To The Iconoclast

TO THE ICONOCLAST

Dear you,

As you’ve mentioned to me last time, being employed by the mob into thinking like they do is particularly tedious for you. I understand. I’m with you on that one, as with many things, good friend. But if you’ll permit me to diagnose, maybe you do not require abject subservience to their mob ideals in order to be a contributing member of society. Maybe you do not need to be told—or worse, conscripted—into what or how to think by any authority but yourself. Maybe you find the needy desire for false allegiance and collectivism where thought is concerned, that hilarious grouping of vast amounts of people according only to which opinions they happen to hold at the time, or which labels they prefer to congregate beneath, as if everyone who takes it upon themselves to wear a certain label happen to be one and the same, to be a completely irrational motivation. I’m with you there too, side by side. Or maybe you find the pop-goals of the majority awful in terms of human creativity, and maybe even you disagree with the idea that happiness is the greatest ideal, as the Dalai Lama, “his Holiness”, likes to pretend is fundamental to human existence, knowing full well the invention of a “happiness machine” is likely just around the corner, and the mob en masse will line up around the world to plug in, and finally, to say goodbye to their suffering. Perhaps you’re simply tired of hearing it all. You know I would go on, but pessimism is a difficult beast to contain. I apologize for when it gets out of hand.

If nihilism, indignation and existential crises plague your life, then dear friend, run to the hills and forests—we have no use for buzzkills here. If you cannot be happy, be interesting—at least for the sake of those around us. But if you enjoy company as I do, and count yourself lucky to have family, friends and lovers, and often find yourself in a myriad of both wonderful and dreadful social situations alike, wherefrom your very vulnerability and innocence get a chance to play, to be hurt, to enjoy, to adventure, then my friend, enjoy the spectacle and observe your muse. If it wasn’t for culture, comedy and irony would disappear and the critic would have nothing to criticize. In fact, the critic owes them this. As such, he stands up for them.

He who leaves nothing but shattered ideas around the floor beneath me—surely you know the answer to your own question. Why such criticism you ask? Simply because it is forever needed. It is a duty to the species and the world to destroy that which has become cages of compromise and routine. I would call it the dangerous art of lyrical iconoclasm, the Nietzschean method of “philosophizing with a hammer”, which in essence is the pursuit of destroying words with more words, putting the idols of man, those herd symbols, the superstitions of Bacon’s idola et notiones falsae, through the grinding teeth of rhetorical assault in the spirit of the cynics and the sophists, without actually destroying anything save for perhaps one’s own convictions. Since mere symbols and ideas are the victims, it is a victimless pastime, where the only weapons and tools ever utilized are words, wit and willing, none of which has let spill a single drop of blood throughout the entirety of human history. This art as it has been performed throughout the epochs and ages by supposedly heretical people (those condemned in their own time only to be praised long after their death) has inflicted absolutely zero harm to anyone or anything.

But I see even you recoil at this thought, oh godless one, as surely words inflict harm to the strongest of people, and sophistry and rhetoric can be used as deception. Congratulations—you’re as smart as Plato. But likely the reason you believe this is because Plato’s campaign against such verbal repertoire is influential to this day, and sophistry and rhetoric are basically pejorative. Sadly, the campaign has worked well enough, and through their disuse we have discovered that sophistry and rhetoric are needed to defend against deception as well. Indeed, words of scorn from a loved one presents a difficulty, for we actually care about what they think and say, yet in every case, it is always the entire situation that sends us to our peril. Perhaps even my words have made your blood boil a time or two. But I am no magician. Only after you’ve considered the physics of the dogma that words can hurt us and we are therefor subservient to them, will you realize your apparent superstition. As per usual, an inversion in thought can help turn things on its head. It is the other way around.

My friend, where you wish to seize the power of the oldest of gods, the prophets, the kings, the leaders, history itself, look to language, the alphabet , the logos, the alpha and omega and everything in between, that idol less broken, and let the sacrifices performed in her name begin. Only from a group of letters can infinity arise. As language has brought us to the dominate the world, so too can it be made to create a better relationship with it and each other. Even so, to this day we teach our children the danger of words, that they can and will hurt, loading them not with tools, but weapons, thereby endowing guttural sounds and scratches on paper with supernatural powers and efficacy. Of course we can all speak and write well enough, but very few seek beyond that. Seek beyond that.

