>Third Impact should've been a year ago

As much as I want to die, I don't think I want to be in one giant hivemind with everyone else on earth...

>>151644871
same

File: gendouwin.jpg (46KB, 778x527px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 778x527px

>>151644737
Weren't you here last year to see it all come tumbling down?

>>151644871
Jean-Paul Sartre — 'L'enfer, c'est les autres.'

>>151645330
>Weren't you here last year to see it all come tumbling down?
I was.
I wish that I could turn back time

>>151644737
Good riddance.

File: 1451625760632.png (267KB, 1320x624px) Image search: [Google]

267KB, 1320x624px

>>151645330
I was

>>151650707
Seriously though, why are so many people opposed to the idea of merging with the rest of humanity? It seems like it would be absolute perfection to me

>>151651665
because i don't want to be mulatto

>>151651665
Because capitalism needs individualism to work, and society is engineered to promote it.

File: 1447487566945.jpg (268KB, 736x721px) Image search: [Google]

268KB, 736x721px

>>151644737
Third impact is happening this January!

>>151644737
Black Rebellion starts in a few months. Millions will die, but it will all be worthwhile.

File: 1463512584135.jpg (733KB, 1442x1614px) Image search: [Google]

733KB, 1442x1614px

>>151644871
>>151644992
>>151645330
>>151651665
>>151651780
>>151651948

Omae wa mo hivemind

>>151651665
It's a place with no interaction, no closeness and with no physical contact, where you are trapped in your own fantasy without the possibility to love or be loved. Everyone can see your deepest desires, but you can never do anything about those desires, because there is no (You).
I also want to add something. Most people are scum. If someone's deepest desire is to be raped by a horse, or if someone is simply a serial killer or a pedo, everyone else will have to live with their thoughts and emotions, forever.
Instrumentality is revolting. It's death for the dead.

>>151653305
You know you pretty much just described 4Chan right?

>>151644737
would "sex" scene in EoE count?

File: 1481819430033.jpg (55KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 640x480px

>>151653546
I should have made it less obvious, I know. But if I had a way with phrasing or humor I wouldn't BE here for new year, wouldn't I?

>>151653546
Oh god your right...

You are now aware of the fact that instrumentality already happened a year ago and we are just now starting to notice it.

>>151657945
If I were, I'd be able to get out of it. This is worse than Tang, this is tap water in rural Ireland after Poe's raven had taken a crap in the well.

>>151658387

Look behind you, that's Rei.

>>151651665
To kimochi warui for my tastes.

File: 11111.png (493KB, 700x300px) Image search: [Google]

493KB, 700x300px

>>151658479

>>151653305
>Most people are scum
>a serial killer
Then why would a serial killer be bad under your own logic?

>>151658785
Because one means just being scum and the other means actively making things worse than they were at the start.
In other words, I've got no idea.

>>151658785
Game theory. Most people are scum, but if you can't at least tolerate them then you're the worst scum of all.

>>151659280
More like gay theory. Tolerating scum enables to be scum. Cleaning up scum may send a message. You don't have to be a serial killer to do that.

>>151659901
Yagami plz.

File: 1472572232355.jpg (48KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 1280x720px

>>151644871
>As much as I want to die, I don't think I want to be in one giant hivemind with everyone else on earth.
>>151645330
>Jean-Paul Sartre — 'L'enfer, c'est les autres.'
Actually, it's a bit ironic that you'd post that, because Huis Clos (No Exit) is actually about how horrible it is that Instrumentality (or at least the kind of connection available in it) is impossible in the first place! Sartre's existentialism is actually the primary lens through which I understand the themes of Evangelion, so I'll try to explain.

Crucial context: the line you quoted is the last line of Huis Clos, a one-act play written by Sartre, about three dead people trapped in a hotel room. Garcin (who delivers the line) was a newspaper reporter who attempted to flee the country after a military coup and was shot by a firing squad. Inez was a postal clerk who seduced the wife of a friend, who murdered them both for revenge. Estelle died of pneumonia after killing the child she had with her lover. Each has committed wrongs in some sense, and, with the exception of Inez, is in denial about it.

The first three Children are the same sexes and temperaments as the characters of Huis Clos. Estelle is a submissive feminine personality who prefers not to speak much of the time. Inez is an aggressive personality who torments Garcin for his cowardice in deserting his country, which Garcin vocally denies. Garcin, like Shinji, is a coward who detests himself for it, and has trouble reconciling his self-image with his own actions: this conflict between "self-image" and "existence" as determined by actions is a cause of anxiety for all three, but compellingly, Sartre goes a bit further than EVA does re: the soul.

>>151644737
it did but he chose to come back & no-one noticed when the world reset

File: 1472572024818.jpg (92KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 960x720px

>>151661591
A crucial component to understanding Sartre is his existentialism: Sartre believed that your identity (what makes you you) does not exist except as it does in the form of the actions you take: what we call "personalities" are illusions we invent to predict and comprehend how other people work. You define your OWN personality (also an illusion) in order to comprehend your sense of self, and the way you do this is by using other peoples' impressions of your own personality. This can be seen in the TV ending of Evangelion, while Shinji is in the theatre talking to "Mitsuki," who says:
>I'm not Mitsuki. I'm the Mitsuki that exists in your mind.

A motif of "Huis Clos" is the utter absence of mirrors or reflective surfaces in the hotel room. This reflects (heh) the fact that the characters' only frame of reference for their senses of self is each other's impressions of themself: this is illustrative of Sartre's conception of "anxiety," because we can't define our personalities by ourselves. Later, characters attempt to use the reflections in each other's eyes as mirrors, which of course only emphasizes how much they rely on each other for self-identification.

