

[Dontaskme]

Thanks for this most excelllent thread starter ...To all distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen, in my opinion, there are a multitude of different and varied ways of talking about ''Madness''..but here is just one simple example

Madness to me means someone who claims to know they know exactly what is going on within the mind of another mind.
(Notice that there is an assumption that the mind is something that contains something else, and is why we say inside the mind )
Notice we think the mind is inside a body, but never outside a body) see how strange that is for a start? to assume the mind is inside a body. See how weird that is?
It's like there is this assumption that the body needs a thought to be known it is a body, so the body is only known and seen because thought inside the body is informing there is a body there.

And yet the thought that informs the body is a body... is thought to be inside the body...so by this logic the inside of the body is where the thought of the body is supposed to be located. So that logic just says the body is inside the body. And the body that is inside the body is also outside of the body because where there is an inside there must be an outside logically speaking, anyway enough of that madness..


People aka minds who believe other people aka minds are MAD ...do so because it is quick to label something that it itself doesn't understand.

The contents of another mind can't possibly be known , it can only be guessed at in relation to what the guesser knows via it's own knowledge or experience. In truth, no two minds can ever meet up, or ever know or see each other. Any attempt to know another mind will always be pure conjecture and speculation, sheer guess work, and not actual truth. And not even an MRI machine can read a mind's exact thoughts.

More to the truth of the matter is the seer cannot see itself - aka the mind cannot see itself...because looking for the seer is what's already looking which cannot be looked at except as an image appearing in the looker looking at the only thing that can be seen. And yet the thing seen can't see...test it out...can a thing see? can the computer in front of you see you?

Try telling that to someone and what do you get?

You get YOU'RE MAD.

That's just one example of what madness means to me. There are loads more.

.

[jayjacobus]

- Interpreting past sane actions through the lens of imagined, ideologically-shaped conditions often results in a madness-verdict from the history revisionists, however the sane man in an insane world (e.g. Lincoln* or Trump**), with a clear apprehension of conditions, yields to appropriateness. A delusional apprehension of conditions results in inappropriate action (e.g., crashing the car.)

* The world of sanctioned slavery.
** The media world of narrative-driven reporting.

Example: Under most conditions, yodeling is inappropriate. Under other conditions, which we can only imagine, or if somewhat mad experience, it is appropriate.

Sanctioned slavery had an economic justification which was opposed by a moral justification. The media world has a moral justification. What rational justification did Lincoln have and what rational justification does Trump have?

If Trump saves the country from the media, is that not a personal justification designed to limit opposition? It may be sane but Trump's purpose is to keep the country in the dark when the dark serves his purposes. A sane Trump is a deceitful Trump. A sane Lincoln is a moral Lincoln. Sane does not mean beneficial which Trump is not. He seeks to decrease the power of people who would oppose him and increase his own power as a result.

He has way too much power and will not restrain his quest for more.

PS: Trump acts in real time. The two other branches judge him with a 2 or 3 year delay. The balance of power does not work when the president's game is over before the judges make their judgments. They are too late to restrain hin,

[Walker]

DAM
Under these limited conditions which need not be limiting, you exist only as writing, so appropriate action is effective writing, inappropriate action is ineffective writing.

Jay
Things happen fast these days. It doesn’t take long to know when the car crashes. For instance, even before Obama was sworn in, businesses with any sense of self-preservation had contracted into hunker-down mode.

Most major media outlets* are organs of the Democratic Party that report what supports the narrative of invalidating Trump’s presidency by any means necessary. There are lots of swampy reasons for this. Trump responds appropriately to that world, and also to his world of official duties.


* Along with the legal world, entertainment world, academia, and those conditioned by their influence.

[jayjacobus]

DAM
Under these limited conditions which need not be limiting, you exist only as writing, so appropriate action is effective writing, inappropriate action is ineffective writing.

Jay
Things happen fast these days. It doesn’t take long to know when the car crashes. For instance, even before Obama was sworn in, businesses with any sense of self-preservation had contracted into hunker-down mode.