Yes, silence is not for you. You are not a mystic—that is for certain. This archetype loses its appeal the moment it opens its mouth, and the silence a mystic constantly preaches is drowned out. But as we know, heresy and blasphemy in its various forms (provocation, for instance—one can be provoked to kill, and in courts of law dissolve oneself of responsibility by blaming the victim) are still crimes punishable by death in some countries, and such sport is not without its danger; for in the minds of those stringent idealists and idolaters, who through their usual disguise of saintliness and piety conclude that an ideal, a principle, an idol, is a living possessor of feelings and volition through which it must take anthropomorphic offense whenever some bold soul challenges it, and is therefor sacred even to the most mundane of human criticisms, such iconoclasm is an attack on their very person. Desecrate a holy book, a holy verse, a holy symbol, and see where that gets you. Burn a flag, an effigy, an idol and be prepared to defend your own life. The same with mere words. You become an enemy to a slave the moment you point out his slavery. It is here where this base human superstition, the superstition of language, takes its foolish form in the manifestation of violence—a symbol about as valuable as whatever substance it is made out of, imagined to be supernatural, imagined to be more valuable than even a living being, the exact same sort of living being that creates these symbols in the first place.

Be weary, however, for in their eyes, if you attack their belief you attack the believer— a bully, or worse, a purveyor of abuse. We might call it a spooky attack at a distance. This “attack”, as they will call it in the typical accusatory and threatening fashion, is nothing more than a series of words strung together in such and such a way as to make it understandable to another human being. Don’t pretend to feel evil for their insidious folly. Calling a series of words an “attack” or implying that the safest sort of creativity—prose, verse and poetry—can bring harm to another human being is an obscenity, and gives actual attacking a bad name. When no one is around, no body language, no threat but you and the words, there’s only one entity in the entire universe to blame for this suffering. This sort of fictional account apropos the danger of words, whereby one blames the language for how he feels, how he reacts, how he responds, when he so happens to come across it, is a mild stupidity and a precursor to hate. When the reaction to your iconoclasm is claims to belittlement, it isn’t you trying to be little.

But don’t let this worry you. You’re needed now more than ever. Dissent, the greatest honesty, is being snuffed out. Authority takes center stage. These ideas need to be plucked from their lofty heights back down onto what is. Philosophy these days is best performed by comedians, forcing us to laugh out ourselves. But what happens when joke is no longer funny? One must even be ironic about irony. Iconoclasm, dissent, irony, contrarianism, is philosophy’s last hope at dignity, for that which was dignified has long left it.

Anyways, I’ve been preachy. I’ll write you again soon.

-LesMis

I agree with you on your statement about irony and humour in general.
Humour is often considered as universal, even if, most agree that you can't laugh about everything.
How can it be universal if you can't laugh about everything ?
Probably because there is a way to laugh with everyone. Everyone who has sense of humour of course ...
Otherwise, laugh from the others. Everyone should accept criticism through humour, it's better to harm the ego than the flesh. It should however never degenerate into bullying of stereotypes.

Regarding your submission to the 'system', just one question :
Aren't we already considered as 'losers' if we don't want to play the game ?

Regarding your criticism of religious systems, may I ask you in which category do you belong ?

If there is a God and he created man according to his image, then he too must have a sense of humour ... and if he does, his jokes are far superior to what any single human can think of. Monty-Python logic applied to the holy scriptures can do wonders, trust me.

Speaking of iconography, here is an interesting Belgian painting by Bruegel the Elder, it's called "Le Misanthrope" ...



You can try to go through the artist's mind in order to decode the symbols he uses in his painting.
I'd rather give you an other key : the sentence written in old flemish.