"Mitsuki," as a "soul" or "existence," according to Sartre, does not exist: it is an illusion of Shinji's mind. By contrast with Sartre's existentialism, "souls" or "essences" DO exist in EVA: however, just like in Huis Clos, human beings cannot comprehend the "essences" of other people because of the existence of the Absolute Terror Field. "Absolute terror" in this context can read as similar to what Sartre described as "anxiety," or its use of "terror" could even be a reference to Kierkegaard, who had a lot to say about fear. Sartre would dismiss Instrumentality as a fantasy that we must learn to live without, and EVA agrees with him in that "Instrumentality is a false goal, and we must learn to exist with anxiety and without Instrumentality."

Sorry. I don't have anybody else to talk to about this.

>>151659901
>>151653305
I don't really approve of this. EVA always struck me as a humanist series, not a nihilist one. Not to accuse you of being a nihilist but you're really coming off like one: I don't think game theory supports what you're saying, either, at least not the moral valuations in it.

>>151661664
Let me ask you something. What would you say if one day, by pure chance, you met someone who was exactly like Shinji. Someone who has the same body language, the same reactions, and the same areas of denial? What if you had a completely unambiguous example? That would still be like that and be immediately recognized by others no matter what environment and what context you put that person in? Asking for a friend.

File: emo-shinji.jpg (71KB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 400x300px

>>151661664
No problem. That was interesting.

Sut the fuc up bich

>>151662412
You're quoting two different posters. I mean, stuff your ears all you want though. At the end of the day, I'm not going through mental gymnastics to support my "just world" fallacy.

Gargle boggle

>>151662412
The gay theory post isn't mine.
>Not to accuse you of being a nihilist but you're really coming off like one.
I don't want to perpetuate the stereotype, but shikata ga nai.

Me gay

Life is shitty with people and even shittier without. I learned it a hard way. I also learned that my hatred for others is directly proportional to my self-hatred.

File: doYa5dc.gif (2MB, 258x316px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 258x316px

>>151644992
>>151644871
What world would you prefer to be in; Berserk or Evangelion?

>>151663103
>even shittier without
Want to know how I know you're a normalfag?

>>151663269
Eva without a doubt. Here's you're (you).

>>151663103
Have an ironic omedetou. And a (you's for everyone).

>>151663384
I tried suicide more than once and spent few years in my room. Please, tell me about normalfaggotry.

>>151644871
>use internet to talk about this

>>151663605
Dear lord I didn't realize people were this addicted to juse.

>>151664202 (sniff)
Normalfaggorty? You see, your unironic belief reveals you are indeed subscrubing to eating from the trash can of ideology.
>I also learned that my hatred for others is directly proportional to my self-hatred.
There's this anon (sniff) he says, an enemy is a friend whose story I haven't hearn. NO. You don't need to hate yourself to hate Hitler. God no. People aren't a reflection of yourself. (sniff) People are people. They can be objectively capable of an evil or selfish act without being a reflection of your own deficiency as a person.
When we have the revolution, after we take the government, I put you in gulag first.

>>151664368
It's not the same.
I'm just interacting with words on the screen.
My Ego is much stronger than during real life interaction when I feel like I'm losing my self.

>>151651665
>why are so many people opposed to the idea of merging with the rest of humanity


Have you ever talked to other people?

The overwhelming majority of humanity are insufferable, self-absorbed narcissists who run endlessly in their ratwheel jobs not earning enough to support the lifestyle they're living, buy things that they don't need and can't afford, and have children that they don't actually care about just because having kids is the logical next step in a committed relationship after marriage.

The rest of them are insufferable, self-absorbed narcissists who are too lazy or stupid to do anything of their own who would, without instrumentality, die meaningless deaths and be mourned by no one.

Can you imagine being stuck together with a bunch of people you can't stand for all of eternity? Even the people that you like and enjoy the company of, can you honestly see yourself feeling the same way after a decade? Two? A century? A millennium?

That's instrumentality. Being stuck with people you hate or will learn to hate for as long as the universe continues to exist.

File: lcl.jpg (25KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 640x360px

>>151664718
It's all you'd have in the Tang dimension. Fruitlessly shitposting in a sea of shitposts.

File: 1471306673592.gif (274KB, 500x341px) Image search: [Google]

274KB, 500x341px

>>151662457
I'm not certain I understand what you mean. How would I help this person?

Well, I guess I'd look to the TV ending for that. I have to admit that it's been a while since I've actually watched it, but the climax of those episodes (immediately before pic related) is when "Shinji's" Rei tells him that "of course no one can understand you!"

It's equally fallacious, in EVA and in Sartre, to expect that ANYONE will be able to (in EVA terms) penetrate your AT field, or come to truly comprehend you as a being (for Sartre, it is because there is no "being" to comprehend in the first place). In other words, no, nobody will ever fully "understand" you, and you will never fully "understand" anyone else, and that in coming to this realization the only solution is to leave anxiety about it behind. As Shinji's "images" of his friends tell him, you have to be "good to yourself," because in a sense you're the only person who's actually be able to. When Shinji comes to this conclusion, he sees all his images congratulating him for coming to terms with the anxiety of existence.

Avoiding nihilism in existentialism can be hard: for Sartre, it's a question of refusing to conform to any pre-existing personality types, which he refers to as living in "bad faith," and his ideas there are rather confusing. For Kierkegaard, meaning is found only through a "leap of faith" in a higher power. As far as I can tell, though, Camus seems to be the closest to EVA's message. For Camus, meaning had to be found in meaninglessness itself, and EVA seems to believe that that meaning can be found in the meaningless of attempting to connect with other people, despite how painful it is. That's why Asuka and Shinji, who despise each other, find each other when they exit the LCL.

