"Where love rules, there is no will to power; and where power predominates, there love is lacking. The one is the shadow of the other."
Carl Jung.
People have many different relationships, sometimes observing these, some years later, the ones you thought would fail are still strong. What makes a successful relationship? There would be many different answers as each person has unique needs, which may not even include "love" and these can be the relationships that endure. It is interesting to read what Carl Jung has to say as this is in direct conflict with some on this Forum.
Good thread, let's start this one off with how much money it takes to buy your "love", allemotion?
How much was your settlement, did you make a million dollars, or two million?
Every relationship is a hierarchy. There is a superior and an inferior. Women leech from and depend on a man's will-to-power. Women seduce men who have the strongest will-to-power, because a woman's WTP is weak and almost nothing by comparison. Women are born without a will-to-power, because the WTP is antithetical to the category of females by their biology. Women are inherently non-violent, and cannot compete in violence against men, directly.
A woman's tactic, and her WTP is indirect. Her violence is indirect.
A male, and all men, are aware from a very early age, naturally and by instinct, that only one rule exists in nature, the truest golden rule, and that is, might makes right. The most powerful, and the one most willing toward power, establishes all rules and laws. Power is a function of knowledge. Women and females are unwise, and depend on men as authorities of knowledge. This is why no female philosopher has ever existed in the history of the human specie, nor will ever exist in the future.
If anything is impossible, then it must be, that a woman can be individual and independent from men. Because for her to do so, would divorce woman completely from the will-to-power. She would then induce a death sentence, as all that does not will toward power, eventually must die, and not survive. Will to power is the fundamental life force of all organisms.
Force, violence, power, war, intimidation, hate,
These are the only true things and true values in life, for men. Love is a lie, an illusion, and a method of women to seduce and promise men, the allure of sexuality, under the guise of beauty. Seduction, and the promise of genetic lineage, is ultimately, the only thing of worth, relative worth, that a woman can offer a man. And the quality of her promise, belies her truest strength or weakness. If she has no capacity to birth and raise the strongest and most superior type of children, then she has no real worth to man.
The rule of nature is unmitigated, uncontrolled, violence and hate. In the end, nothing can control this force, not even the beast of woman. Nature is defined by violence, and the power to prevent or impose violence, before any other value or virtue.
Atthet wrote:This is why no female philosopher has ever existed in the history of the human specie, nor will ever exist in the future.
You've tried to make this argument before, Atty, and you lost it, remember? You know now that it isn't true, and yet you repeat it. That isn't philosophy, it's plain dishonesty.
In the end, nothing can control this force [of Nature] ...
Nonsense, Atty! There is very little left of Nature that is completely beyond human control, and that certainly includes our own behaviour.
Atthet wrote:This is why no female philosopher has ever existed in the history of the human specie, nor will ever exist in the future.
You've tried to make this argument before, Atty, and you lost it, remember? You know now that it isn't true, and yet you repeat it. That isn't philosophy, it's plain dishonesty.
In the end, nothing can control this force [of Nature] ...
Nonsense, Atty! There is very little left of Nature that is completely beyond human control, and that certainly includes our own behaviour.
No, I don't remember. If there is a female philosopher, and allemotion is her, then how come she cannot teach me, educate me, about the will-to-power, and its relationship to men and women, based on a gender division? Isn't allemotion the authority on the will-to-power?
If you answer yes, then she has many questions to answer, doesn't she?
Atthet wrote:This is why no female philosopher has ever existed in the history of the human specie, nor will ever exist in the future.
You've tried to make this argument before, Atty, and you lost it, remember? You know now that it isn't true, and yet you repeat it. That isn't philosophy, it's plain dishonesty.
In the end, nothing can control this force [of Nature] ...
Nonsense, Atty! There is very little left of Nature that is completely beyond human control, and that certainly includes our own behaviour.
No, I don't remember. If there is a female philosopher, and allemotion is her, then how come she cannot teach me, educate me, about the will-to-power, and its relationship to men and women, based on a gender division? Isn't allemotion the authority on the will-to-power?
If you answer yes, then she has many questions to answer, doesn't she?
Will to power? It's amazing the complete nonsense that has been made up through the years. If you want to win an argument in the love relationship, you need to lose. Give the power to the other person.
Although the nature of emotion and the problems that it causes does not deter people engaging in a worldly life, it presents the question is there meaning to the emotional problems people have or would it not be in a person's best interest to choose to live a solitary life and avoid this inevitable turmoil of emotion.
SecularCauses wrote:If you want to win...you need to lose.
Doublespeak,
I do not buy into your Jewish faith, foggy. To me, if you want to win, you need to win. Woman must never have power over man, but man must always have power over women. Man must subvert, control, dominate everything, and everyone. There must be no greater power than man, and there is no greater power than man.
Your Jewish God, your dogma, your Jesus, is not mine. Keep that childish fantasy to yourself, you zealot.
You're wrong. A man with absolute power can take everything he wishes, with none to stop or oppose him. Violence is the one and only natural law, the rule of all force.
Man dominates everything, especially woman.
Well, after some observations I discovered, that every action, no matter how altruistic it might look, has an egoistic (or biological) motive(-s). This can easily be applied to relationships: we get involved in romantic relationship because of our own needs. This means, that 'love' as a union between man and women is illusion. They never become 'one organism'. They are always separate. Which leads to next question: why relationships fail. In the beginning, everything, usually, works perfectly, because both sides want the same: physical contact. And, obviously, we cannot receive it without 'giving' it to our partner. Later, however, everything becomes more complicated, because our needs change, and often what one wants to get, other doesn't want to give. This causes conflincts. We all have experienced it. Because of that, perfect relationship can be defined as when one side wants to get something, and another side can and wants to give it. Of course, this is impossible. Because, again, no one gives anything without expecting to get something from it. Same with friendship. However, from friends we want different things than from 'love' partners. I would even say that friendship can be more rewarding than 'love'. But nothing is better than solitude. I had many relationships, but nothing is more satisfying than solitude. At least for me. Maybe because I am ultra introvert. Maybe because I don't like relationship mechanics(how they work). Maybe both.