Om dat de wereld is so ongetru, dear om gha ic in den ru

Which gives us in modern Dutch :

Omdat de wereld is so onbetrouwbaar, daarom ga ik in den rouw

In English :

Because the world cannot be trusted, therefore I go into mourning

Any thoughts ?

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Ex 20:3-4 (NIV) "You shall have no other gods before me. You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below."


•God destroys idols; He is the great iconoclast. Even good things can become idols, and while reveling and boasting seem good at the time, it is a grave disservice to idolize anything or anybody. The result is God's wrath, on you and the idol. God will not be eclipsed.

www.acts17-11.com...

Have you ever considered that giving words power is making idols? Words are what appear to make the 'things' that are believed in!!
One can believe that they are an object, that all people are objects, is that not making idols, making 'things'?

Really there is only God, which is not a thing. There can be no things when there is just what is.

The individual is an illusion, there is nothing separate - it is one - yet you continue to believe in 'things'. The 'things' created in thought just fight and conflict with themselves and hide the ever present peace.

a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

Aren't we already considered as 'losers' if we don't want to play the game ?

According to no set of rules.

Regarding your criticism of religious systems, may I ask you in which category do you belong ?

Black rabbits exist.

Victor Hugo and Moliere. This moniker was a poor attempt at a play on words.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

Have you ever considered that giving words power is making idols? Words are what appear to make the 'things' that are believed in!!
One can believe that they are an object, that all people are objects, is that not making idols, making 'things'?

We are objects.

Really there is only God, which is not a thing. There can be no things when there is just what is.

“There is just what is”—it means nothing, itsknowagain. Failure to discriminate between objects will lead to injury and death.

The individual is an illusion, there is nothing separate - it is one - yet you continue to believe in 'things'. The 'things' created in thought just fight and conflict with themselves and hide the ever present peace.

‘Things’ are not created in thought. Objects are outside of thought.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

‘Things’ are not created in thought. Objects are outside of thought.

Wording is 'thinging'.
Life is made of experience.
Words are experienced.

But you are lost in words.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

Wording is 'thinging'.

It isn't, my friend. Words are words; that's it. We cannot give words supernatural powers, no matter how hard we try.

Why do you fear words? It is you, and not the words, that causes conflict between them.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

It's the first time I enjoyed one of your threads. Beautifully written and an intention that sounds true. (Gonna read it again, maybe I misunderstood )

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Itisnowagain

Wording is 'thinging'.

It isn't, my friend. Words are words; that's it. We cannot give words supernatural powers, no matter how hard we try.

When you went to school did you not learn how to 'spell'?
Words are indeed tricksters. They make believe all sorts of things that are not true - and the stories they tell can be conflicting so they can be very distracting.
Stories told in the media have great power.

Why do you fear words? It is you, and not the words, that causes conflict between them.

I do not fear words - I see words as they arise and they are very beautiful. They just appear from nowhere and then are gone - amazing!!

a reply to: Itisnowagain

well, the written word is the best form of magic, we humans are capable of.

a reply to: Peeple

It's the first time I enjoyed one of your threads.

This is the first time I enjoyed one of your responses. Thank you for the kind words.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

When you went to school did you not learn how to 'spell'?

True enough. But it wasn’t until after school did I learn why we spell, or why we use grammar, and so forth. This sort of education, the trivium they used to call it, is no longer a part of our education systems, except where our future leaders go.

Words are indeed tricksters. They make believe all sorts of things that are not true - and the stories they tell can be conflicting so they can be very distracting.
Stories told in the media have great power.

They are indeed dangerous to those who are superstitious of words. But the one who make believes all sorts of things that are not true are those who cannot distinguish between truth and falsity, cannot see through the rhetoric, and who are unable to furnish the proper thinking in regards to what is being said.

I find nihilism and existential crises to be quite enjoyable.

a reply to: Calalini

I find nihilism and existential crises to be quite enjoyable.

I suppose then, they are meaningful for you?

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Is your OP the ranting result of calling a black person the N word? jkjk

Words do not have supernatural powers, but they do have powers. I dont entirely get what you were getting at with your OP, who exactly are you calling out, what sort of people is doing what wrong? What sort of people are doing what right? How would you like to see things changed? What is your ideal way for a single person to live, and what is your ideal way for a group of people to live?