At least, that's how I read it. I'm not too sure about it all. My conviction is that the "so be good to yourself" scene is EVA's thesis about how meaningful happiness can be found for someone in Shinji's situation.

>>151662480
Thanks!

>>151662515
I'd make the argument that submitting to theories that only reinforce your macabre ideas of a humanity out to get itself and refusing to listen to anything that could contradict that is the worse "stuffing your ears"-related sin. As far as I'm concerned, a world in which everyone despises each other (or whatever you're talking about) is an absurd conclusion that does not reflect reality.

>>151663384
Doesn't Anno despise otaku? If that's the case, it's not unreasonable to read EVA as a call for self-hating otakus to embrace the possibility of normality if it means a respite from despising everyone. Even if you're a nihilist, isn't it better to be happy than sad?

>>151644737
>>151644871
>>151653305
>>151664868
why do so many of you think instrumentality is hell?
even if you fundamentally disagree with someone's ideals, after you merge, you'll come to see it from their point of view and they'll see it from yours/everyone elses
in essence, instrumentality is total and complete understanding for everyone.
as a side effect, it removes the notion of survival and all the problems that stem from trying to surive with finite resources

>>151664908
I'm not going to lie, I barely understood any of that. Thanks anyway, it was an interesting read.

>>151665260
I don't want understanding nor do I want to understand. I wanna real and palpable barriers between me and other people.

>>151664202
Normalfags attempt suicide and there's plenty of "hikkikomori" forums where attention seekers like yourself blogpost.

>>151665904
well if someone who felt differently merged with you, maybe one of you would change your mind

>>151665260
Look at how crazy people here are just because they didn't have sex or wash their armpits for a year or two. Now imagine that for a million years.

>>151651665
Because I value my individuality, even if part of an individual's personality is defined by suffering. I would rather suffer and be myself than have a surcease of all pain and lose all sense of self. I don't like the idea of knowing everyone's deepest inner thoughts and feelings or visa versa.

Part of what makes us individuals are those distinct borders between ourselves and other people.

>>151665260
>in essence, instrumentality is total and complete understanding for everyone.
Because complete and total understanding for everyone eliminates the struggle for understanding from which meaning is found. Instrumentality is cheating, too, because you don't really know everything about everybody. People won't have points of view in Instrumentality because there aren't individuals to HAVE points of view. It's just giving up: "I can't understand people, so I'll eliminate the distinctions between "people" and just become an unthinking part of them."

Socializing is hard, sure, but it's necessary for a fulfilling life. It's best to accept the suffering necessary to understand people and savor it. (There's a bit of Nietzsche here too, I think, but I haven't read NEARLY enough to be capable of citing him, and I'm not sure he talks about socialization so much as he does suffering in general. I think.)

>>151665571
Sorry, I did my best! I noticed a few typos in a crucial line, so I'll try and clarify.

When Rei tells Shinji to be good to himself, it's because he's the only person who is capable of doing so: nobody else can be good to Shinji, because they are incapable of understanding him. They're incapable of understanding him because there's a barrier between people (represented by the AT Field) that can't be crossed while still leaving "Shinji" as a being intact.

File: this isn't eoe.jpg (722KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

722KB, 1920x1080px

>>151666289
And seconds before the fusion is complete, I would send the other soul a smug mental image and say in their mind: Here's your (you).

>>151666382
>He fell for the meme of self.

File: sidonia-izana-face[1].jpg (29KB, 680x383px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 680x383px

>>151666580
I hope you're planning on clarifying that Anon.

>>151666292
ironically, i think all the disgusting hikis here on /a/ would benefit the most from instrumentality

>>151666492
i don't necessarily disagree, seeing as how shinji himself rejected instrumentality.
but i feel like that's just one possible interpretation of a hive mind.
you say they'd become a singular entity and there'd be no individual thought, but what if it was similar to the internet where everyone is connected, but without any form of security (in this case the AT fields)

>>151665171
>be a normal and love everyone! You'll be happy!
Like I said you're a normalfag.

>>151666930
>Like the internet but with no security.
What would possibly go wrong?

>>151666492
>Socializing is hard, sure, but it's necessary for a fulfilling life.
Can you tell me when your winter break is going to end so I can stop reading this normalfag garbage? "Socializing" is neither difficult nor fulfulling.

>>151665171
>isn't it better to be happy than sad?
Easier said than done.

>>151666382
This. I don't want or need to know how a criminal or a child molester feels like. I don't need to sympathise with them or know their inner feelings. Sometimes walls are a great idea indeed. I don't need to sympathise with someone who has caused evil to say, yes, this is evil. Same goes for disgust. Want the unclefucker to know everything about you and you about them forever? Neither do I.

>>151667013
worried someone will steal your identity anon?
you don't need to worry because you're an open book to everyone and everyone is an open book to you
if you're worried about someone judging you, you don't need to worry because it becomes an outdated concept if everyone understands you

>>151666931
Well, you actually didn't say that before. I'm someone else. In any case I don't think that it's necessary to be a normalfag to believe that people are not illogically out to get everyone else, or that people are incapable of irrationally loving other people for that matter.

>>151666930
It's the interpretation of the "hive mind" that EVA seems to depict. By contrast with the Internet, which is a network connecting many distant and individual nodes (my individual PC with your individual PC, for example, via the servers that host 4chan), LCL is a gigantic homogeneous sea of red shit. The "homogeneous" part is important: there's no "security" because there's nowhere for that security to be in the first place, whereas a network between PCs is necessarily seperated from its nodes insofar as it can be called a "network."

File: download.jpg (21KB, 268x150px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 268x150px

>>151666382
True purely in the theoretical sense. The value of individuality is artificial and manufactured under capitalism.