Most major media outlets* are organs of the Democratic Party that report what supports the narrative of invalidating Trump’s presidency by any means necessary. There are lots of swampy reasons for this. Trump responds appropriately to that world, and also to his world of official duties.


* Along with the legal world, entertainment world, academia, and those conditioned by their influence.

The media doesn't take action. They provide information. Trump invalidates their information and takes action without restraint. Trump is an organ of one man, himself. He is not an organ of the GOP, the media, the people, the country. He is an organ that has no purpose for any group other than himself.

What is the purpose of a man who is not beholden to anyone? Watch Trump to learn what Trump is doing but he wants to misinform you about the information you receive. The media is an organ of the democratic party? That's just Trump's bullshit to dissuade you from taking a hard look at what he is doing.

When the media reports on national debt, foreign relations, oil prices, immigration, taxes, reforms, gun violence or anything; Trump will say "Don't listen to them. Listen to me. I am the only fair reporter. This is because they are not reporting the news. This is because they are fabricating stories to support the Democrats."

Really? Trump is the fair reporter? You are fool if you believe that.

[henry quirk]

"He seeks to decrease the power of people who would oppose him and increase his own power as aresult."

As I see it: he's mostly bluntin' the power of folks who'd put a leash 'round my neck, tellin' me as they do how the leash is for my own good. Nuthin' Trump has done has blunted me, leashed me. Mostly he's stayed the hell out of my way, and -- by way of his shenanigans -- kept the would-be leash holders offa my throat.

#

"The media doesn't take action. They provide information."

In which universe? Certainly, in the universe I live in, the bulk of folks in 'the media' are just propagandists (and, yeah, FOX is just as much a propaganda machine as MSNBC [I watch both, trust neither]).

[Nick_A]

I define human intelligence as the ability to connect the wholeness of ideas with their interpretations we witness. It is human nature to lose the ability and miss the forest for the trees. We sacrifice the higher mind revealing wholeness for the sake of arguing amongst the trees. From this perspective, those skilled in arguing amongst the trees are considered intelligent and those feeling the truth of wholeness are considered mad.

Most seem to prefer to argue Trump so we may as well abandon contemplating madness for the pleasure of arguing Trump. But in respect to Simone's efforts and for the sake of keeping higher ideas alive, I'll leave you with Plato's description of divine madness. I'll make it easy on me and just post Wiki

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divine_ma ... azy_Wisdom

Divine madness, also known as theia mania and crazy wisdom, refers to unconventional, outrageous, unexpected, or unpredictable behavior linked to religious or spiritual pursuits. Examples of divine madness can be found in Hellenism, Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, Sufism, and Shamanism.

It is usually explained as a manifestation of enlightened behavior by persons who have transcended societal norms, or as a means of spiritual practice or teaching among mendicants and teachers. These behaviors may seem to be symptoms of mental illness to mainstream society, but are a form of religious ecstasy, or deliberate "strategic, purposeful activity,"[1] "by highly self-aware individuals making strategic use of the theme of madness in the construction of their public personas".[2]

Animal madness refers to the results of physical brain defects while human madness refers to the drive to connect our higher mind sensitive to universal wholeness with our associative mind which divides phenomena into parts. This could drive anyone mad.

In this day and age it is a concept better left alone since anyone expressing a result of higher mind will be attacked as disruptive by the educated elite that prides itself in the amount of facts they know rather than the ability to incorporate them into human understanding which connects the wholeness of above with the diversity of below.

So for the sake of peace; "Go Trump."

[Eodnhoj7]

Define it.

Example it.

Argue about it.

Go!

Define it.

Example it.

Argue about it.

Go!

[Dontaskme]

DAM
Under these limited conditions which need not be limiting, you exist only as writing, so appropriate action is effective writing, inappropriate action is ineffective writing.

Yeah but that's all just for show, just for effect..we all know there's no one writing the story that everyone is reading.

Many authors appear but there is only one reader reading the writing no one ever wrote.