Weatherall on Nostr: The following explains why #nostr is filled with little triggered and offended ...

The following explains why #nostr is filled with little triggered and offended quasi-puritanical pissant emasculated cunts who like to smell their own farts all day... it explains why you are a cosmic-level loser who ends up in a gyno-gulag occupied only by you and the haunting spirit of your long gone loveless mommy.

Read it and weep "lovers", "christians", "spiritual" people, and all the rest of you fucking soulless LARPers. How is fooling nobody but yourself working out?

-------------------------------------

"It is also clear that moral hedonism damages not only the clarity, but also the character of a person. The state of remoteness and dissolution not only fails to include the will, but dismisses it from the outset, declaring it on the one hand unnecessary, and on the other hand, restrictive, chaffing and therefore a hindrance to dissolution and fluidity. For the will does not dissolve the soul, but gathers it and concentrates it; it does not immerse it in a boundless, infinite current, but creates a profile and form, it is not pointless, but definitive and definite; it cannot talk to everyone, blissfully responding "yes", but also needs to have the option of a solid, justified denial. Therefore, hedonistic tenderness, embracing the soul and capturing its central sense, involves it in a certain weakness of will, expressed in indifference or in direct hostility to all wilful impulses and tasks.

"Love", professed and preached by the affectionate moralists, turns out to be a weak-willed or "passively-willed" state: this "love" does not strengthen the character by concentrating forces and forging the spiritual centre of the individual, but gradually weakens it; it does not formulate a personal spirit, but delights the soul with boundlessness and uncertainty: it disaccustoms the soul from persistent rejection and instead draws it to all-embracing and all-reconciling neutrality. Such weak-willed love is not an active emotion, for emotion is not hostile to the will, but needs it and seeks rapprochement with it; but at the same time we are not here discussing a passive effect, for the effect at its very depth cannot be causeless, just as a wound is impossible without a wounding arrow. The weak-willed love of a hedonistic moralist is rather a "mood", easily muddling along with a lack of both will and objectivity. As a weak-willed mood, this love is sentimental, and as a pointless mood this love is purposeless: it does not carry within itself a spiritual task or spiritual responsibility. It is a feeling that is saturated with itself; it is not a beginning, but an end, not an outcome, but a finalisation, not a step, but an achievement; it is sweet self-worth or the enjoyment of valuing one's self; and he who dwells in himself and does not allow anything external to lead him away from himself, he is declared to be right. Can such a weak-willed and sentimental character, consciously extinguish in himself the very genesis of heroism, sweetly sinking in an endless and pointless mood, and consciously asserting its rightness as the only path which is exemplary for all - can he rise and resolve the heroic problem of resistance to evil? And is it not clear that by "solving" this problem in his way, he will create a temptation for weak-willed and overworked souls rather than giving strength and wisdom to men who stand on the right path?

Further, strange as it may seem at first glance, such "love" not only fails to bring "loving" into the lives of other people, and does not
introduce it into a single, living system of consistency, solidarity and community''5, but, on the contrary, tears love away from others, contrasts it to them and fixes this opposition with a kind of philosophically "justified", practical indifference to their fate. This characteristic is explained, on the one hand, by the moralistic approach to "love," and on the other hand, by its satisfying effect."