But anyway, words are very important! And very powerful! Imagine if tomorrow, all the books disappeared, the existence of language disappeared from inside and outside of all humans minds, and noone could write or speak. Would that be a more ideal world for you? After thinking about this, it is seen how language is one of the primary necessary inventions for our intelligence to have started its 'ascent?' from the rest of the animal kingdom, who remains in potentially some degree greater of blissful ignorance. It is such a supreme importance for the cohesion of a or our species, to be able to explicitly show (and tell) what most exactly is in ones mind, and then to discuss the whats and whys and etc.

Also language may 'help' the individual understand what it is that is even occurring in their mind. Well the animal life is simple enough, you are born, you kinda pick up on the way things are by watching and learning, you have your parents and siblings, for some reason they care about you more than the others in your pack, ok, so care about them a bit more than the others, ohh, everyone needs a mate from outside of their family, ok gotta show off and compete with the others to get a good mate so I can make a family of my own, nice eating is cool, sleeping is cool, running is fun, I can get used to this, it feels good sometimes and its exciting.... And well the advent of language and the uber human mind is just this taken to a roofless level. The exploration of materials and near infinite way of combining them to make greater environmental comforts and aids etc.

But I do wonder how different you and I would be to the selves we are now, though it is almost pointless to talk about seeing as exactly everything that occurred prior to our births had to occur in order for us to exist at all, including but certainly not limited to, the advent of language, but if we never learned a language, but just had the hardware, and our 'inner..mute?...illiterate...voice', to be our most intimate guide through this life. I dont want to wrongly sense what you are getting at, which is why I first asked you, but perhaps you are getting at the words and thought that is used superfluously, as if we answer that last question I just posed, we wouldnt fundamentally be that much different, though we may be, I personally was even very much different than I am now a few years ago, and even more radically different few years prior that, so are you getting at, the thoughts and language that 'dont effect and affect' anything? You dont understand why it exists, why it should exists, why one needs or wants it to exist? Kinda like me and my personal if even light hatred of 99cent stores, even then there are some decent things in there, but a lot is just useless crap that will be in a landfill in short while.

As always, inspiring and passionate writing and thinking.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

According to no set of rules.

The set of rules exist, it's not able to deal smoothly with some extreme cases of oversized egos, but it exist.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

Victor Hugo and Moliere. This moniker was a poor attempt at a play on words.

I was expecting you would have the capacity to go beyond the poor attempt at playing with words, since you produced over 100 lines of rhetoric about the so called emptiness of language ...
2 Black rabbits only ? C'mon !
There can be 7 billions if you understand to you're not better than any other guy down here.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Is this a note to yourself?

a reply to: ImaFungi

The OP (thank you for making it through that wall of text) is the advocacy of iconoclasm, criticism, and pessimism, as high art forms, but people are turned off from such methods for fear of offending others. To refute this, I argued that when it comes to communication, people offend themselves. I’m not sure by what mechanism this occurs, but I have intimated it is a form of superstition due to the decrease of rhetorical knowledge (among other things—for instance, lack of exposure to other cultures) prevalent in modern society. The destroying of mental idols hurts no one.

What is my ideal way for a single person to live? My ideals are for myself. That’s the thing about ideals—they’re always personal and prejudiced. They are not for anyone else, nor could they be. They are matters of personal taste. But if you wish to know what sort of people I personally like to be around, I gravitate towards wit, good spirits and merrymaking.

I hold language very dear, and absolutely do not wish to see it disappear. I only wish it was appreciated for what it is, and used to its full extent. It’s something like this: the purpose of language is to prove others exist. It is how we learn the inner lives of others, and express our own. You’ll notice I do not speak about words in a negative fashion. I speak negatively about how one might react to to words. By learning the art of rhetoric, grammar, logic, how to use words, the art so often used against us, words are finally seen for what they are.

But what language is, I do not yet know. Language is still a frontier where more exploration is needed.