Watch Hypernormalization. In practice, we have become a society of individuals with no collective action. We have become a society of consumers, defining ourselves by the media we consume rather than the traits we share. Everything is catered to our own tastes and we are never challenged to embrace a larger idea to enact change that benefits more than ourselves.

>>151666289
>merged with you
I dislike TOUCHING other people.
Merging would make my ghostly self puke ectoplasm.

>>151667193
People may not be out to get anyone else but people are inherently selfish and vacuous meatbags.

>>151667185
>Loss of individual agency.
Just another reason why I'd reject it.
Build an AT field and make the angerus pay for it.

>>151667202
Of course, we must rally around the Proletariat eh Igor? Fuck off.

>>151667088
MLK day, but it's certainly not a "normalfag" position that socializing can be difficult and/or fulfilling. Nietzsche died a virgin, man, and Sartre was a self-hating wackjob with a lazy eye and persistent self-image problems his entire life that helped nurture the creation of his philosophies in the first place.

I guess I'm talking quite a bit of Camus, here, too, though, so I should concede that that guy was a total fucking Chad. But I'm not.

Actually, hang on a second. How on earth is the statement that "socializing is difficult" a "normalfag" thing to say?

>>151667229
Agreement: Your way of though is very un-meatbag-like, Anon, if I may say so myself.

>>151667225
well maybe if you merged, and everyone understood why you disliked touching people, they'd all decided to reject instrumentality.

or maybe after being exposed to everyone else's thoughts, you'd realize you're autistic and change your mind

>>151644737
Don't worry, by some secret jewish calendar it's still not 2015, and recently they begun researching some hueg object under ice in the Antarctic.

>>151667229
That's certainly possible, but your evidence for the selfishness part seems lacking in light of the equal evidence against: for every snuff flick you can pull up there's another of people rescuing puppies or whatever the fuck. Why should I trust you, especially considering that taking you on faith would make my life less fulfilling?

Inside of the LCL Sea, I want to be part of the Loli Ocean.

>>151667368
Conjecture: Were I not surrounded by this lamentable mass of normalfaggotry I may be of a more pleasant disposition.

>>151667358
Nietzche may have died a virgin and philosohpy notwitthstanding, he was a butthurt incel. Even goodol' Schopey was a normalfag.

>how on earth
Stop strawmanning me.

Anyway, socializing and more is ridiculously easy and most amount of times involves nothing more than the most base and droll interactions. Naturally, such an act is inherently worthless due to its abundance and its nature of fluff.

>>151667439
>rescuing puppies or whatever act of believed sainthood isn't just an act
You seem like you're young and impressionable enough to believe people donate out of their own good will and not to feel good about themselves.

File: 1483081674551.jpg (363KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

363KB, 1280x960px

>>151667358
>Actually, hang on a second. How on earth is the statement that "socializing is difficult" a "normalfag" thing to say?
Because someone who really has anxiety will never stop the music to tell the whole audience about this huge problem he's having stepping in front of that same audience.
An anxious person caught red handed in their behavior will try to make a joke or an excuse, or get agitated. They will never say something they prepared in advance like "Guys! I'm your friend from your expedition! I'm totally not the Thing!"

>>151667373
You're annoying.
The best thing about being in a separate body is the ability to tune the fuck out other shitbags.
I can't imagine spending eternity with someone like you.

>>151667817
Exactly. Sociailizing is one of those things that you either can do or cannot do. There is no difficulty to it, it's just one or the other.

>>151667718
So incels are normalfags now, too? That's confusing.

>Stop strawmanning me.
You accused me of being a normalfag for saying "socializing is difficult but fulfilling." You were only arguing the second part, then?

>You seem like you're young and impressionable enough to believe people donate out of their own good will and not to feel good about themselves.
It can be both things. Apparently you're young and cynical enough to believe that people are incapable of doing things for irrational good reasons.

>>151667439
The fact that altruistic behavior exists does not invalidate the existence of selfish behaviors, and many altruistic behaviors are undertaken for reasons which are at their core selfish. Virtue signaling is a great example of this, virtue signaling behavior is ostensibly altruistic but the signaling individual's motivation is a form of personal gain, self-aggrandizement, or advancement in social status. The behavior therefor is not altruistic, it is selfish.

>>151667895
Incels are certainly normalfags. They're all sour grapes. I'm arguing that socialization is neither difficult to those who can and that whether you're capable of socializing or not, it is an inherently worthless act.

>irrational good reasons
Is feeding your ego what you chalk up to irrationality? People aren't these little mystery coffers waiting to be plundered. People are penniless purses devoid of intrigue and merit for the most part. Maybe a cobweb here or there.

>>151667817
I'm sorry, I'm really confused now. Are you saying that because there are normalfags who think they have anxiety (but who really don't) who say things like "socializing is difficult," that nobody can say that without being a normalfag? I don't think that's what you're trying to say but as far as I can tell that's the most likely thing.

>>151667951
I agree that seemingly altruistic behavior can be fundamentally selfish in motivation, but that certainly doesn't prove that ALL behavior which appears altruistic MUST BE fundamentally selfish in motivation.

>>151667873
you seem like an autistic cucklord and i'd love if you would never post again, or took another breath for that matter
i'm just saying the both of us might feel differently if we were forcefully merged with the entirety of humanity

>>151644871
>not wanting the tang

>>151668036
>I agree that seemingly altruistic behavior can be fundamentally selfish in motivation, but that certainly doesn't prove that ALL behavior which appears altruistic MUST BE fundamentally selfish in motivation.
Except it all MUST BE. One could even argue that the common love one can observe between others in today's society is merely a more advanced stage of friends with benefits. If any altruistic actions were truly altruistic, that would imply the person undertaking such actions doesn't possess a value system.

