F A N T A S I E S

luka

Well-known member
Staff member
who do you think you are relating to there? the speechifier or the speech recipient?
 
I might start filming myself with drones just NOT achieving my dreams.
Slow mo footage from a drone over the city at night, slow zoom into a bedroom window, corpsey slo mo masturbating in the blue light of his laptop amidst empty packets of wotsits
 
Slow mo footage from a drone over the city at night, slow zoom into a bedroom window, corpsey slo mo masturbating in the blue light of his laptop amidst empty packets of wotsits
sorry for the lads whatsapp joke. haha wanking haha lonely wanks in a basement lads haha
 

entertainment

Well-known member
Yeah fantasies are socially constructed to a degree. But there's also something else in there that isn't. So what's that part and why does it hinge around the same archetypal figures and situations across civilasations and history?

Human behaviour tends to go down the same avenues. Same categories recur wherever fantasies are freely expressed.

I'm not saying that we are born with specific fantasies in our heads that has nothing to do with the cultural conditions, but that we are born with possibilities of certain ideas. Psychic potentialities given to us by evolutionary development.

That's why mythological figures and situations echo throughout history of creative expression. The myths weren't some primordial image handed down from above for human behavior to imitate. They were more like primary coagulation of the same sensibilities that are afforded to us.

The tracks aren't laid out for us, but we tend to go down the same ones, which is why they look like tracks. Psychic residue of cultural history.
 

Corpsey

call me big papa
The fantasies always come down to the same underlying drives, regardless of their manifestation.

Primitive man probably fantasised about killing a buffalo with a perfectly placed spear and getting sucked off the cave later.

Modern man fantasises about being revealed as the wokest man in existence and getting sucked off on stage at TED.
 
There is a deliciously, savagely ironic quality to this pain-machine, as
it operates by seeking to reduce tension in the human organism. Since the organism simultaneously experiences the reality principle as an intolerable pressure and also knows, at the level of the unconscious, that its identity nevertheless depends upon submitting to the symbolic order, it will seek to escape the tension that it is by various means of self-destruction. The famous pessimism of Freud's works of the Twenties and Thirties arose from confronting this hideous machine both on his couch in the form of individual psychopathologies and in the surrounding European culture, which had thrown itself into a hellish war whose only rationale, Freud conjectured, could be found in a libidinal impulse towards auto-annihilation. Micro and macro Thanatos, the death drive manifested in individual neurosis and species level suicide.

Now, in analysing the tendency of human beings to destroy themselves, Freud is much more ready to count himself as the successor of Nietzsche than of Spinoza. Freud was enthused by Nietzsche's psychology of anthropoid self-laceration, and these analyses, as presented in their most developed form in The Genealogy of Morals, also prove indispensable to Deleuze and Guattari's Anti-Oedipus.

These are the most important passages in Nietzsche's writings, and certain other of Nietzsche's most significant ideas - especially his idea of motivational analysis, that we should look to the philosopher for the key to the philosophy - feed into the psychonalytic truism that there is no 'objectivity'; in other words, there is no libidinal neutrality, everything that we want has designs upon us.
 
That's the second time I've linked you to something that could change your life and you've thrown it back in my face!
 

luka

Well-known member
Staff member
That's the second time I've linked you to something that could change your life and you've thrown it back in my face!
he always does that. he hasnt even read a single one of the various important books ive written.
 
Yeah fantasies are socially constructed to a degree. But there's also something else in there that isn't. So what's that part and why does it hinge around the same archetypal figures and situations across civilasations and history?

Human behaviour tends to go down the same avenues. Same categories recur wherever fantasies are freely expressed.

I'm not saying that we are born with specific fantasies in our heads that has nothing to do with the cultural conditions, but that we are born with possibilities of certain ideas. Psychic potentialities given to us by evolutionary development.

That's why mythological figures and situations echo throughout history of creative expression. The myths weren't some primordial image handed down from above for human behavior to imitate. They were more like primary coagulation of the same sensibilities that are afforded to us.

The tracks aren't laid out for us, but we tend to go down the same ones, which is why they look like tracks. Psychic residue of cultural history.
i have a book here called the seven basic plots which is all about that, only 7 stories. you know it? I don't need to read it obv
 

Corpsey

call me big papa
Skipped to the end and lo and behold I have now read the whole article:

"Reason is not commonsense.

Rationality does not disclose a world that fits with the Human OS scanning pattern at all."

Thank u, next.
 

luka

Well-known member
Staff member
corpsey has lost interest. its afternoon, energy crash. it was a good run this morning though. got a lot of mileage out of the subject.
 
Top