>>151668026
>Incels are certainly normalfags. They're all sour grapes.
But this is a confusion. Normalfags are normal and accepted in society: they get what they want and aren't considered weird. Incels aren't. How do you conflate the two?

>People are devoid of merit... for the most part
So what is "worth" or "merit," then? You seem to be preoccupied with what doesn't have it, but you haven't mentioned what does.

>>151668036
Agreed there, I wouldn't ever say that everything humans do is selfish, but I would say that since humans are biological replicators who's primary instinctual motivation is to carry on our individual genetic lineage, our behaviors are more often selfish than purely altruistic.

>>151668223
Incels are, at their core, neurotypical, the earmark of normalfaggotry. AN incel will likely, at one point or another, settle down with a festering whale.

>>151668223
>of what does
Ask yourself how easy it is to find true merit in a world devoid of it, one predisposed to be devoid of it, parties that are interested in it continuing to be devoid of merit, and subjects who are all the more than willing to be devoid of merit.

File: kimochi warui.jpg (18KB, 449x251px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 449x251px

instrumentalityfags make me sick

>>151664908

Someone needs to screencap these because I am too lazy and drunk. These kinds of questions get asked a lot and I think it'd be a good macro

>>151668358
>Incels are, at their core, neurotypical, the earmark of normalfaggotry. AN incel will likely, at one point or another, settle down with a festering whale.
Nietzsche wasn't that. He hovered around the same woman for his entire life, even after some other guy married her (inb4 cuck jokes). He certainly wasn't "normal," even if he was an incel.

>>151668380
I still can't figure out why they even exist. Maybe that's kind of the point.

>>151668672
Eh, they're alright. I've written similar things before. Apparently EVA has more to do directly with Shopenhaur, but I don't really know enough about him to say so I talk about existentialists instead because I think they're interesting and my only IRL friend who's read them doesn't want to watch EVA, so explaining what happens is really, really hard.

>>151669022
He was normal enough to orbit around a married woman. Normalfaggotry is a spectrum.

>>151664908
>Asuka and Shinji, who despise each other
anon...

File: sartre at fieldo.png (111KB, 1341x469px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 1341x469px

>>151668672
Might as well. Thanks again to whoever wrote it.

>>151669116
The hedgehog's dilemma was Schopey's brainchild. But Eva is really a patchwork of Freudian, Jungian and Schopenhauerian concepts.

>>151668162
I need to make sure I understand you because, frankly, I'm a little frightened that you're right. How can someone perform a virtuous act if there's no such thing as virtue as defined by a value system?

>>151668358
Then your claim isn't that people don't have virtue, it's that virtue doesn't exist based on how you have defined it, is that right?

>>151669247
Well, they certainly abuse each other physically enough: immediately after the scene I reference, Shinji starts choking Asuka, remember? That's hardly an indication of "love," or at least love as most people would understand it.

>>151669195
>Normalfaggotry is a spectrum.
So Chads at the top, I'd imagine, and who's at the bottom? Chris-chan?

>>151669348
That'd be correct. Virtue, by nature of its existence, can not exist without a value system. Virtue, by its nature, cannot be genuinely performed by one with a value system.

>>151669466
More or less given all the stuff regarding virgin with rage and a boyfriend free girlfriend. Adding to the fact that he wanted them so much, he pierced his taint among other things.

>>151669422
Love and physical abuse went hand in hand throughout human history. Sexual act itself is a physical abuse in a sense.

>>151669619
Are shippers really this desperate to push their narrative?

>>151669580
>Virtue, by nature of its existence, can not exist without a value system. Virtue, by its nature, cannot be genuinely performed by one with a value system.
Then virtue can't be anything "by nature of its existence," because according to you it can't exist. Was that just a typo, or is this a paradox or something?

>>151669619
Then you'll agree with me that Shinji and Asuka, insofar as they may have been attracted to each other, also evidenced signs of hatred towards each other such as physical violence and saying things like "I hate you," right?
I mean, she actually does say that a couple times at least, I'm pretty sure.

>>151669580
>That'd be correct. Virtue, by nature of its existence, can not exist without a value system. Virtue, by its nature, cannot be genuinely performed by one with a value system.
But what about luuuuuv?
Can it only exist between two people who ultimately despise themselves, and each-other.

>>151669348
>How can a virtuous act be preformed without a virtue system.
Well it really can't, lucky for humans we're very good at reprograming our behaviors and creating virtue systems by which we define beneficial or harmful behaviors is itself instinctual for us. This does however mean that there are very few absolute virtues.
>>151669619
>Sex is itself physical abuse in a sense.
I really want you to tell me what sense that is, because unless the sex isn't consensual I can't see how it's abusive.

>>151669733
The opposite of love is apathy.
Hate is just another facet of love,

>>151669746
No, it is a paradox. Moreover, it is an ideal strived towards by some, but never truly obtained in the altruistic sense. Not unlike the notion of an omnipotent god, for if said god were omnipotent, could it create a boulder that even it could not lift? If yes, then it isn't omnipotent, as it cannot lift such a boulder. If no, it is also not omnipotent as it couldn't create everything.

>>151669940
That's a good joke.

>>151669930
>that spoiler
Fuck off I'm not humoring your questions.

>>151669422
you're doing a great disservice to yourself by grossly oversimplifying human behavior
for example, one interpretation of this scene is that shinji wasn't sure if he actually went back to earth or was still in his own tang fantasy. hence why he breaks down when she reacts unexpectedly

>>151670050
Well I got your (you), didn't I? Now as good as getting (her), but it's a start.

>>151670123
>you're doing a great disservice to yourself by grossly oversimplifying human behavior
I don't think that's necessary for what I'm saying at all, though. People can love and hate each other at the same time, I'm certainly not denying that, and his choking her could have any number of motivations, up to and including love, hatred, AND a disbelief in reality.

>>151670180
You're not ever going to get (her) because you're a dumb faggot shipper.

>>151669957
What about virtue derived from pure reason, like Kant? I guess that's still a virtue system, but in the baby drowning example he claims that someone acting to save the baby because they just think it's the right thing to do (and not the the thing to do based on pure reasoning) isn't acting virtuously, I think.

It seems to come down to a definition of virtue that makes itself paradoxical. Aren't there other ways of defining virtue that can get around this?

>>151665260
Instrumentality fundamentally changes the nature of human existence in a way that we would only be able to understand by experiencing it and then rejecting it.

Isn't that a scary thought? You don't know how Instrumentality would feel. And if you didn't reject it quickly, you would forget how it DOESN'T feel.

It's also an evolutionary dead end. Sure, we eliminate conflict and strife. But humanity as we knew it will cease to exist and the new humanity will have no further need for advancement.

>>151670227
too close

>>151670540
>Aren't there other ways of defining virtue that can get around this?
I'm sure there are. You can effectively mutate any word you want to serve any nefarious purpose by ascribing your own definition to it. Doesn't mean others will play ball, but kicking something into the nebulous realm of subjectivity is a surefire way to stall an argument. By refusing to acknowledge one's own interpretation of a word or idea, neither you nor he will win the argument.
>whether it's the right thing to do
He's right in ascertaining it isn't completely virtuous because a moral system is just another value system with more input from others.

>>151670540
Is it a virtuous act when dolphin saving the baby?

>>151670853
I don't think we have any marine biologists on hand to answer this question regarding possible dolphin morality, behavior, and what impact their intelligence has on their behavior.

>>151669422
There's a theory that Asuka has a subconscious fetish for asphyxiation stemming from Kyouko's attempt at killing her along with her suicide. This would fit pretty well considering the context and Anno's boner for Freudian psychology.

And if it were the case and Shinji found out about it during Instrumentality (possibly at the beginning, where we see a scene from a previous episode play out differently) then it means he's doing it out of a combination of confused affection, anger, frustration, and as a reality check.

>>151670695
Something happened to me five years ago. Something involving five hours of sleep paralysis and a place or state of mind that was Unspeakable.
Not again. I don't want to think about it, I don't want to fantasize about it or try to rationalize. Just no.

>>151670808
>with more input from others.
Less input, actually: it's supposed to be based off of pure reason, without anything to do with empirical/human input at all. But I'm not certain that this dodges that paradox.

>>151671088
>there's a theory
It was a literal forced meme by a newfag I made leave the board, almost.

>>151670949
I mean when someone doesn't comprehend the concept of virtue nor aware of social benefits and still acts virtuous.

>>151670540
Well if virtue was only possible from a position of pure reasoning/rational analysis then there has never been a single virtuous act ever preformed because no human being has ever or will ever be capable of pure reasoning.

The way I see virtue, a virtuous behavior is any behavior that falls above the middle line of a scale from harmful to beneficial behaviors. That scale shifts as circumstances change, since obviously what is beneficial for us now in a post-industrial resource rich environment would not necessarily be the same as what's beneficial for hunter gatherers, or a transcended race of interstellar travelers.

>>151671265
I honestly think it's a completely valid theory, even if it did start out as a shitpost.

>>151650707
I swear I had another pic about this but I can't find it

>>151671280
It depends on why the dolphin did it.

>>151671280
I have to agree with the other guy here, although I kind of resent it: dolphins are very social creatures, so they're definitely aware of social benefits.

I don't know about octopi, though.

File: 24116935efb3edb3ed64d650b7f12f4a.jpg (10KB, 236x191px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 236x191px

>>151671129
>five hours of sleep paralysis

>>151671307
>The way I see virtue, a virtuous behavior is any behavior that falls above the middle line of a scale from harmful to beneficial behaviors.
Harmful/beneficial how? Wouldn't this just be utilitarianism?

>>151671340
I think it's the exact type of garbage that someone like Matt Memefield would, and has, cooked up.

>>151671129
Jesus, Anon, I'm sorry you had to deal with that.

>>151671423
Well, it sounds like it would fit with Freudian ideas, garbage or not, and plenty of people would tell you that Freudian ideas WERE garbage so that fits too.

>>151671485
It's a retarded shitpost anon. That's all it was, don't look too deep into it.

>>151671307
>no human being has ever or will ever be capable of pure reasoning.
Well, hang on, how can you claim that? What about logic, and math? Isn't that pure reasoning?

Sure, it might be difficult to move and apply to more complex situations, but impossible?

>>151671485
don't you DARE shittalk papa freud

>>151671247
But there is no such thing as pure reason. The human mind is built in a certain way, to reproduce and colonize. You never get reason unless you can build robot that can be completely unbiased and unaffected by personal stuff. (or personal stiff right)

>>151671614
But reasoning is demonstrably useful for reproduction and colonization. Humans have it and so do many animals. You're claiming that people can't have reasoning because as a species our goal is to reproduce, but that's exactly WHY we have reasoning in the first place, not why we can't have it!

>>151667718
>You seem like you're young and impressionable enough to believe people donate out of their own good will and not to feel good about themselves.
Doesn't matter, there's no practical difference between kindness out of self-interest and kindness out of selflessness. At the end of they day net happiness has been created. Would you prefer it if our brains didn't have a rewards system that favors "good" actions?

>>151667202
What the fuck does capitalism have to do with a philosofical sense of self. How goddamn fucking brainwashed and delusional do you have to be so that the first thing that comes to your mind when speaking about a basic concept on the subject of life itself be about a political system. Jesus fucking christ dude.

>>151671610
Hey, it's ok. I'm not a shrink, or I probably would. I'm more interested in English and philosophy so I don't actually know what stuff he was wrong about, just that the psych community has generally thrown out everything he said except the core concept of the subconscious.

>>151671748
>doesn't matter
Except it clearly does given the context of the argument.

File: 1390801339403.jpg (40KB, 624x480px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 624x480px

Ideologues need to grow up and accept that you can be both a good and a bad person as long as you're honest.

>>151667718
>rescuing puppies or whatever act of believed sainthood isn't just an act
Whether or not they did it to fire up that dopamine production doesn't matter. What matters is that people do indeed perform selfless and possible self-endangering acts that benefit them in no physical or long term manner.

>>151671920
>benefit them
As far as you know.

>>151671394
>Harmful/Beneficial how?
That's partially dependent on the situation the society finds itself in. For example, right now it is still beneficial to spend resources rehabilitating injured individuals so they can return to functionality later, however in a resource starved situation it might be distinctly harmful for society to spend medical resources on those individuals.
>Wouldn't this be utilitarianism.
For the most part yes, as long as that goal of greatest happiness doesn't collapse the society driving towards that goal.
>>151671607
Logic and math, physics, chemistry, etc exist independently of humans. We discovered these processes but we had no part in initiating them, we just found out how to understand them with relative consistency. I may have been mistaken in saying it's impossible, but I think you'd have to fundamentally alter a human to make them 100% rational.

>>151671386
>>151671439
That wasn't the scary part. There was a Presence. Something that wasn't part of my imagination or a part of things that affected me that day. Someone else's thoughts and will, in a place where time or space meant very little. No idea if it was one person, a group, or something else. Such distinctions meant almost nothing in the dream.
(I was only aware of how much time had passed after it was over. This is why I hate tang so fucking much.)

>>151671855
Most of what he said was right, it's just that now we've started to break it down even further into the chemical processes and neural pathways that cause the observed phenomena.

Only a few of his concepts were invalid, and they weren't completely invalid but rather derived from a combination of other concepts which he didn't fully break down. Like destrudo, which is coincidentally a concept referred to in Evangelion. People don't really have a "death drive", but certain things can cause people to behave in a self-destructive way.

>>151671882
What is wrong with being selfish in a way that helps others, and how is it fundamentally different from helping others altruistically?

>>151671992
It still doesn't invalidate the fact that they did something good.

>>151672199
>>151672224
If you're going to cellphone samefag I'm afraid I don't feel compelled to go back and forth with you.

File: 1368230876364.jpg (42KB, 735x735px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 735x735px

>>151644737
>mfw I can remember rewatching EoE last year like it was yesterday
>mfw I can remember 3.33 threads like they were yesterday
>mfw I can remember watching the series for the first time 8 years ago like it was yesterday.

>>151672286
You're delusional and possibly paranoid. Might want to see a doctor about that.

>>151672199
There's nothing wrong with it, that just means it isn't altruistic. If you are acting altruistically you don't care if the action is beneficial or harmful to yourself, you do it because you know (or at least believe) that it will be beneficial for others.

>"the belief in or practice of disinterested and selfless concern for the well-being of others."
Emphasis here on "selfless concern".

>>151672449
>two arguments arguing the same sentiment show up out of nowhere regarding a post I made long ago
Your defensiveness is only testament to your guiltiness. Again, within the context of the original argument, selfishness invalidates genuine altruism. Hop off my cock.

>>151671829
on a very abstract scale, your sense of self is a tricky issue.
should it be defined more objectively in the sense that what you personally value should extend beyond the scope of yourself? for instance, if you died tomorrow would you be fine with what you've contributed to society? (perhaps just memories you've left behind in your loved ones, or perhaps some art or a cure for a disease)
or should it be more subjective? is what you leave behind totally irrelevant seeing as how you're ultimately dead. was what you ultimately valued just how much you enjoyed your time on earth?

in both cases, the fact that we currently live in a society ingrained so deeply with capitalism is not insignificant

>>151672286
Nigger, >>151672224 isn't me, just answer the fucking question.

>>151672722
see >>151672529

File: 14692097570570.jpg (40KB, 604x604px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 604x604px

>>151672632
>you enjoyed your time on earth

>>151672770
>>151672529
>Again, within the context of the original argument, selfishness invalidates genuine altruism.
I read the chain, how does the context change anything? In what way does selfishness invalidate anything? Kindness is kindness.

>>151673036
see>>151672500
You clearly aren't looking at the chain.

>>151673036
Altruism isn't just kindness, it's selfless kindness. An example of altruistic behavior would be throwing yourself in front of a bullet for a complete stranger, or donating to a charity where you'll never see that money and where you'll probably never meet the people it helps. When you ignore harms or benefits to yourself in service to the wellbeing of others you are being altruistic.

>>151673143
Ah, yes, I did miss that one. My bad. I still don't understand why you think that means humans are innately terrible.

>>151673583
That wasn't him, I'm a different Anon. I don't think humans are innately terrible, I do however think that all humans have an innately selfish component to some degree, and that altruistic behavior is relatively rare.

>>151673820
would you guys say that innately selfish component traces back to survival instinct?
if we lived in a world full of abundance would we see less selfishness and more altruism?

>>151673820
But fuck charity, what about love indeed? Is it only possible between people who are themselves in extreme circumstances?

File: shot0006.png (903KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

903KB, 640x480px

It did though

>>151674053
We would simply find new ways to be selfish and to abuse others.

>>151674053
I definitely would, as I said earlier in the thread, humans are biological replicators and biological replicators are driven by an instinct to continue their own genetic lineage. Some amount of selfishness is a smart survival strategy because under duress (especially in situations of limited resources) organisms which prioritize their own survival will be more likely to live long enough to reproduce. If situations of duress and resource shortage were nonexistent, then there would be no reason for selfish behavior because it wouldn't improve the survival odds.
>>151674058
No, as love is expressed between people outside of situations of duress.

>>151672057
Holy shit, I should really kill myself before it's too late.

>>151674372
>No, as love is expressed between people outside of situations of duress.
On what planet is this supposed to make sense?

>>151674475
>Is it (love) only possible between people who are themselves in extreme circumstances?
My answer is no, because people fall in love outside of extreme circumstances.

>>151674473
I'm surprised it's so surprising. I was under the impression that everyone goes through these things, just with more or less denial. In fact I think I already wrote the whole thing on 4chan once.

>>151674372
then another interesting question for you:
are humans (who undeniably possess a level of cognizance beyond most if not all other animals) more than mere biological replicators?
can we as a species, or at least as individuals decide to pursue things "beyond" survival?
or would you say conquests like art and philosophy will ultimately just benefit humanity's long term survival?

It did happen. Weren't you on /a/?

>>151674776
Maybe it's my fault for imagining something like my LSD badtrip except 3x worse and with a sleep paralysis bonus.

>>151674776
I had some kind of sleep paralysis once, although I didn't experience any kind of outside presence. I was just terrified that I had somehow injured myself seriously and was actually paralyzed. At some point I'm going to make sure to leave behind instructions should I ever be that badly crippled to either find a way to let me communicate with other people or just pull the life support, I can't think of much worse a fate than being trapped in a useless meat shell with no capacity to interact.
>>151675110
Well we as a species have already shown a pretty strong tendency to alter our behaviors regardless of the benefit/harm of said alteration. Whether or not there is a hard limit to how radically we can reprogram ourselves is something that we may never find out. Obviously we as individuals can pursue actions beyond species survival and in the cases of many people chose to completely ignore the species propagation imperative. Philosophy obviously has pure utility for survival because it, and in extension tools like the scientific method are a great way of weeding out useless and inaccurate information from useful and accurate information, presumably allowing us to make better decisions, but purely creative endeavors like art don't (at least to me) have any specific utility and are simply an expression of an individual's skill and creativity.

>>151674776
i can definitely say that i've never gone through something like that, nor has anyone ever shared with me an experience like that.
although i can't really prove that we aren't all just mentally repressing these things

>>151675590
I wouldn't call it bad. What would the word be? Otherness? Something that came from an archetype, or somewhere else, and not my imagination. Presence. In nightmares you just wake up when it becomes to intense. This kept going, with no possibility of escape.

>>151668100
>cucklord
And I'd love it if you went back to /pol/.

>>151675925
i'd say you could argue that there's utility through art as it has been shown to deeply move and affect people
for example after seeing an art piece one might feel inspired to take action or create something, or escape some depression etc.
or more practically, i believe music and public sculptures are often used to lighten people's moods and to subtly dissuade civil disobedience

>>151676605
>I wouldn't call it bad
A prolonged nightmare with no possibility to escape sounds pretty bad desu.

>from an archetype
explain please

>>151676697
That could very well be, although I think that those subtle effects are secondary outside of propaganda which is obviously specifically designed to subtly manipulate those who consume it. I'm not really able to easily address questions to do with art as my experience with it is limited to impulse doodling that doesn't have any real clear purpose.

>>151675930
People are afraid of peer pressure and ridicule. Dreams are utterly personal.

>>151677198
>from an archetype
>explain please
Basic symbols, characters and relations present in all languages. Some people think it's part of a collective (un)conscious.

>>151677926
I'm intrigued but confused. How can you be sure these aren't from your imagination?

>>151677926
Could also simply be similar base "programming". Those characters, relations, and symbols could just be good moves in design space that are always repeated because they keep working well.

>>151678308
Because it's unspeakable, unimaginable. More than 4 dimensions. Warmth/cold isn't a thing at the place I dreamed about. The main senses are empathy and spatial awareness. Something with touch, only it's not really touch. If you ever experience it, you will know exactly what it is.
May or may not be one of the reasons I can connect to Eva so much.

>>151666382
>surcease: Archaic or North American
kek

>>151680137
>North American pain.
>Tfw no burger.

>>151644871
>I'd know all my parents fetishes and they'd know mine

I'd take death in a second

>>151680654
This ten times over, I'd greatly prefer the sweet release of death.

>>151680654
>>151680837
the idea is that it wouldn't be weird like it is if they found out now

>>151681995
From every metric currently available with which I can judge the weirdness of a thing, it would be fucking weird. There's nothing interesting or discussion provoking in the idea of "that thing will just change so it's not that thing any more, it will be this new thing". Why not explain why exactly it would stop being weird, I'm still not convinced. I find it weird and slightly uncomfortable sharing fetishes with my significant other so you'll have to walk me through how suddenly sharing fetishes with all of the entire human species will somehow just not be weird.

>>151682622
you feel uncomfortable with others learning about your fetishes because they've been stigmatized by society and you fear you'll be judged and treated differently if that knowledge was out in the open. (because you would be)

but if everyone understood and knew about each other's weird secrets, they wouldn't just see you as some bizarre degenerate to be feared, they'd see that it's just a natural part of who you are and that it can't (and shouldn't) be helped

>>151651665
Because niggers sandniggers and assorted shitskins are part of "humanity" too.

>>151651665
Seele go